Remove Blogging Remove Cease and Desist Remove Fair Use Remove Ownership
article thumbnail

512(f) Once Again Ensnared in an Employment Ownership Dispute–Shande v. Zoox

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

This paradigm, however, breaks down when copyright ownership is contested. In that circumstance, the takedown notice becomes a proxy battle for a larger and likely fact-dependent war over ownership, which the service in the middle isn’t in a good position to resolve. The hosting service honored the takedown notice.

article thumbnail

People Don’t Come to See the Tattoo, They Come to See the Show

IP Tech Blog

Because ownership of original works, like a tattoo, vests with the author (here the tattoo artist), the tattoo artist owned the copyright in the tattoo, even though it was physically on the someone else’s body. Netflix moved to dismiss the complaint on, among other grounds, fair use. Lynn Goldsmith, et al. , Koons , 467 F.3d

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

Too Rusty For Krusty–Nickelodeon v. Rusty Krab Restaurant (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The Rusty Krab court expands upon these points in its subsequent section detailing findings of law, but its discussion is fairly conclusory, mainly comprising maxims about what a parody is and isn’t rather than specific discussion of the defendants’ use and why it fails to qualify.

article thumbnail

Anti-Circumvention Takedowns Aren’t Covered by 512(f)–Yout v. RIAA

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

[I’ll blog the Supreme Court’s cert grant in Gonzalez v. Heldman. * Another 512(f) Claim Fails–Ningbo Mizhihe v Doe. * Video Excerpts Qualify as Fair Use (and Another 512(f) Claim Fails)–Hughes v. New Destiny Church. * ‘Reaction’ Video Protected By Fair Use–Hosseinzadeh v. Federici. * Biosafe-One v.

article thumbnail

11th Circuit UPHOLDS a 512(f) Plaintiff Win on Appeal–Alper Automotive v. Day to Day Imports

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Start with my prior blog post. I’m simplifying a lot–see my prior blog post for the gory details). Heldman. * Another 512(f) Claim Fails–Ningbo Mizhihe v Doe. * Video Excerpts Qualify as Fair Use (and Another 512(f) Claim Fails)–Hughes v. The Lower Court Ruling. This is a messy case with complex facts.

Fair Use 104
article thumbnail

Surprise! Another 512(f) Claim Fails–Bored Ape Yacht Club v. Ripps

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Heldman * Another 512(f) Claim Fails–Ningbo Mizhihe v Doe * Video Excerpts Qualify as Fair Use (and Another 512(f) Claim Fails)–Hughes v. New Destiny Church * ‘Reaction’ Video Protected By Fair Use–Hosseinzadeh v. Klein * 9th Circuit Sides With Fair Use in Dancing Baby Takedown Case–Lenz v.

article thumbnail

512(f) Plaintiff Must Pay $91k to the Defense–Digital Marketing v. McCandless

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Heldman. * Another 512(f) Claim Fails–Ningbo Mizhihe v Doe. * Video Excerpts Qualify as Fair Use (and Another 512(f) Claim Fails)–Hughes v. New Destiny Church. * ‘Reaction’ Video Protected By Fair Use–Hosseinzadeh v. Klein. * 9th Circuit Sides With Fair Use in Dancing Baby Takedown Case–Lenz v.