Remove category creative
article thumbnail

SpicyIP Tidbit: Putting An End To The Delhi Curfew, 18th G20 Meeting Releases its Aspirational Declaration!

SpicyIP

While there seem to be general commitments made in its preamble, specific aims have been enlisted under each category branching into sub-categories. Promotion of cultural and creative industries and creative economy. While perusing through the Declaration, I found a couple of interesting IP related commitments.

article thumbnail

[Guest post] Works of applied art – the difference between design and copyright law

The IPKat

USM Haller modular furniture In 2011, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU), for the first time, had to decide on issues revolving around the protection of different categories of works under European copyright law. Here’s what Henning writes: Works of applied art – the difference between design and copyright law by Henning Hartwig I.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

[Guest post] Reciprocity in copyright law

The IPKat

In the light of the foregoing, (…) a portrait photograph can (…) be protected by copyright if, which it is for the national court to determine in each case, such photograph is an intellectual creation of the author reflecting his personality and expressing his free and creative choices in the production of that photograph.

article thumbnail

Generative AI and creativity: A quick analysis of US and Canadian copyright registrations for artistic works

Kluwer Copyright Blog

In addition to raising questions about ownership of outputs , infringement in training , and the future of copyright as a policy tool to encourage creativity , economists are in the early stages of analysing the effects of these technologies on human creativity. Turning to Canada , the data is mixed and inconclusive.

article thumbnail

SpicyIP Tidbit: Union Minister of State for Commerce and Industry clarifies Current IPR Regime Sufficient for AI Works Protection

SpicyIP

Som Parkash, the Minister clarified that the existing IPR regime is well-equipped to protect Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated works, thus indicating no necessity to establish a separate category of rights. Whether the government plans to amend the Copyright Act of 1957 to update copyright laws to cover AI-generated content.

article thumbnail

Some Trademarks Receive More Protection Than Others – Here’s Why

Erik K Pelton

It’s important to remember that creativity and uniqueness are very relevant, but it only in the relevant brand or industry to qualify for stronger protection. Foe example, a camera company called “Cameras” will get zero protection because it describes the category of things that are being made or sold.

Trademark 130
article thumbnail

Originality in copyright law: An objective test without any artistic merit requirement, recalls Arnold LJ

The IPKat

Indeed, as Advocate General Mengozzi also explicitly noted in his Opinion in Football Dataco (with regard to the standard of originality for databases), that ‘copyright protection is conditional upon the database being characterised by a ‘creative’ aspect, and it is not sufficient that the creation of the database required labour and skill.’