Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Hawkes & Son (London) Ltd v. Paramount Film Service Ltd [1934] 1 Ch 593 (the Colonel Bogey case - infringement of copyright occurs when "a substantial, a vital and an essential part" of a work is copied, per Lord Slesser) Jennings v. Stephens [1936] Ch. 469 ("performance in public" as infringement) Donahue v.
Distributors of peer-to-peer file-sharing software can be liable for copyright infringement if there are "affirmative steps taken to foster infringement". Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp. 550 U.S. 437
Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc., 663 F. Supp. 706 (S.D.N.Y. 1987) was a federal case in which artist Saul Steinberg sued various parties involved with producing and promoting the 1984 movie Moscow on the Hudson, claiming that a promotional poster for the movie infringed his copyright in a magazine cover, View of the World from 9th Avenue, he ...
Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., 593 U.S. ___ (2021), [1] was a U.S. Supreme Court decision related to the nature of computer code and copyright law. The dispute centered on the use of parts of the Java programming language 's application programming interfaces (APIs) and about 11,000 lines of source code, which are owned by Oracle (through ...
In other words, while the plaintiffs claim that Lipa infringed on their copyrighted expression, the very ideas they claim as original can be found in numerous examples of earlier songs, rendering ...
17 U.S.C. § 501, 17 U.S.C. §106. A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004 (9th. Cir., 2001) was a landmark intellectual property case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court ruling that the defendant, peer-to-peer file sharing service Napster, could be held liable for contributory ...
Some countries, like Canada and Germany, have limited the penalties for non-commercial copyright infringement. For example, Germany has passed a bill to limit the fine for individuals accused of sharing movies and series to €800–900.
Rogers v. Koons, 960 F.2d 301 (2d Cir. 1992), [1] is a leading U.S. court case on copyright, dealing with the fair use defense for parody. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that an artist copying a photograph could be liable for infringement when there was no clear need to imitate the photograph for parody.