Showing posts with label works made for hire. Show all posts
Showing posts with label works made for hire. Show all posts

Sunday, December 17, 2023

Marvel Settles Fight Over Spider-Man, Doctor Strange Rights; The Hollywood Reporter, December 8, 2023

Ashley Cullins, The Hollywood Reporter; Marvel Settles Fight Over Spider-Man, Doctor Strange Rights

"It looks like Marvel won’t be bringing its battle over the rights to Spider-Man and Doctor Strange into the new year. Attorneys for the company and the estate of Steve Ditko on Wednesday notified the court that they’ve reached an amicable settlement and expect a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice to be filed in the coming weeks.

This all started back in 2021, when Marvel filed a series of lawsuits in response to copyright termination notices from Larry Lieber and the estates of Gene Colan, Steve Ditko, Don Heck and Don Rico. A very long list of characters were at issue, including Iron Man, Captain America, Black Widow, Hulk and Thor. In June, all but one of the matters settled."

Monday, June 19, 2023

Stan Lee said he was 'heartbroken' that he never copyrighted Marvel characters for himself; Insider, June 16, 2023

  , Insider; Stan Lee said he was 'heartbroken' that he never copyrighted Marvel characters for himself

""I always resented the fact that when I wrote these stories, I never thought, 'Gee, I ought to try and copyright something myself and own it.' It always belonged to the company," said Lee. "So, from a business point of view, that was a mistake. I was heartbroken. There wasn't much I could do about it.""

Sunday, August 28, 2022

The Importance of a Work Made For Hire Agreement; JD Supra, August 16, 2022

Arthur Zorio, Brownstein Hyatt Farber SchreckThe Importance of a Work Made For Hire Agreement

"It is ideal for a business to employ policies and strategies to own intellectual property, not merely to receive an assignment or license thereto. One tool for doing so is to ensure that copyrightable works are created under effective “work made for hire” circumstances. In the United States, the initial owner of a copyrightable work is generally the person who reduces a copyrightable expression to a tangible medium. However, the individual who reduces a copyrightable expression to a tangible medium is not the owner if it is a work made for hire. A work made for hire exists generally when: (1) the work is prepared by an employee within the course and scope of employment for the employer; or (2) the work is prepared by an independent contractor who has signed a work made for hire agreement pursuant to 17 U.S.C. Section 101."

Saturday, April 30, 2022

Neal Adams, Comic Book Artist Who Revitalized Batman and Fought for Creators’ Rights, Dies at 80; The Hollywood Reporter, April 29, 2022

Borys Kit, The Hollywood Reporter; Neal Adams, Comic Book Artist Who Revitalized Batman and Fought for Creators’ Rights, Dies at 80

"Adams also worked tirelessly to promote better working conditions and, radically at the time, creators’ rights, especially for their work. He early on recognized the value of creators and was a thorn in the side of publishers, demanding compensation for himself and others when their characters were adapted off the page.

He, along with Stan Lee, formed the Academy of Comic Book Arts, hoping to start a union that would fight for benefits and ownership on behalf of writers and artists. Lee wanted an organization that was more akin to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, and the two parted ways.

In the late ’70s, when a new federal work-for-hire law was being enshrined, Marvel and then editor-in-chief Jim Shooter distributed contracts that stated freelancers could not assert copyright over their creations. As detailed in Reisman’s 2021 Lee biography, True Believer, Adams sent around a copy of the contract, scrawling on top, “Do Not Sign This Contract! You Will Be Signing Your Life Away!” While it caused a ruckus and awareness, the effort didn’t have its intended effect as Marvel flexed its muscle and threatened anyone who tried to unionize with a drying up of the freelance well."

Saturday, March 26, 2022

Even in the digital age, Only human-made works are copyrightable in the U.S.; March 21, 2022

 K&L Gates LLP - Susan Kayser and Kristin Wells , Lexology; Even in the digital age, Only human-made works are copyrightable in the U.S. 

"The U.S. Copyright Office Review Board refused copyright protection of a two-dimensional artwork created by artificial intelligence, stating that “[c]urrently, ‘the Office will refuse to register a claim if it determines that a human being did not create the work,’” see recent letter. The Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices does not explicitly address AI, but precedent, policy, and practice makes human authorship currently a prerequisite.

A “Creativity Machine,” authored the work titled “A Recent Entrance into Paradise.” The applicant, Steven Thaler, an advocate for AI IP rights, named himself as the copyright claimant. Thaler’s application included a unique transfer statement: “ownership of the machine,” and further explained that the work “was autonomously created by a computer algorithm running on a machine.” Thaler sought to register the work as a work-for-hire because he owns the Creativity Machine.

AI’s “kill switch” at the U.S. Copyright Office? AI isn’t human. The Review Board relied on the Office’s compendium of practices and Supreme Court precedent dating back to 1879—long before computers were a concept—to hold that the U.S. Copyright Office will not register a claim if it determines that a human being did not create the work.

The Review Board also denied Thaler’s argument that the work made for hire doctrine allows non-human persons like companies to be authors of copyrighted material. The Board explained that works made for hire must be prepared by “an employee” or by “parties” who “expressly agree in a written instrument” that the work is for hire.

Because Thaler did not claim any human involvement in the work, the Board did not address under which circumstances human involvement in machine-created works might meet the statutory requirements for copyright protection. This is an issue that may soon arise."

Monday, January 31, 2022

Know if Someone Else Will Own the Copyright in What Your Freelance Writer Creates; Lexology, January 27, 2022

Gordon Feinblatt LLC - Ned T. Himmelrich, Lexology; Know if Someone Else Will Own the Copyright in What Your Freelance Writer Creates

"Be sure to understand who owns the copyright when you hire someone to contribute to your project. If the person is also working for another entity, consider what rights that other principal may have. The situation may arise where a business wants to use the creative input of someone on a temporary or freelance basis, or wants to use the writer’s expertise for certain projects, but that person may be employed by someone else. The issue is that under the copyright principles of “work made for hire,” the employer, not the creator, owns anything created by an employee within the scope of his or her employment. If the creator is employed elsewhere and is providing any type of content which could be deemed within the scope of his or her employment, then the first employer, and not the second venture who is receiving the freelance help, may own the work created."

Tuesday, August 18, 2020

Intellectual Property ‘Grab’; Inside Higher Ed, August 17, 2020

Colleen Flaherty, Inside Higher Ed; Intellectual Property ‘Grab’

"COVID-19 has upended so many academic norms. Now Youngstown State University may be poised to turn another tradition on its head: faculty ownership of textbooks, articles and other nonpatentable works.

According to documents from the university’s ongoing contract negotiations with its faculty union, Youngstown State wants to fundamentally change how it defines scholarship, copyright, intellectual property, distance education and the legal term "works for hire." It also wants to introduce the concept of commercialization into the faculty contract."

Tuesday, November 12, 2019

Spinal Tap Creators and Universal Music Settle Copyright Dispute; Variety, November 5, 2019

Jem Aswad, Variety; Spinal Tap Creators and Universal Music Settle Copyright Dispute

"The complaint also sought a judgment in the actors’ right to reclaim their copyright to the film and elements of its intellectual property (screenplay, songs, recordings and characters). Vivendi has claimed that the film was created as a work for hire, with the studio essentially the author. This would prevent the actors from exercising their option to reclaim the rights to the film 35 years after its initial release, which is permitted by law.

“The scale and persistence of fraudulent misrepresentation by Vivendi and its agents to us is breathtaking in its audacity,” Shearer said in a statement at the time. “The thinking behind the statutory right to terminate a copyright grant after 35 years was to protect creators from exactly this type of corporate greed and mismanagement. It’s emerging that Vivendi has, over decades, utterly failed as guardian of the Spinal Tap brand – a truer case of life imitating our art would be hard to find.”"

Thursday, April 4, 2019

Faculty Council discusses intellectual property rights; The Ithacan, April 3, 2019

Ashley Stalnecker, The Ithacan; Faculty Council discusses intellectual property rights

"Costa said the current policy on student work at the college differs from the typical policies of higher-education institutions. Currently, the college deems any work created by a student in a class under the jurisdiction of a professor to be the property of the faculty member or the college. Costa said this means that if the faculty memberearned any royalties, they would be required to share it with the college but not with the student who created it.

Costa said that normally among higher-education institutions, student-created work is the copyright of the student. In this case, the student would earn any royalties associated with the work. For commissioned work, the person who made the commission would own the copyright. Because the work was paid for, the person who paid for it owns the work."

Thursday, January 31, 2019

Game of Life Copyright Dispute Meets 'Day of Reckoning'; Law.com, January 30, 2019

Scott Graham, Law.com; Game of Life Copyright Dispute Meets 'Day of Reckoning'

"Markham died in 1993. His heirs sued in 2015, invoking a provision of the Copyright Act of 1976 that allows authors to terminate licenses after 56 years in certain circumstances.

But that provision excludes works for hire, and Smith concluded that the Game of Life is a work for hire that was commissioned by Klamer and produced by Markham’s company. “The weight of the evidence in this case is that the success that met the Game of Life was, in fact, nothing if not the result of collective effort,” Smith concluded. “And although the credit, in the colloquial sense, can be split pro rata, the law dictates that the copyrights cannot be.”"

Friday, November 16, 2018

Stan Lee Is Dead at 95; Superhero of Marvel Comics; The New York Times, November 12, 2018

Jonathan Kandell and Andy Webster, The New York Times; Stan Lee Is Dead at 95; Superhero of Marvel Comics


"Mr. Lee was often faulted for not adequately acknowledging the contributions of his illustrators, especially Mr. Kirby. Spider-Man became Marvel’s best-known property, but Mr. Ditko, its co-creator, quit Marvel in bitterness in 1966. Mr. Kirby, who visually designed countless characters, left in 1969. Though he reunited with Mr. Lee for a Silver Surfer graphic novel in 1978, their heyday had ended.

Tuesday, November 13, 2018

Marvel Icon Stan Lee Leaves a Legacy as Complex as His Superheroes; The Daily Beast, November 12, 2018

Spencer Ackerman, The Daily Beast; Marvel Icon Stan Lee Leaves a Legacy as Complex as His Superheroes

"Stan Lee supercharged Marvel Comics into one of the most important cultural forces on the planet. But how much credit does he really deserve?"

Monday, September 24, 2018

Five Lessons From The Toy Wars: How Intellectual Property Laws Can Restrict Your Career Mobility; Forbes, September 23, 2018

Michael B. Arthur, Forbes; Five Lessons From The Toy Wars: How Intellectual Property Laws Can Restrict Your Career Mobility

"Orly Lobel’s new book You Don’t Own Me recounts the knock-down, drag-out and still unfinished "toy wars" between Mattel, distributor of Barbie dolls, and nearby rival MGA Entertainment, distributor of the Bratz collection. The book shows how those wars “challenge the right and freedom to leave jobs, compete with incumbent companies, control ideas and innovate.” What Lobel calls "the criminalization of employment mobility" is a serious problem, and this article offers some first steps to protect yourself from its grasp."

Thursday, September 13, 2018

Music Law 101: Who Owns the Copyright in a Song?; Lexology, August 29, 2018


"After your band has written and recorded a song, who actually owns the song? This simple question does not necessarily have a simple answer. How many people were involved in the writing process? Were there other people involved in the recording process? Did you hire a producer? Did you use other background vocalists or musicians in the studio? Did you use “work made for hire” agreements with individuals involved in the process? Do you have a band agreement? The answers to these and other important questions help determine who actually owns the copyrights in any given song."

Wednesday, August 29, 2018

Trump’s NAFTA Revision Could Further Extend Copyright Term (Or Not); Comic Book Resources, August 27, 2018

Eirik Gumeny, Comic Book Resources; Trump’s NAFTA Revision Could Further Extend Copyright Term (Or Not)

"An ambiguous press release from the United States government relating to the North American Free Trade Agreement is causing unexpected confusion for authors and copyright lawyers, as one specific document seems to state that the copyright term may be extended to 75 years. The wording, however, is unclear.

Per The Hollywood Reporter, a fact sheet released today by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative indicated that the “copyright term” — the length of time the creator of a particular work is entitled to certain protective rights — would “extend” to 75 years. Currently, the copyright term is set for the life of the author, plus 70 years."

Sunday, June 24, 2018

This guy's invention got U.S. Patent No. 10 million; Marketplace, June 19, 2018

; This guy's invention got U.S. Patent No. 10 million

"Today marks a milestone of in the American innovation economy. Back in 1836, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued patent No.1 under the current numbering system. It took 155 years to get up to patent No. 5 million and then just another 27 years to issue 5 million more. Patent number No. 10 million was issued this afternoon for something called "Coherent Ladar Using Intra-Pixel Quadrature Detection." The technology is owned by Raytheon, and it was invented by Joseph Marron, a principal engineering fellow at the company's Space and Airborne Systems division. He talked with Marketplace host Kai Ryssdal about his invention. The following is an edited transcript of their conversation..."

Monday, August 28, 2017

Jack Kirby’s 100 Coolest Comic Book Creations; Comic Book Resources, August 28, 2017

Brian Cronin, Comic Book Resources; Jack Kirby’s 100 Coolest Comic Book Creations

"Today would have been the 100th birthday of legendary comic book artist Jack Kirby. Comic book fans and creators from all over the world are spending today sharing their favorite memories on social media about the comic book icon. When we were thinking of ways to celebrate his tremendous impact on the world of comic books, we realized that one of the easiest ways to visualize Kirby’s impact was just to list 100 of his coolest comic book creations. So that’s just what we’re going to do. We’re going to alphabetically list 100 amazingly awesome comic book creations by Jack “The King” Kirby and we’re combing characters as much as possible, so this could easily be waaaaaaay over 100 (the X-Men, for instance, are just one entry when they could easily be six between Professor X, Cyclops, Jean Grey, Beast, Angel and Iceman). Enjoy!"

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

If an AI creates a work of art, who owns the rights to it?; Quartz, August 15, 2017

Robert Hart, Quartz; If an AI creates a work of art, who owns the rights to it?

"Without developing some form of framework recognizing AIs as legal persons, just as monkeys are not, we cannot award an AI copyright. “And we’re a long way from that moment, if we’ll ever get there,” Bridy says. The most likely near-term solution would be to award copyright to the owners of the AI itself, which would be similar to how employers automatically own the work their employees produce."

"Let's Hear Some Ideas"; Bizarro, August 15, 2017

Dan Piraro, Bizarro; "Let's Hear Some Ideas!"