article thumbnail

Whither a Signal-Based Broadcast Treaty?

Kluwer Copyright Blog

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. The 2006 GA authorized negotiations for a diplomatic conference on the Broadcast Treaty only on “traditional” broadcasting and cable casting and only adopting a “signal based” approach.

article thumbnail

IP as a political instrument in Russia

The IPKat

Under the amendment, such authorization from the patent owner was also not necessary in the event of a critical need related to public health. Notably, Article 1360 had never been applied in practice since 2006, the year of enactment of Part IV of the Civil Code covering IP rights. International license.

IP 132
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

The Much-Adapted “Peter Pan” (1904 – Forever )

Velocity of Content

Having obtained film animation rights — a relatively new licensing concept at the time, but one which Disney Studios began frequently exploiting from the 1930’s on – Walt Disney and his studio release the famous animated film. > “ Peter Pan in Scarlet ” (2006 novel by Geraldine McCaughrean). Peter Pan” (1953 animated film).

article thumbnail

Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Law in the UAE

IP and Legal Filings

A GCC Trademark Law was issued in 2006. This law will replace the current Trademark Law of 1992 subsequent to its publication in the Official Gazette by the UAE government. There are no restrictions placed on licensing or assigning patents to foreign parties. Trademarks are protected by registration with the IP Department.

article thumbnail

Fair Use for Documentaries in US Copyright Law: Brown v Netflix

Kluwer Copyright Blog

The performance of the song clip in the film was transformative, as it was held that the filmmaker had used the unaltered song as “raw material” to produce a work with undoubtedly “new aesthetics” (in this regard, the District Court had cited the 2006 Second Circuit’s precedent Blanch v.

Fair Use 103
article thumbnail

Prince, Prince, Prints: Will the Supreme Court Revisit Fair Use?

LexBlog IP

A few years later, in 1984, Goldsmith’s agency, which had retained the rights to those images, licensed one of them to Vanity Fair for use in an article called “Purple Fame.” In 1981, Goldsmith, who was then a portrait photographer for Newsweek , took a series of photographs of the then-up-and-coming musician Prince. He did just that.

article thumbnail

U.S. Supreme Court Vindicates Photographer But Destabilizes Fair Use — Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Specifically, when a derivative work is created pursuant to a statutory exception, then the derivative work is prepared “lawfully,” even though the artist who created the derivative did not get a license or other permission from the owner of the copyright in the underlying work. Goldsmith herself had been entirely unaware of the licensed use.)