Not only Russian copyright, broadcast and digital law
VIP Products sells the “Bad Spaniels Silly Squeaker” dog toy, which resembles a bottle of Jack Daniel’s Old No. 7 Black Label Tennessee Whiskey, but has light-hearted, dog-related alterations. For example, the name “Jack Daniel’s” is replaced with “Bad Spaniels,” “Old No. 7” with “Old No. 2,” and alcohol content descriptions with “43% POO BY VOL.” and “100% SMELLY.”
Comments closed
Tamita Brown, Glen S. Chapman, and Jason T. Chapman (“Plaintiffs”) are musicians who created the song Fish Sticks n’ Tater Tots (the “Song). In 2017, a documentary film titled Burlesque: Heart of the Glitter Tribe (the “Film”) depicts a group of burlesque dancers in Portland, Oregon, one of whom incorporated the Song in a performance.
Comments closed
No policy intervention. Under this option, the use of publications would remain governed by the rules applicable to the rights transferred to press publishers by authors and other rightholders. Issues related to the different bargaining position of press publishers and online service providers would not be addressed, without prejudice to the possible application of competition law.
Comments closed
Publishers are increasingly facing difficulties in relation to the digital exploitation of, and the enforcement of rights in, press publications such as newspapers and magazines. The changes to the way copyright-protected content is distributed and consumed in the digital environment have affected press publications in a specific way. The publishing industry is in the middle of a shift from print to digital.
Comments closed
In the short term, the situation would not substantially change for CHIs. They would enjoy a narrow or larger space for preservation depending on the MS in which they carry out their preservation activities. Except in cases where MS may update their implementation of the current EU exception for ‘specific acts of reproduction’ to exploit its full space for preservation purposes, legal uncertainty and barriers to preservation will persist to varying degrees in the long term too.
Comments closedNo policy intervention. Reproduction of works for preservation purposes by CHIs would continue to take place only as permitted under the different conditions and the varying space provided by the national implementation of the existing EU exception for ‘specific acts of reproduction’, or after the reproduction right has been cleared with rightholders if CHIs consider that the transaction costs involved is for them worth and possible to incur. In voluntary legal deposit contexts and for parts of scientific publications that libraries have access to remotely, preservation could continue to take place within broader agreement-based systems.
Comments closed
A substantial part of the law on copyright in the UK is derived from EU law. There are 11 EU Directives all of which have been implemented by the UK. The purpose of the Directives is to harmonise the copyright frameworks in Member States, by reducing national discrepancies and maintaining a level of protection which encourages creativity and enables consumers from across the EU to access services.
Comments closedPreservation by cultural heritage institutions (CHIs) faces legal uncertainty in the new technological environment. As in many cases preserving works requires copying them, the societal importance of preservation is reflected in national exceptions to the reproduction right for preservation purposes, which implement an optional EU exception for “specific acts of reproduction” by certain institutional users.
Comments closed
The impact of Option 4 on research organisations in relation to legal certainty and transactions costs is similar to Option 3. Differently from the other options, because of the broader scope of application of the exception, Option 4 would specifically benefit researchers in commercial companies as they would no longer need a specific licence to mine content to which they have lawful access to.
Comments closed
Similar positive impact on researchers as under Option 2 as regards both legal certainty and reduction of transaction costs, as a result of the introduction of an exception harmonised at EU level. Additional positive impact as this option would remove the legal uncertainty and the grey area as regards the research projects carried out by public organisations with a possible commercial outcome, including in cooperation of these organisations with private partners (PPPs).
Comments closed