Remove 2016 Remove Copyright Infringement Remove Fair Use Remove Moral Rights
article thumbnail

IT’S THE COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT FOR ME: WHY CLAIMS AGAINST MEME CONTENT SHOULD NOT MATTER

JIPL Online

In particular, it explores why copyright of a meme’s underlying content does not matter in a normative sense. In this blog I argue that copyright protection of the content underlying memes does not matter because of the relative weakness of enforcement mechanisms for copyright infringement of this scale. 139 (2016). [ix]

article thumbnail

Monday Miscellany

The IPKat

Topics include access and substantial similarity, fair use, performers’ rights, moral rights, expert testimony, the role of lay listeners, sound sampling, as demonstrated in dispositions of litigated and settled infringement disputes. More information about this event here.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Journey Through “Novembers” on SpicyIP (2005 – Present)

SpicyIP

With further ado, here’s what I found in Novembers: Database Protection in India: Since Prof Basheer’s 2005 post about the inaccurate implication of the theft of data as copyright infringement, to 2023, not much seems to have changed. Speaking of late movie stars, one may wonder about the posthumous enforcement of celebrity rights.

article thumbnail

The Modern Copyright Dilemma: Digital Content Ownership and Access

IP and Legal Filings

The crux of this debate is the argument that if the theft of restricted digital content is for the purpose of knowledge and research, it should be considered as an act done under ‘fair use’ and ‘fair dealing’ of the content. Digital Rights Management & Fair Use If everything is so well designed, then where is the issue?

article thumbnail

A Look Back at India’s Top IP Developments of 2023

SpicyIP

Delhi High Court] On August 9, the Delhi High Court devised a judicial mechanism to combat novel ways of copyright infringement and issued the first-ever Dynamic+ injunction in favour of Universal City Studios LLC., The judgement was passed collectively in an appeal against 4 orders (two impugning the 2016 Ericsson v.

IP 124