article thumbnail

DoodStream: Hollywood, Netflix, Amazon & Apple Sue “Rogue Cyberlocker”

TorrentFreak

The Paris court noted that the site “encouraged the infringement of copyright and related rights by setting up tools specifically designed for the mass and illicit sharing of protected content.” The case is listed for hearing on April 8, 2014. 5 and 6,” an order from the court reads. 1 to 3 were masked.”

Reporting 105
article thumbnail

AI and copyright in 2022

Kluwer Copyright Blog

21, Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 ), New Zealand ( section 5(2)(a), Copyright Act 1994 ), South Africa (section 2(h), Copyright Act 1978 ) and the UK ( Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, section 9(3) ). We were not aware that the image may have been created by AI” 2. The focus in these cases was on parody.

Copyright 145
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

Does food flavouring constitute a “work”?

LexBlog IP

He worked for large companies, active worldwide in the food industry, which specialised in the design and development of recipes and culinary products for industrial use. Compensation presupposes culpability and infringement of IP (or related rights) (i.e.,

article thumbnail

Cambodia and its RCEP Accession

IP and Legal Filings

Additionally, it requires Cambodia to maintain online databases with data on applications and registrations for patents, industrial designs, and trademarks. The RCEP Agreement’s GI provisions are compliant with the Law on Geographical Indication (2014). Conclusion.

article thumbnail

Africa IP Highlights #2: The trademarks arena

The IPKat

The Plaintiffs highlighted specific instances where the Defendants falsely represented themselves as the Plaintiffs when applying for work for the Kenya Film Commission’s Technical Proposal KFC/OT/05/2013/2014 by using the Plaintiffs’ trademark ‘ACAL' without the Plaintiffs’ authority or consent.

article thumbnail

Athens court rules on moral damages in software infringement case

LexBlog IP

This prevents the possible infringement of the exclusive right to reproduce a computer program provided for in article 42(2) of the Copyright Law, which belongs to the creator or author of the relevant program. In other words, it is the price of a program that has not been designed to cover the needs of a specific natural or legal person.

Copying 52
article thumbnail

The Orphan Works Directive is broken but the Commission won’t fix it!

Kluwer Copyright Blog

The ‘practical difficulties’ that the Commission acknowledges in its conclusions, which in our view stem from the regime designed in the OWD rather than the Member States’ implementation or practices, will continue to exist. The Directive will therefore continue to exist as it is, with no changes to its scope or its system.

Copyright 103