Nicole Maxwell’s Post

Ever wondered how to protect your book from plagiarism and copyright infringement? This week, David Faux, a multi-talented attorney, entrepreneur, scholar, and former music journalist, will demystify copyright law and share essential strategies for safeguarding your literary work. Key Takeaways: 1️⃣ Understanding Copyright: David explains the five exclusive rights authors have over their work. 2️⃣ The Importance of Registration: Why registering with the U.S. Copyright Office is crucial. 3️⃣ Copyright vs. Trademark: David clarifies the differences. 4️⃣ Steps to Register: How to apply, deposit your work, and pay fees. 5️⃣ Protecting Your Ideas: Tips for safely sharing in writing groups and public forums. Tune in to arm yourself with the knowledge to protect and enforce your literary rights! The link to listen is in the comments. #BookMarketing #CopyrightLaw #IntellectualProperty #AuthorRights

Copyright Assignment Contracts in Perpetuity: Comprehensive Analysis of Court Judgments #1957 #ambiguity #assignees #clarityandprecision #comprehensiveanalysis #contractualprovisions #Copyrightassignmentcontracts #copyrightduration #copyrightowners #CourtJudgments #disputes #enforceability #intentionoftheparties #interpretations #JudicialScrutiny #languageusedinthecontract #legalcounsel #LegalFramework #perpetuity #Section19(5)oftheCopyrightAct #writtenagreements

#ICYMI: "Times Up? Not So Fast: Supreme Court Rules Damages Are Not Limited to Three Year Look Back Where Copyright Act Claim is Timely under “Discovery Rule” NEW #GenovaBurns Complex Commercial Litigation blog authored by Partner Lawrence Bluestone, Esq. and Gina Maturi, J.D. (pending admission). #CopyrightLaw #IntellectualProperty #CopyrightInfringement #NowYouKnow #ComplexCommercialLitigation https://lnkd.in/g9CBPpxd

Fair use is a vital concept in copyright law, allowing limited use of copyrighted material without permission. It covers areas like comment, criticism, research, teaching, and parody. Fair use is measured by four factors: purpose and character, nature of the work, amount used, and commercial impact. Each case is unique, making it crucial to understand these guidelines. For expert advice on copyright issues, choose our IPR services. Follow us for more insights. 👉Visit us: www.4aipsolution.in 📩[email protected] 👉Follow us on: https://lnkd.in/enCeJBi3 https://lnkd.in/eKyRDCvg https://lnkd.in/gdzyc5_M . . #FairUse #CopyrightLaw #IPRServices #IntellectualProperty #LegalAdvice #Commentary #Criticism #Research #Teaching #Parody #FairUseFactors #PurposeAndCharacter #CommercialImpact #CopyrightProtection #ExpertGuidance #FollowUs #Copyright #IPRServices

Have advances in media forced the law to catch up to the latest tech? Hear from Princeton University's David Bellos and MontaguLaw, P.C.'s Alex Montagu on this and more in the latest AccelPro IP Law interview, On the History of Copyright Protection. AccelPro strives to provide multiple perspectives on every topic we explore. That very much includes professors and lawyers, alongside regulators, clients and more. Bellos says, "I personally do not buy the oft-touted argument that new media has forced the law to catch up with technological development. On the contrary, it's rather the opposite. New media, once it was invented, saw a great opportunity in existing copyright law, and its creators scrambled to organize their businesses so they could exploit it." And Montagu says of copyright protection more generally, "In the 17th and 18th century, these issues were debated publicly. Today, that's not what we're doing. This is an issue that, if debated at all, is debated in the context of the United States Copyright Office or the World Intellectual Property Organization. There are very few people involved. And we argue that this is actually touching everybody, so we want to open up the discussion." https://lnkd.in/gDDmTUrV Interview by Neal Ungerleider

Feels like judgement number 157 on fair compensation under the InfoSoc Directive... but this one does feel especially important, as it talks about the direct effect of article 5(2)(a) and (b) and the possibility of direct claims by individuals in court on this basis. Here's the operative part: Article 5(2)(a) and (b) of Directive 2001/29 1... must be interpreted as meaning that an individual may rely, before a national court, against an entity entrusted by a Member State with collecting and distributing the fair compensation established under that provision, on the fact that the national legislation laying down that compensation contravenes provisions of EU law which have direct effect, provided that such an entity has, in order to perform that task in the public interest, special powers beyond those which result from the normal rules applicable in relations between individuals. 2. ...must be interpreted as having direct effect, and that therefore, in the absence of a correct transposition of that provision, an individual may rely on it for the purposes of disapplying national rules under which that individual is obliged to pay remuneration by way of fair compensation imposed in contravention of that provision

🎨 Writers, artists, and creators—we know the struggle is real. Between actually finishing that project and figuring out copyright laws, it’s like wrangling a herd of cats! 😅🐱 But guess what? We’ve got you covered. At Editority, we handle the messy, technical stuff so you can focus on creating without pulling your hair out. 🖋️🎉 Let us do the hard work—your masterpiece deserves it! ✨ Check us out at editority.com and say goodbye to the stress! ✨ #CreativeChaos #WeGotYou #EditorityToTheRescue #IndieAuthors #CreateFreely

"Times Up? Not So Fast: Supreme Court Rules Damages Are Not Limited to Three Year Look Back Where Copyright Act Claim is Timely under “Discovery Rule” NEW #GenovaBurns Complex Commercial Litigation blog authored by Partner Lawrence Bluestone, Esq. and Gina Maturi, J.D. (pending admission). #CopyrightLaw #IntellectualProperty #CopyrightInfringement #NowYouKnow #ComplexCommercialLitigation https://lnkd.in/g9CBPpxd

Barry White's signature baseline from “I’m Gonna Love You Just a Little More Baby” was allegedly stolen ... almost 20 years ago, but his estate only picked up on it when Future, Metro Boomin and Kendrick Lamar recently reused it in "Like That." This claim obviously has timing issues, and the lawyers are well aware. To address the problem, plaintiff claims that since there was no Internet back in 1986, there was no wide enough distribution of "Everlasting Bass," the allegedly infringing song, to place plaintiff on notice. Two immediate issues come to mind. One, the 1986 song was influential enough to be named by the Rolling Stone as one of the 20 greatest West Coast Rap Songs released prior to N.W.A's 1988 album "Straight Outta Compton." As such, the "we had no idea about it" claim seems problematic. Two, courts are split as to whether the clock on copyright claims begins to run when the wrongful act takes place or when plaintiff should know about it. The Supreme Court in Warner Chappell recently punted on this very question, and it remains to be seen which side ultimately wins the day. This lawsuit thus has lots of hurdles, although the sampling is truly unmistakable, and the original 1986 unlicensed use is unfortunate. Munck Wilson Mandala LLP #copyright #IP #IPlaw #medialaw #copyrightlaw #law #entertainmentlaw #entertainmentindustry #litigation #federalcourt #entertainment #legal #musiclaw

Hi all- Professor Lee's post has links to a useful summary of this case, so I only want to call out one point that I found especially interesting in the decision. One of the most specious -- and prevalent -- arguments raised by those who do not wish to acquire consent from creators for AI use relates to tokenization. The argument is that converting text and storing it as tokens somehow "does not involve make copies." This argument has always seemed intellectually dishonest. Argue "fair use" if you want a defense (and are in a fair use jurisdiction and think you can prevail), but do not use smoke and mirrors to present magic as a factual assertion. Here is the court's view: "That these works may be contained in Stable Diffusion as algorithmic or mathematical representations – and are therefore fixed in a different medium than they may have originally been produced in – is not an impediment to the claim at this juncture."