Remove Artistic Work Remove Copying Remove Marketing Remove Non-Fungible Tokens
article thumbnail

Can We Reexamine the Role of Blockchain in Copyright Now?

Plagiarism Today

Back in January, the crypto group Spice DAO (decentralized autonomous organization) made headlines for spending approximately $3 million to acquire a physical copy of the book Jodorowsky’s Dune , a bible for a planned Dune move that would have been made in the 1970s. . The payment beyond excessive.

Copyright 243
article thumbnail

IP infringement in Metaverse

IIPRD

As recently in 2022 Hermès, a fashion house sued Manson an NFT (non-fungible token) creator for trademark infringement who marketed a digital asset called “Metabirkins”, which was a digital copy of a bag created by Hermès, which sold at many high prices. Later it was settled. Copyright Infringement.

IP 52
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

IP and NFTs: Where are We?

LexBlog IP

In his motion, Rothschild argued that he used “MetaBirkins” as a title to an artistic work as opposed to a source-identifying trademark. Although the order does not resolve any of Hermes’ claims on the merits, it does offer a first glimpse at how courts may treat trademark claims involving NFTs moving forward.

IP 52
article thumbnail

“For Sale: This Article”: an overview of non-fungible tokens (NFTs) and IP

IP Whiteboard

NFT stands for non-fungible token. Non-fungible basically means unique. By way of comparison, a $10 note is an example of a fungible asset, because it can be replaced with another $10 note, or two $5 notes. Multiple pieces of copyright material may exist in a single digital work. What are NFTs?

article thumbnail

[Guest post] The NFT Hermés Case: Mainly Relevant for Large Collection of NFTs

The IPKat

Grimaldi ) whereby the right to protect a registered trade mark (a protection given in the USA law essentially by the Lanham Act ), under some circumstances, cannot be enforced to detriment of “the right of others to express themselves freely in their own artistic work” (from the Rogers v. Grimaldi case).

Artwork 95