Remove 2020 Remove Advertising Remove Artistic Work Remove Designs
article thumbnail

Fleshing out the copyright in a tattoo

IP Whiteboard

In what we understand to be an industry-first, the Copyright Agency (an Australian not-for-profit collecting society that also licences copyright protected literary and artistic works) has licenced an Indigenous artwork for a tattoo. Left: Chris Black’s Jarrangini (buffalo), 2018 © Chris Black/Copyright Agency, 2020.

article thumbnail

Supermarket Showdown (Lidl v Tesco) – Lidl’s rights (trade marks and copyright) in the Lidl logo are infringed by Tesco’s “Clubcard Price” signs

Kluwer Copyright Blog

On copyright subsistence, the judge held that the Mark with Text is an artistic work, failing within the sub-category of “graphic works”. As part of this scheme, in September 2020, Tesco introduced the Clubcard Prices promotion: Tesco Clubcard holders were given discounts at the point of sale on certain products.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Copyright Protection of Modern Art

IP and Legal Filings

The lack of organisation and ambiguity make the protection problematic even if the work is copyrighted. According to section 13 (1)(a) of Copyright Act of 1957 copyright subsists in original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works. Appropriating such work would be illegal. right to copyright will exist.

Art 52
article thumbnail

Nike V. Stockx: An Analysis Of The Trademark Infringement In The Metaverse

IP and Legal Filings

Artists are using virtual reality and augmented reality to create previously unimagined artworks. These artistsworks are undeniably unique and would be entitled to appropriate IP protection. Nike itself had taken the initiative to work with StockX primarily due to its faith in the verification process of StockX.

article thumbnail

Resolving Conflicts Between Trademark and Free Speech Rights After Jack Daniel’s v. VIP Products (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

1125(c)(3)(C) by claiming its humorous use of the Jack Daniel’s marks was not pure commercial speech because it poked fun at the company in the Bad Spaniels design. The other issue in Jack Daniel’s was whether VIP could invoke the “noncommercial use of a mark” exemption from dilution liability in 15 U.S.C.

Trademark 101
article thumbnail

USC IP year in review, TM/ROP

43(B)log

slide] Annual number of TTAB decisions under failure to function and related categories: 2000-2020—you can see an increase with a fall in 2020 due to the fact of 2020; 2021 looks to have regained the momentum of failure to function. failure to function can be significant in ordinary cases with uncontroversial subject matter.

IP 94
article thumbnail

SpicyIP Weekly Review (March 4-March 10)

SpicyIP

Calm Water Therapeutics Llc vs The Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs on 28 February, 2024 (Delhi High Court) The appeal challenged the rejection of a patent application for a “Bi-Functional Co-Polymer” by the Assistant Controller of Patents. Dr Reddy S Laboratories Limited vs Neutec Healthcare Pvt.