2017 Artwork Marketing Ownership 
LexBlog IP
FEBRUARY 21, 2022
billion in sales in 2021 alone, the non-fungible token (“NFT”) has recently undergone a dramatic rise in prominence in the cryptoverse, similar to the “crypto summer” of 2017-18 or the “DeFi summer” of 2020. With an astounding $17.7 million) knew that the NFT may or may not reference any art at all.
IP and Legal Filings
SEPTEMBER 8, 2021
According to a report by Markets and Markets, the cryptocurrency market is expected to grow from USD 1.6 NFTs may be represented in the form of memes, artworks, or videos. Most prominently, through its 2020 report, IBM stated that several patents granted to them in 2017 also comprised of blockchain patents.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
LexBlog IP
AUGUST 13, 2021
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]. ” [10].
IP and Legal Filings
OCTOBER 19, 2022
Forms of digital media or virtual artworks are traded among NFT traders in the current NFT market practice, frequently for astronomically high prices. 2560 (2017) and Section 140 of the Civil and Commercial Code of Thailand, which are further expanded upon in other provisions.
Kluwer Copyright Blog
APRIL 5, 2023
1] The artwork is held by the Italian state museum Gallerie dell’Accademia of Venice, which, along with the Italian Ministry of Culture, initiated the precautionary proceeding against the German company Ravensburger and its Italian subsidiary for producing and selling the puzzle and reproducing the work’s image.
The IPKat
MARCH 13, 2022
Further to an appeal, in 2017 the Court of Appeal of Milan partly sided with the artist’s estate, but found that the unauthorized reproduction of the artist’s works in the context of the project and the book would not be unlawful. In 2014, the Milan Court of First Instance dismissed the action in its entirety.
LexBlog IP
JULY 5, 2022
Just as every piece of artwork is unique, there is no “one size fits all” when it comes to protecting your fashion goods with intellectual property tools. Fashion companies should be aware that they may need to obtain a license to, or ownership of, the copyright from the photographer. ” [8]. 3d 114, 118 (2d Cir.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
52 
Let's personalize your content