Remove 2003 Remove Contracts Remove Copyright Law Remove Licensing
article thumbnail

Publicity Rights Concerning Sports Athletes

IP and Legal Filings

Through various proceedings from the Court of law, Publicity rights are inherent in Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. [i] i] In principle, the Delhi High Court has recognized publicity rights in the case of ICC Development (International) Ltd v Arvee Enterprises (2003). [ii] iv] The Copyrights Act, 1957. [v]

article thumbnail

Ninth Circuit Reaffirms That Parties Can Contractually Shorten Statute of Limitations Period for Copyright Infringement Claims

The IP Law Blog

10, 2023), the Ninth Circuit held that the trial court had properly enforced contractual provisions to find that the Plaintiff’s copyright infringement claims were barred by the agreed-to shortened, statute of limitations period. Evox Productions creates and licenses images of cars. Chrome Data Solutions, LP (filed Feb.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

If “Trespass to Chattels” Isn’t Limited to “Chattels,” Anarchy Ensues–Best Carpet Values v. Google

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

With respect to copyright, the court says: “Plaintiffs do not rely on copyright protection for their websites in pleading their claim…Plaintiffs are not asserting infringement of any right to the reproduction, performance, distribution, or display of their websites. We need to know more about this license.

article thumbnail

Please share nicely — From Database directive to Data (governance) acts

Kluwer Copyright Blog

For public sector bodies — producers and holders of vast quantities of data — as well as for the companies that act as suppliers, the sui generis database right has been slowly eroded since 2003. So effectively, the 2013 directive already curtailed public sector bodies’ copyright and sui generis rights in data. by Tito Rendas. €

article thumbnail

A Preliminary Analysis of Trump’s Copyright Lawsuit Over Interview Recordings (Trump v. Simon & Schuster) (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Fifth, assuming Trump owns a valid copyright, did he grant an implied license to Woodward to publish transcripts of the interviews and/or the record­ings themselves? Sixth, assuming Woodward published copyrighted material without Trump’s authorization, was he permitted to do so, either as a fair use, or by the First Amendment?

Copyright 119