‘Businesses wishing to make use of copyrighted works that have no known rights holder can now obtain a licence allowing them to use the material without infringing UK copyright laws under a new licensing system launched by the Intellectual Property Office (IPO).’
OUT-LAW.com, 31st October 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘In 1962 Achille and Pier Giacomo Castiglioni designed a floor lamp with a marble base and a curved lead to a bowl shaped reflector. Those lamps, known as the Arco lamp and you can see a picture of one of those lamps in Achille Castiglioni’s studio in Quick History: The Arco Lamp in Apartment Therapy. Original Arco lamps retail for £1,373 but it is possible to buy a reproduction for a fraction of that price as the Prime Minister’s wife did recently (see “Samantha Cameron counts the cost of her repro lamp” 3 Oct 2011 The Guardian).’
NIPC Law, 17th October 2014
Source: www.nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk
‘Rights holders could lose even more control over their content if they take cases to court to test new copyright exceptions, the academic whose proposals prompted the new laws has exclusively told Out-Law.com.’
OUT-LAW.com, 7th October 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Under a new exception to copyright law, anyone will be able to make a funny parody or mash-up from existing material. But do the courts have a sense of humour, asks Adam Rendle.’
Daily Telegraph, 4th October 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘A law has come into effect that permits UK citizens to make copies of CDs, MP3s, DVDs, Blu-rays and e-books. Consumers are allowed to keep the duplicates on local storage or in the cloud. While it is legal to make back-ups for personal use, it remains an offence to share the data with friends or family.’
BBC News, 1st October 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘As a number of new laws come into effect this week, we take a look at how your life will be affected.’
Daily Telegraph, 1st October 2014
Source: www.telegrpah.co.uk
Deckmyn and another v Vandersteen and others (Case C-201/13; ECLI:EU:C:2014:2132; [2014] WLR (D) 385
‘The concept of “parody” within the meaning of article 5(3)(k) of Parliament and Council Directive 2001/29/EC was an autonomous concept of EU law and its essential characteristics were to evoke an existing work, while being noticeably different from it, and secondly, to constitute an expression of humour or mockery. The concept was not subject to the conditions that the parody should display an original character of its own, other than that of displaying noticeable differences with respect to the original parodied work; that it could reasonably be attributed to a person other than the author of the original work itself; and it should relate to the original work itself or mention the source of the parodied work. However, the application of the exception for parody, within the meaning of article 5(3)(k) of Directive had to strike a fair balance between the interests and rights of persons referred to in articles 2 and 3 of the Directive, and the freedom of expression of the user of a protected work who was relying on the exception for parody and it was for the national court to determine, in the light of all the circumstances of the case, whether the application of the exception for parody preserved a fair balance.’
WLR Daily, 3rd September 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘On 14 May 2014 the Intellectual Property Bill received royal assent. The Act made some far reaching changes in patents, registered design and unregistered design right law which I summarized in “Reflections on the Intellectual Property Act 2014” 7 June 2014 4-5 IP Tech and discussed in detail in “How the Intellectual Property Act 2014 changes British Patent Law” 21 June 2014 JD Supra, “How the Intellectual Property Act 2014 changes British Registered Design Law” 19 June 2014 JD Supra and “How the Intellectual Property Act 2014 will change British Unregistered Design Right Law” 11 June 2014 JD Supra 11 June 2014. On 28 Aug 2014 Lady Neville-Rolfe, Minister for Intellectual Property, signed The Intellectual Property Act 2014 (Commencement No. 3 and Transitional Provisions) Order 2014 which will bring many of the provisions of the Act into force.’
NIPC Law, 6th September 2014
Source: www.nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk
‘Criminal penalties could be pursued against intentional copiers of either UK or Community registered designs that do not have rights holders’ permission for their actions from the beginning of next month.’
OUT-LAW.com, 5th September 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘A few days ago a number of newspapers reported that, following similar moves by a number of other UK institutions, the National Gallery in London has changed its strict no-photos-(please) policy, “after staff realised they were fighting a losing battle against mobile phones”, The Telegraph explains.
Legal Week, 27th August 2014
Source: www.legalweek.com
‘A man has been jailed for 33 months after recording Fast And Furious 6 from the back of a cinema in Walsall.’
BBC News, 22nd August 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘“I have paid a developer handsomely for my company’s website so my company owns the Copyright? Right?” Well, not exactly.
The question itself is predicated on a totally incorrect assumption of legal principle of their being a single copyright pertaining to a single site. When considered carefully, a website may consist of a large number of separate elements including music (or jingles), text, photographs, the font of the characters making up the site, colours, style, “look and feel”, language, sequence in which the web pages appear, forms, drawings and designs, and not forgetting the domain name itself. Each and every-one of those features attracts its own copyright and a website might therefore be correctly regarded as a ‘bundle’ of different rights protected separately by copyright law. How does this work? Let us begin by considering any music appearing on the website.’
Zenith Chambers, 12th August 2014
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
‘The application of intellectual property law in our modern age is fraught with complexities. As societies and technologies develop, situations invariably arise that the drafters of legislation had perhaps not considered.’
Technology Law Update, 8th August 2014
Source: www.technology-law-blog.co.uk
‘Wikimedia, the organisation behind Wikipedia, has refused a photographer’s repeated requests to delete his most famous shot as it is jeopardising his livelihood – because a monkey pressed the shutter button and “owns the copyright”.’
Daily Telegraph, 6th August 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘New rights to make private copies of copyrighted works, make free use of copyrighted material in works of parody and quote extracts from copyright protected books, audio and video content will be introduced into UK law from October.’
OUT-LAW.co, 30th July 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Work on a new online copyright enforcement regime under the Digital Economy Act (DEA) has been shelved now that rights holders and internet service providers (ISPs) have voluntarily agreed a framework for educating alleged infringers about the harm of piracy, the UK government has confirmed.’
OUT-LAW.com, 24th July 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Article 5 of Parliament and Council Directive 2001/29/EC of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society meant that the copies on a user’s computer screen and the copies in the Internet “cache” of that computer’s hard disk, made by an end-user in the course of viewing a website, satisfied the conditions that those copies had to be temporary, that they had to be transient or incidental in nature and that they had to constitute an integral and essential part of a technological process, as well as the conditions laid down in article 5(5) of that Directive, and that they could therefore be made without the authorisation of the copyright holders.’
WLR Daily, 5th June 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Copyright law struggles to keep up with developing technology. In February’s Svensson decision the European court said that using hyperlinks to access material already freely available on the internet did not infringe.’
Technology Law Update, 9th June 2014
Source: www.technology-law-blog.co.uk
‘Internet users who visit a website are safe from the threat of a copyright lawsuit, thanks to a landmark case which concluded in the European court of justice on Thursday.’
The Guardian, 5th June 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024