Remove topics oracle-v-google
article thumbnail

Third Circuit Declares Copyright Independence for Fireworks Systems–Pyrotechnics v. XFX

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

This case involves copyright protection for fireworks systems–a relevant topic for July 4th! This ruling seemingly addresses some of the missing pieces from the Google v. Oracle litigation. The post Third Circuit Declares Copyright Independence for Fireworks Systems–Pyrotechnics v. June 29, 2022).

Copyright 129
article thumbnail

Fair Use for Documentaries in US Copyright Law: Brown v Netflix

Kluwer Copyright Blog

Chapman (‘plaintiffs’) collectively filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Netflix, Amazon, and Apple (‘defendants’), claiming that the defendants had directly and indirectly infringed their copyright over the song “ Fish Sticks n’ Tater Tots ” by using it in their documentary titled ‘Burlesque’ ( Brown v. Google, Inc.

Fair Use 103
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

With Warhol, It’s Time to Transform Transformative Use

Copyright Lately

After all, the last time the Court considered whether a creative work qualified as a “transformative” fair use under the Copyright Act was in 1994’s “Oh, Pretty Woman” case, Campbell v. The transformative use doctrine did play a role in Google v. Or in squaring the broad language from the Ninth Circuit’s Seltzer v.

article thumbnail

How Prince and Warhol Got to the Supreme Court

Velocity of Content

What is “transformative” has been a hotly debated topic for years. This case comes hot on the heels of the Supreme Court’s 2021 decision in Google v. Oracle , which found that Google’s use of parts of Oracle’s declaring code, used in APIs, was fair. And one other thing —an important thing.

article thumbnail

U.S. Supreme Court Vindicates Photographer But Destabilizes Fair Use — Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Despite those caveats, the opinion is likely to be enormously consequential, far more so than the Court’s similarly narrow and context-specific ruling two years ago in the Google v. Oracle software case. (See my commentary on that case here.) Barton Beebe’s empirical work on this topic. of America v.

article thumbnail

WIPIP Concurrent Session #6 Copyright Theory

43(B)log

RT: Don’t need a jury (though there may be subtle effects on how judges behave because of the jury background); Google v. Oracle suggested fair use mostly wasn’t a jury question. Enhanced by Equustek v. Google’s global injunction against Google requiring delisting a site worldwide.