Remove 2015 Remove Artwork Remove Marketing
article thumbnail

UPDATE—New York Court Awards Statutory Prejudgment Interest to Grünbaum Estate’s Heirs

LexBlog IP

On July 12, 2021, Justice Andrew Borrok ruled that the rightful owners of two artworks by the Viennese Expressionist Egon Schiele (the “Artworks”) are entitled to prejudgment interest following an art dealer’s refusal to turn over the Artworks in 2015. [3] .” [2]. ” [10]. ” [10].

Artwork 52
article thumbnail

Canadian Perspectives on Artist Resale Rights

IPilogue

In its October 2015 policy proposition , CARFAC also highlighted the reality that many artists living in isolated northern communities live in impoverished conditions, while their work dramatically appreciates in value. The study also found that the market continued to grow after the implementation of the resale right in 2006.

Art 105
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Protection of Nonfungible Tokens in Nepal

IP and Legal Filings

The National Information and Communication Technology Policy, 2015, has therefore been a key policy action. However, as artwork typically cannot be duplicated exactly and cannot be swapped with another without losing or gaining value, it is non-fungible. Conclusion. NFTs are viewed as the future of ownership by enthusiasts.

article thumbnail

Globally Local: Analysing The Impact Of Geographical Indication On International Trade

IP and Legal Filings

It further depends upon flexible marketing strategies, long term strict regulations and safeguard procedures. Asian countries reflect the most positive attitude towards GI implementation as these nations rely largely on “agriculture, horticulture, animal husbandry, handicraft, cuisines, pottery, artwork and many other cultural products”.

Artwork 96
article thumbnail

Africa IP highlights 2021 #1: The copyright field

The IPKat

The Court of Appeal however found that there was enough evidence before the court to prove CPL’s ownership of the copyright in the artwork (as it had commissioned and paid for the artwork). It therefore held that Morison was also liable for copyright infringement of the artwork in the registered trademark.

article thumbnail

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

Kluwer Copyright Blog

The court found that three out of four fair use factors i.e. the purpose and character of the use, the amount and substantiality of the portion used, and the effect on the potential market, weighed in favor of fair use (with the remaining factor, i.e. the nature of the copyrighted work, being considered neutral and favoring neither party).

Fair Use 101
article thumbnail

SpicyIP Weekly Review (March 4-March 10)

SpicyIP

The plaintiff alleged that the defendant’s use of “Café Social” for its restaurant in Chhindwara, Madhya Pradesh infringes its trademark as it copied the “Social” word mark and the plaintiff’s distinctive artwork representing its trademark. Both the parties have registrations over their respective “Karim” and “Kareem” trademarks.