Showing posts with label creators. Show all posts
Showing posts with label creators. Show all posts

Thursday, March 14, 2024

Moral Rights of the Artist (Humans Only): an Updated US Perspective; Center for Art Law Inc, January 12, 2024

 Irina Tarsis , Center for Art Law IncMoral Rights of the Artist (Humans Only): an Updated US Perspective

"I Defining and codifying moral rights

Moral rights, or droit moral (having originated in France), describe rights of creators in their artistic work that are not necessarily pecuniary, yet still integral to and arise from the idea that an artist's very being is included in the work that they create. Recognition and evolution of visual artists' rights in the United States have been slow to develop, and the scope of moral rights enacted in the United States is limited.

Typically, moral rights are neither alienable nor waivable; they last for the duration of an artist's lifetime and can survive for the benefit and discretion of an artist's estate even after the original work is finished or changes ownership through the stream of public commerce.18 The basic moral rights are as follows:

  1. right of attribution or authorship, which entitles the artist to:
    • be recognised by name for their work or permit the work to be published anonymously;
    • prevent a wrong person being named as the author of their work;
    • prevent having their name be associated with a work that they did not create;
    • decline having their name be associated with a work that has been modified or distorted in such a way as having the authorship remain with the work is prejudicial to the artist; and
    • remove their name from the work in cases of mutilation or the artist's belief that the work is no longer true to its original creation; and
  2. right of integrity, which prevents tampering or modifying the artwork without the artist's consent even after ownership in the artwork transfers;
  3. right of disclosure, which concerns the artist's reputation and provides that the artist has discretion to decide when and how their work can be made public; and
  4. resale royalty rights, which is a semi-economic right assuring that an artist may continue to benefit financially from commercial appreciation of their work in the secondary market by receiving a percentage of the sale proceeds.

These rights are enumerated in the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (the Convention) under Articles 6 bis19 and 14 ter.20 While the US is a signatory to the Convention,21 according to the US Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988, the Convention's acts and protocols are not self-executing under the US Constitution, and they must be implemented through US legislation...

ii Space, the final frontier: back to the future

Statutorily, moral rights of artists in the United States are poorly protected and narrowly enforced; some seemingly substantive claims are dismissed on procedure failure to state a claim,114 as res judicata115 or on industrial design grounds.116 As soon as US artists die, the moral rights evaporate altogether. The cavalier rather than chivalrous attitude towards the vision and the will of the artist persists as tastes and emphasis change. Consider, for example, museums deaccessioning art that was once donated directly by an artist.117 Similarly, consider the trend of covering up or removing the New Deal-Era murals from schools and court houses,118 which is evocative of the problem posed by Serra's Tilted Arc in the 1980s. Until the US Supreme Court reviews a VARA case, or Congress amends the Copyright Law to include a resale royalty provision, artists and their advocates remain limited by the available moral rights protections, and they have to be creative in using public and private law to protect artists' rights. For digital artists, the ability to enforce some of their moral rights is becoming easier, at least on the screen.

As protest art and street art become mainstream, and AI-generated art attracts more fans, in real life and in the metaverse,119 moral rights of artists in the United States are still protected by a patchwork of case law, contracts and state and federal regulations. During the 'Some Like it Digital: Meet Me in the Metaverse' webinars hosted by the Center for Art Law in 2022,120 a guest speaker mentioned that the constitutional law for the metaverse is, or will be, the Copyright Law, for better or worse.

Going forward, will there be more artists expressing themselves in the other verse? In space, outside the boundaries of planet Earth, where their moral right will still need to be protected, for now only against other humans?

In Thaler, District of Columbia Court asked 'Must … originator be a human being to claim copyright protection?' and answered 'yes'; with a footnote: 'The issue of whether non-human sentient beings may be covered by “person” in the Copyright Act is only “fun conjecture for academics”',121 though useful in illuminating the purposes and limits of copyright protection as AI is increasingly employed. Nonetheless, delving into this debate is an unnecessary detour because “[t]he day sentient refugees from some intergalactic war arrive on Earth and are granted asylum in Iceland, copyright law will be the least of our problems”.122 With human-generated art being sent into space, though, the subject of protecting artists' rights (freedom of expression, attribution, etc) will increasingly abut against international treaties controlling the parameters of sending objects into and outside of our solar system, onto other planets and for display on space stations."

Saturday, December 23, 2023

Original Mickey And Minnie Mouse Will Enter Public Domain Next Week—Here’s What It Means For Creators; Forbes, December 22, 2023

 Mary Whitfill Roeloffs, Forbes; Original Mickey And Minnie Mouse Will Enter Public Domain Next Week—Here’s What It Means For Creators

"Two of the most sought-after characters in film and television are set to enter the public domain on Jan. 1, which will allow creators to use the original versions of Mickey and Minnie Mouse to create new projects of any kind, likely adding to a lineup of films and books like “Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey” and “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” based on other popular characters with expired copyrights."

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."

Tuesday, October 10, 2023

How to Submit a Removal Request on YouTube Due to Copyright; MakeUseOf, October 9, 2023

SAM WOLFE, MakeUseOfHow to Submit a Removal Request on YouTube Due to Copyright

"Ultimately, YouTube wants to protect creators who put in time and hard work to produce original content. If you find that someone is stealing your content or YouTube has found matches of your videos, don’t hesitate to turn in a removal request."

Monday, July 3, 2023

“I Have a Problem With the Stealing of My Material”: A Common Rallying Cry Emerges On AI; The Hollywood Reporter, July 3, 2023

BY WINSTON CHO , The Hollywood Reporter; “I Have a Problem With the Stealing of My Material”: A Common Rallying Cry Emerges On AI

"In a hearing before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet examining the intersection of AI and copyright law, key players in Hollywood moved for guardrails to protect their work. “The rapid introduction of generative AI systems is seen as an existential threat to the livelihood and continuance of our creative professions unless immediate steps are taken on legal interpretive and economic fronts to address these emerging issues,” said Ashley Irwin, president of the Society of Composers and Lyricists (SCL), at the hearing on May 17. “It’s essential to prioritize policies and regulations to safeguard the intellectual property and copyright of creators and preserve the diverse and dynamic U.S cultural landscape.”"

Friday, June 16, 2023

Commentary: Warhol decision’s implications for creators, artists; Minnesota Lawyer, June 16, 2023

 Jack Amaral and Jon Farnsworth, Spencer Fane LLP, Minnesota Lawyer; Commentary: Warhol decision’s implications for creators, artists

"Impact on artists and copyright holders

This decision is a victory for copyright holders. Although copyright infringement and analysis of the Fair Use Doctrine is a case-by-case factual analysis where a judge determines whether fair use is a valid defense based on the four factors above, this decision sends a clear message that commercial uses of copyrighted works might be less likely to be considered fair use. This decision could have a significant impact on photographers, artists, and other creators such as software engineers.

Creators who build off copyrighted works should be aware of this decision and know the potential consequences of building off of other’s work. This decision will likely make it more difficult to show a work is “transformative” while leaving an artist open to liability...

Takeaways for creators and businesses:

  • If you have current works that are protected under copyright law, keep your eyes peeled for potentially infringing works. Speak with an experienced intellectual property attorney to see if you may have a valid infringement claim.
  • If you build off of other creator’s work to create your own, speak to an intellectual property attorney who will walk you through the four factors of the Fair Use Doctrine and help determine if your work could be considered infringement and open you up to potential liability."

Monday, May 8, 2023

Sam Altman: OpenAI plans a pro-copyright model for ChatGPT; Axios, May 8, 2023

"OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said Friday that last week's White House AI summit discussed laws mandating AIs reveal themselves, and added that his firm is working on new ChatGPT models that respect copyright...

On copyright, Altman positioned himself on the side of copyright systems that ensure creators are paid for the value they create: "We're trying to work on new models where if an AI system is using your content, or if it's using your style, you get paid for that," he said."

Friday, April 28, 2023

A terrible decision on AI-made images hurts creators; The Washington Post, April 27, 2023

Edward Lee, The Washington Post; A terrible decision on AI-made images hurts creators

"The Copyright Office’s position is wrong. It misunderstands authorship and ignores the copyright clause’s goal of promoting “progress” by offering authors incentives to create new works, including with new technologies.

Its decision also misunderstands the creative process."

Wednesday, April 26, 2023

World Intellectual Property Day – April 26, 2023; World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO); World Intellectual Property Day – April 26, 2023

Women and IP: Accelerating innovation and creativity


"In 2023, we celebrate the “can do” attitude of women inventors, creators and entrepreneurs around the world and their ground-breaking work.

Women in all regions are shaping the world through their imagination, ingenuity and hard work, but often face significant challenges in accessing the knowledge, skills, resources and support they need to thrive."

Monday, January 30, 2023

USPTO introduces new tool to help creators identify their intellectual property; United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), January 18, 2023

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO); USPTO introduces new tool to help creators identify their intellectual property

"Today at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) Women’s Entrepreneurship (WE) event in Naples, Florida, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Kathi Vidal announced the launch of the agency’s new Intellectual Property (IP) Identifier tool. This user-friendly, virtual resource— designed for those who are less familiar with IP—enables users to identify whether they have IP and the IP protections they need to support and advance their business, invention, or brand. The IP Identifier serves as an important foundation for an innovator, entrepreneur or creator’s IP journey. In addition to the tool helping identify a person’s or company’s intellectual property, it provides easily digestible information on intellectual property – patents, trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets. 

“Protecting your IP is a smart and necessary business strategy, and the IP Identifier is a great starting point for those new to IP,” Director Vidal told the audience at the WE event. “This resource will equip entrepreneurs with a basic understanding of the IP they have and will lead them to resources to protect it. We encourage everyone who is considering starting a business or trying to grow one to utilize this tool. It’s another example of our work to bring more people into the innovation ecosystem to increase American competitiveness, grow the economy, and solve world problems.” 

The IP Identifier is comprised of two modules: The Basic IP Identifier; and the Advanced IP Identifier. The Basic IP Identifier module consists of six simple questions that allow users to quickly assess the type of IP they should protect. The Advanced IP Identifier module allows users to learn about their specific type of IP and obtain links to additional resources, including how to file an application for protection. A third module, Managing your IP assets, is currently under development. 

Companies benefit from having IP protection. When used as collateral, a company’s first patent increases venture capital funding by 76 percent over three years and increases funding from an initial public offering by 128 percent. It can also help serve as a recruiting tool: The approval of a startup’s first patent application increases its employee growth by 36 percent over the next five years. Further, protecting your IP can also increase your market share – a new company with a patent increases its sales by a cumulative 80 percent more than companies that do not have a patent.

The IP Identifier was announced as part of USPTO’s recently-launched Women’s Entrepreneurship (WE) initiative, a community-focused, collaborative, and creative initiative to inspire women and tap their potential to meaningfully increase equity, job creation, and economic prosperity. WE includes a new online hub for aspiring women entrepreneurs that provides key information on how to get started, how to identify and protect their intellectual property, and how to secure options for funding and how to build and maintain a network."

Monday, December 5, 2022

Explainer: The Supreme Court, Fair Use and the Future of Protected Artistic Expression; Jurist, December 1, 2022

 , Jurist; Explainer: The Supreme Court, Fair Use and the Future of Protected Artistic Expression

"What’s at stake here?

The decision of the current Supreme Court case can shape the future of what does and does not constitute fair use. Goldsmith claimed that Warhol’s images based upon her copyrighted photographs constituted a derivative work. Thus, Goldsmith argued that the Warhol Foundation infringed her exclusive right to prepare derivative works and is therefore liable to her. The Warhol Foundation, however, argued that Warhol’s images were sufficiently transformative and thus constituted fair use. As such, the Warhol Foundation argued that it did not infringe Goldsmith’s copyright and is therefore not liable for its use of Goldsmith’s work in the Prince illustrations.

By finding in favor of Goldsmith, who owns copyright in the Prince photographs, the applicability of fair use may be limited. In this scenario, future content creators may face increased liability when creating new content based on copyrighted work. Because creativity is often inspired by some underlying work, such a decision may stifle creativity. As the Acuff-Rose case highlights, for example, works like parodies of a copyrighted work would constitute infringement without fair use. On the other hand, by finding in favor of the Warhol Foundation, which used Goldsmith’s copyrighted work in its work, future copyright owners may be denied a remedy when a user has unfairly used their creative work. Because the copyright regime has historically protected a creator’s financial incentive, such a decision may stifle creativity. In either scenario, creativity may be stifled: over-protecting a work may prevent others from using that work in their creative process, while under-protecting a work may prevent creators from entering the market without an assurance of monetary gain. As the Gerald Ford case highlights, for example, some uses may unfairly exploit the initial creator’s work. As the Supreme Court noted in that case, quoting in part an earlier decision, “The challenge of copyright is to strike the ‘difficult balance between the interests of authors and inventors in the control and exploitation of their writings and discoveries on the one hand, and society’s competing interest in the free flow of ideas, information, and commerce on the other hand.'”"

Friday, August 26, 2022

AI Creating 'Art' Is An Ethical And Copyright Nightmare; Kotaku, August 25, 2022

 Luke Plunkett , Kotaku; AI Creating 'Art' Is An Ethical And Copyright Nightmare

If a machine makes art, is it even art? And what does this mean for actual artists?

"Basically, we now live in a world where machines have been fed millions upon millions of pieces of human endeavour, and are now using the cumulative data they’ve amassed to create their own works. This has been fun for casual users and interesting for tech enthusiasts, sure, but it has also created an ethical and copyright black hole, where everyone from artists to lawyers to engineers has very strong opinions on what this all means, for their jobs and for the nature of art itself."

Wednesday, January 5, 2022

Our View: Copyright absurdity must come to an end; Leader-Telegram, January 4, 2022

Leader-Telegram; Our View: Copyright absurdity must come to an end

"It’s far easier to argue that today’s copyright laws are largely beneficial to corporations who don’t want the money from the merchandising spigot turned off. Those companies are the true beneficiaries of 95-year coverage.

Protecting authors and creators is one thing. Ad infinitum extensions for wealthy corporate interests are quite another. It’s time to end this nonsense. We’re not advocating a rollback of the current terms, but we do oppose further extensions.

Absurd laws create contempt for all laws, and the absurdity of the current copyright approach is clear. It should not be compounded."

Tuesday, December 14, 2021

Sonny Bono’s Widow Strikes Back in Cher Copyright Fight; Billboard, December 9, 2021

Bill Donahue, Billboard; Sonny Bono’s Widow Strikes Back in Cher Copyright Fight

"Cher’s legal battle with Sonny Bono’s widow is heating up, with Mary Bono arguing that the legendary singer should not be allowed to claim that her divorce agreement trumps important provisions of federal copyright law.

Cher sued Mary Bono last month, seeking to block her from taking control of Sonny’s music. The case is one of several closely-watched music lawsuits over copyright law’s “termination right” — a provision that allows creators or their heirs to win back control of rights they signed away decades prior."

Friday, May 1, 2020

How to find copyright-free images (and avoiding a stock photo subscription); TNW, April 29, 2020

 , TNW; How to find copyright-free images (and avoiding a stock photo subscription)

"If you search for any term and head to the Images section in Google, you’ll instantly find thousands of images. There’s one issue, though: Some of them might be copyrighted and you might be putting yourself (or your employer) at risk. Fortunately, you can filter images by usage rights, which will help you avoid that...

Here are a couple of our favorite free stock photo sites:
If you’re looking for copyright-free PNG cutouts, you should check out PNGPlayIcon8, and PNGimg.
Even though a lot of these images are free to use without any attribution, you can support the creators by giving them credit, which in turn gives their work more exposure. You might not have the resources to purchase their images, but someone else might be interested in hiring them. Crediting them for their work helps with that.
You get to save some money by avoiding buying a Shutterstock subscription, they get free exposure. It’s a win-win."

Tuesday, February 18, 2020

Steal This Intellectual Property; Reason, March 2020 Issue

Dierdre McCloskey, Reason; Steal This Intellectual Property

"I want you to steal what the lawyers self-interestedly call "intellectual property": Hoffman's book or my books or E=mc2 or the Alzheimer's drug that the Food and Drug Administration is "testing" in its usual bogus and unethical fashion. I want the Chinese to steal "our" intellectual property, so that consumers worldwide get stuff cheaply. I want everybody to steal every idea, book, chemical formula, Stephen Foster lyric—all of it. Steal, steal, steal. You have my official economic permission. 

What?! A liberal (in the classical sense) wants people to steal? You bet. Here's why. An idea, after it is produced, has no opportunity cost."

Monday, February 3, 2020

BYU students compete to make new art out of old — and now copyright-free — works; The Salt Lake Tribune, February 2, 2020

, The Salt Lake Tribune; BYU students compete to make new art out of old — and now copyright-free — works

"The entries in BYU’s second annual Public Domain Film and Music Festival will screen Wednesday, Feb. 5, at 7 p.m., at the Varsity Theater on the BYU campus. Admission is free.

The contest covers both film and music based on works whose copyright protection has lapsed. Musicians have a week to compose something based on public-domain music, and film crews of five or fewer have 48 hours to make a short film based on a public-domain book.

The contest is run by BYU’s Copyright Licensing Office, which secures licenses for copyrighted educational materials to be used by the university’s instructors, said Kenny Baldwin, the office’s director of operations.

The contest is a way to educate students about how copyright works, Baldwin said, and “inspire the community to embrace their own right as creators of creative content.”"

Wednesday, January 29, 2020

YouTube reversed my bogus copyright strike after I threatened to write this; Mashable, January 28, 2020

Matt Binder, Mashable; YouTube reversed my bogus copyright strike after I threatened to write this

"“Your case is the most extreme I’ve heard about. Congratulations,” Electronic Frontier Foundation Manager of Policy and Activism, Katharine Trendacosta, said to me in a phone conversation on the issue. “This is the first time I've heard about this happening to something that didn't contain anything. And I have heard a lot of really intense stories about what's happening on YouTube.”...

“Your case is a really extreme example of a fairly common situation in which these major companies send DMCA takedown on a very broad basis,” she explained. “YouTube is far more afraid of being sued by Warner Bros. than being sued by you, so you end up with them being much more cautious and doing things like just allowing DMCA strikes on anything.”

So, what can be done? Apparently, not much."

Tuesday, January 21, 2020

A Tool That Removes Copyrighted Works Is Not a Substitute for Fair Use; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), January 20, 2020

Katharine Trendacosta, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF);

A Tool That Removes Copyrighted Works Is Not a Substitute for Fair Use


"By making eliminating material flagged by Content ID so easy—just click here!—and making challenging matches so perilous, YouTube has put its thumb on the scale against fair use and in favor of copyright abuse. That thumb gets especially heavy given how few real alternatives to YouTube exist.

Hosting creative content should mean a robust commitment to fair use. Fair use enriches our culture and our understanding of it. It is what ensures that copyright doesn’t strangle free expression and creativity. Subtle reinforcement of anti-fair use ideas enacted by private companies, done by the largest players in the ecosystem, does real damage."

Tuesday, January 7, 2020

‘Rhapsody in Blue’ (1924) just reached the public domain, showing the insanity of U.S. copyright law; The Los Angeles Times, January 4, 2020

Michael Hiltzik, The Los Angeles Times; ‘Rhapsody in Blue’ (1924) just reached the public domain, showing the insanity of U.S. copyright law

"The liberation of all these creations, however, should also be an occasion for mourning. They would have been released to the public domain in the early 1960s, if not for an aggressive campaign staged in Washington by big media companies, especially Walt Disney Co., desperate to keep lucrative control of their copyrighted works for as long as possible.

Copyrights prevent consumers or creators from accessing, building on, or even repurposing artistic works without the permission of the copyright holders or the payment of a fee that can be steep. That’s arguably an obstacle to cultural development, and raises the question of why the heirs should exercise so much power and collect such payouts so many decades after the creators are gone."