Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A recurring issue in intellectual property law is the possibility of establishing rights in subject matter from the public domain and drawing the boundaries between what is public and private. In one guise, this issue is now before the Supreme Court in Assoc. for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., No. 12-398, cert. granted, Nov. 30, 2012) (patent eligibility of isolated DNA). Earlier this year the issue arose in another guise in Golan v. Holder, 132 S.Ct. 873 (2012), which upheld the constitutionality of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (or, informally, Copyright Restoration Act), granting U.S. copyright protection to certain works that had passed into the public domain in the United States, but which were still protected in their country of origin. In doing so, however, the Court construed the scope and significance of the public domain in a manner at odds with prior Supreme Court jurisprudence and in a manner that could have lasting significance for maintenance of trademark rights in subject matter within the scope of patent or copyright.
In Golan, various orchestra conductors, musicians, publishers, and others who had enjoyed unfettered access to certain such works in the public domain filed suit, objecting that Congress, in enacting the Copyright Restoration Act, exceeded its authority under the Copyright and Patent Clause and under the First Amendment. The Copyright Restoration Act restored rights in works that passed into the public domain for any of three basic reasons: the United States did not protect works from the country of origin at the time of first publication abroad; the United States did not protect sound recordings fixed before 1972; or the author failed to comply with U.S. statutory formalities. When the United States joined Berne in 1989, it did not protect such foreign works that had fallen into the public domain here. In 1994, however, TRIPS required implementation of Berne's first 21 articles, including protection of works of other member states where copyright had not expired in the country of origin.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.