article thumbnail

When is an artist entitled to refuse attribution of an artwork? Italian Supreme Court provides (final) guidance in long-running dispute over Jeff Koons’s The Serpents

The IPKat

There, it was presented as an original Koons artwork of which three copies exist. Garrone subsequently contacted Koons several times (in 1997, 2007 and 2009) in order to obtain a declaration of authenticity from him and thus sell the artwork. Subsequently, the sculpture was shipped to Italy and held at customs in Milan.

Artwork 94
article thumbnail

First duel between NFTs and copyright before the Spanish courts: NFTs 1 – Authors 0

Kluwer Copyright Blog

Mango, in turn, sustained in its defence that (i) as the rightful owner of the physical Paintings, it was entitled to display them in public, and that (ii) the creation of digital works (i.e. Therefore, the moral right of “disclosure” had already been exhausted. an exploitation that caused them no harm).

Copyright 121
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

Bracing for Impact Keynote Address Tells a Copyright Story Never Told: Art and Copyright in Ghettos and Concentration Camps

IPilogue

Professor Lior Zemer, Dean at the Harry Radzyner Law School at Reichman University, began his presentation with Artwork of the Compiègne Concentration Camp by Abraham Joseph Berline created in 1941. Most artwork created in ghettos and concentration camps is today, by default, Orphaned Work.

Art 106
article thumbnail

Honourable Justice Marshall Rothstein’s Keynote Commentary at Bracing for Impact Conference: “Why Has it Taken So Long?”

IPilogue

Justice Rothstein offered a Canadian perspective on how our moral rights framework would line up with Dean Zemer’s approach. Justice Rothstein explained that the concerns raised by Dean Zemer would fit neatly into the Canadian understanding of moral rights. However, it is a worthwhile goal.

article thumbnail

Second Circuit’s Decision in Kerson v. Vermont Law School May Embolden Property Owners to Conceal Contentious or Inconvenient Art

LexBlog IP

Copyright Act to provide living creators of “works of visual art” [2] with certain non-transferable “moral rights” with respect to their artwork. [3] ” [5] The latter has become known as the “public presentation” exception. .”

Art 52
article thumbnail

Is Generative AI Fair Use of Copyright Works? NYT v. OpenAI

Kluwer Copyright Blog

The lawsuits brought by the owners of such works, including artworks in the case of image-generators and journalism in the NYT case, claim that this should not be allowed. As in the present context, the initial concern of copyright holders was that their consent had not been acquired by Google prior to scanning their works.

Fair Use 137
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. Right: Photo courtesy of Katie Hagebols retrieved from [link]. What about moral rights?