LexBlog IP
APRIL 25, 2023
History suggests the law will split inventorship down the middle and grant rights to those “portions” of an invention or copyrightable work that were created by a human, and avoid granting protection to the “portions” that were AI-generated. Copyright law does this well with the protection of derivative works.
TorrentFreak
JANUARY 6, 2023
Schneider’s first amended complaint alleged that YouTube and its users infringed her copyrighted musical compositions and sound recordings, and that YouTube facilitated infringement by removing copyright management information (CMI) from her copyright works, in violation of the DMCA. YouTube’s Licensing Defense.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright Lately
NOVEMBER 8, 2022
The principle that characters which evolve over time don’t enter the public domain all at once was established by the 2014 opinion in Klinger v. At the same time, those aspects of the character’s evolution that don’t appear until later works may still be eligible for copyright protection. Conan Doyle Estate, Ltd.
Copyright Lately
AUGUST 2, 2022
performances of “The Unofficial Bridgerton Musical”) or other derivative works that might compete with Netflix’s own planned live events,” including the multi-city “ Bridgerton Experience.” 1962, 1976 (2014). Was it a license on the world’s greatest terms? Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. ,
TorrentFreak
MAY 17, 2022
It is unlikely that these features will appear on a licensed mainstream service but that doesn’t stop subscribers from desiring them. for a ‘lifetime’ license. You agree that as a condition of your license, you will not: i. People Want to Download and Keep Movies & TV Shows.
IP Intelligence
JUNE 7, 2023
Warhol created these silkscreens from a photograph of Prince taken by Lynn Goldsmith, who claimed copyright infringement when the Warhol estate licensed Orange Prince to Conde Nast after Prince’s passing in 2016 to illustrate an article about Prince’s life and music. We limit our analysis accordingly.
Plagiarism Today
SEPTEMBER 28, 2021
” The case raises questions of fair use and whether the new paintings were transformative enough to be non-infringing or if they were simply derivative works. That court found that most of Prince’s work was non-infringing (though several works still were) and the two sides ultimately settled the case in March 2014.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
52 
Let's personalize your content