Technology & Marketing Law Blog
AUGUST 16, 2023
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 litigants are an employer and former employee.
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
MAY 2, 2022
The court remains skeptical of LinkedIn’s privacy-based arguments: LinkedIn has no protected property interest in the data contributed by its users, as the users retain ownership over their profiles. Five years into this litigation, let’s take stock of all of the things we still don’t know: Is hiQ still an operational business?
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
MARCH 15, 2022
The court says the takedown notices are covered by the litigation privilege: “Since the statements at issue here were made to Amazon during the notice and takedown period, they are absolutely privileged. So extending the litigation privilege to DMCA takedown notices seems like an overreach. Defamation.
Biswajit Sarkar Copyright Blog
JANUARY 16, 2024
These rights provide exclusive ownership and control over intangible assets, allowing creators to protect their innovations from unauthorised use, reproduction, or distribution. Firstly, intellectual property rights grant startups exclusive ownership over their innovative ideas and inventions.
LexBlog IP
MARCH 24, 2023
The lease agreement allows the NCAA to use the trademark “Sweet Sixteen” in its marketing, promotions, and other activities related to the tournament, but the KHSAA retains ownership of the trademark. In some cases, the NCAA has even taken legal action to protect its trademarks.
The IPKat
MAY 26, 2023
Last year, former GuestKat Jan Jacobi reported both the Warsaw District Court’s Referral to the CJEU and AG Rantos’ Opinion on the TB v Castorama Polska and Knor litigation (see IPKat posts here and here ). This, by submitting evidence appropriate to the nature of that right and any special formalities governing the ownership of that right.
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
APRIL 1, 2023
Construing these allegations as true and in Service’s favor, Service subjectively believed that he possessed an ownership interest and that he never approved the Comedy Dynamics deal. I’m pretty sure the drafters of 512(f) never contemplated that it would be invoked in disputes over ownership.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
62 
Let's personalize your content