article thumbnail

Is Your Website Published or Unpublished?

Plagiarism Today

It deals with whether Amazon and/or CCA infringed FDN’s copyrights by scraping descriptions from their website for use as part of Amazon’s product listings. That question is whether the descriptions were “published” or “unpublished” according to the law when they were put on FDN’s website. According to the U.S. Bottom Line.

article thumbnail

3 Count: Frequent Flyer

Plagiarism Today

Next up today, Rhiannon Bevan at TheGamer reports that Nintendo has filed a takedown notice against a video of a fan-created first-person shooter that was based on the Pokemon franchise. The video was uploaded by Twitter user @Dragon_GameDev2 who published it to both Twitter and Twitch as a way to announce the new project.

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

SpicyIP Weekly Review (September 27 – October 3)

SpicyIP

West-Coast Pharmaceutical Works directed the Registry to draw up a decree-sheet per the terms of settlement between the Defendants and the Plaintiffs with regard to the case of infringement of Plaintiff’s OMEZ trademark by Defendant’s OMES [September 28, 2021]. Delhi High Court in Reddys Laboratories Limited v. News from around the World.

article thumbnail

Understanding the CCB’s First Two Final Determinations (Guest Blog Post–Part 3 of 3)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Flores sent a DMCA 512(g) counter-notice on June 27, 2022, and filed with the CCB the next day. At an initial conference on January 23, 2023, the parties reached a settlement and asked to dismiss the claim. Prutton claims that Oppenheimer was unreasonable in settlement negotiations. It seems like it did. What is the burden?

article thumbnail

U.S. Supreme Court Fixes Ninth Circuit’s Test for Mistakes in Copyright Registrations—Unicolors v. H&M (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The Ninth Circuit also held that the 31 designs were not a “single unit of publication” as a matter of law, because they were not first published together as a “singular, bundled unit.” The Ninth Circuit acknowledged that “this court has never previously addressed what it means to publish multiple works as a ‘single unit.’”