This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In this context of international and EU legal obligations to protect cultural rights, the EU has set a legal imperative to protect the public domain. Building and enhancing the EU Digital Single Market is a quintessential component and the raison d’être of the EU law provision.
As in the Tribunale di Venezia and Tribunale di Firenze’s decisions, the idea is to transform the State into a commercial actor competing with other companies in the market of the commercial reproduction of cultural heritage images. The decisions of both the Tribunale di Venezia and the Tribunale di Firenze share some conceptual confusion.
In 1984, Condé Nast, the publisher, obtained a license from Goldsmith to allow Andy Warhol to use her Prince portrait as the foundation for a single serigraphy to be featured in Vanity Fair magazine. In 2016, Condé Nast acquired a license from the Warhol Foundation to use the Prince Series as illustrations for a new magazine.
M S Infoconnect Web Technologies India Pvt Ltd vs M/S Siliconreview Technologies India Pvt Ltd on 5 March, 2025 (Bangalore District Court) The plaintiff, a magazine for IT professionals, sued for passing off its trademarks Silicon India, www.siliconindia.com, and CIO Review. Karan Johar v. India Pride Advisory Pvt.
When it comes to celebrities and other public figures, the laws across Canada have established various personalityrights to protect these individuals from the exploitation of their image or likeness. This stems from the idea that a person should have the exclusive right to market and/or capitalize on their personality and image.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content