Remove Artistic Work Remove Editing Remove Fair Use Remove Intellectual Property Law
article thumbnail

Jack Daniels v. VIP Products and the Freedom to Parody and Comment in the United States

Kluwer Copyright Blog

In the United States, the doctrine of fair use has been held to permit parody in uses ranging from rap music to children’s books. These fair use rights, the courts have said, have their roots in the U.S. The freedom of authors to use trademarks in their works could be stifled by the threat of litigation.

article thumbnail

Generative AI and Copyright – Some Recent Denials and Unanswered Questions

Intellectual Property Law Blog

Howell affirmed, “[i]n the absence of any human involvement in the creation of the work, the clear and straightforward answer is the one given by the Register: No.” Where AI alone creates a work, this point seems clear.

Copyright 147
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Can Intellectual Property Rights Safeguard Your Blog?

Kashishipr

Copyright is a legal protection afforded to an original, creative literary, musical, or artistic work. The protection under copyright is instantaneous and immediate to the works being created, and therefore, it is not necessary to have such rights registered. Blogging and Fair Use. Copyright and Blogs.

article thumbnail

IP and NFTs: Where are We?

LexBlog IP

Indeed, the directors of the US Patent and Trademark Office and US Copyright Office are in the process of conducting a joint study to untangle the various interests at play, having promised Sens. District Court for the Central District of California. The case is in the discovery phase. Nike, Inc. StockX LLC , Case No.

IP 52
article thumbnail

Free Speech, Chatting About Friends, Kraken/Crackin’ On AI, & Thinking About Fred & Ginger: Generated Content, Amici Curiae, & A Case About Jack Daniels That Dances Around Trademark Issues And Leaves Some Things To Chew On

LexBlog IP

VIP Products, on the other hand, argued that their toy was protected under the doctrine of “fair use” as it was being used in a non-trademark sense, and that it was not likely to cause confusion among consumers. Rogers , 875 F.2d ” Id. ” Id. In VIP Products v. Jack Daniels Products , 953 F.3d