"Disney, Marvel and Lucasfilm have joined with Sanrio to stop a company from selling unlicensed cake frosting featuring their incredibly lucrative properties. As first reported by THR, Esq., the entertainment giants filed a trademark- and copyright-infringement lawsuit against George and Danielle Wilson, whose Wilson Cake Imaging offers printed, edible frosting sheets and cake toppers depicting a wide range of characters and performers."
Showing posts with label injunction. Show all posts
Showing posts with label injunction. Show all posts
Friday, September 4, 2015
Disney, Marvel, Lucasfilm & Sanrio slice into cake-frosting seller; ComicBookResources.com, 9/4/15
Kevin Melrose, ComicBookResources.com; Disney, Marvel, Lucasfilm & Sanrio slice into cake-frosting seller:
Thursday, October 24, 2013
Is The NFL Committing Copyright Infringement By Using Photos Without Consent?; Forbes, 10/23/13
Darren heitner, Forbes; Is The NFL Committing Copyright Infringement By Using Photos Without Consent? :
"On October 21, 2013, seven photographers filed a federal lawsuit in the Southern District of New York against the National Football League (NFL), Replay Photos, Getty Images and the Associated Press. The lawsuit requests damages for copyright infringement from all the defendants, damages for vicarious and contributory copyright infringement, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty. The basis for the action is that the NFL has used photos in violation of the photographers’ copyrights in the same. The photographers further allege that the NFL’s failed to receive consent to use the photos in connection with the NFL’s advertisements, news, promotions and products."
Saturday, July 14, 2012
Why we are breaking the Pirate Bay ban; Guardian, 7/11/12
Loz Kaye, Guardian; Why we are breaking the Pirate Bay ban:
"If the government is unwilling to act, it falls to the rest of us. Since April the Pirate party has provided a proxy – pirateparty.org.uk – allowing people to connect to Pirate Bay. Initially this was in support of our sister party in the Netherlands where there is a similar crackdown. However, it has become a political protest to highlight the futility of the UK injunction and impotency of the coalition.
This proxy continues to be a legitimate route for those affected by the court orders. Not surprisingly to anyone who knows how the internet (or human nature) works, we have also experienced a huge Streisand effect. The Pirate party's website is now in the top 500 websites in the UK – above any other political party. If the aim was to change people's behaviour, the most noticeable change we have seen is an upsurge in interest in our kind of politics. I doubt this was the BPI's intention.
We must not hand courts and governments censorship powers without public debate. The Lib Dems and Conservatives need to decide where policy is headed, not just make noises about digital rights. Until that point it is left to the Pirate party to defend them."
"If the government is unwilling to act, it falls to the rest of us. Since April the Pirate party has provided a proxy – pirateparty.org.uk – allowing people to connect to Pirate Bay. Initially this was in support of our sister party in the Netherlands where there is a similar crackdown. However, it has become a political protest to highlight the futility of the UK injunction and impotency of the coalition.
This proxy continues to be a legitimate route for those affected by the court orders. Not surprisingly to anyone who knows how the internet (or human nature) works, we have also experienced a huge Streisand effect. The Pirate party's website is now in the top 500 websites in the UK – above any other political party. If the aim was to change people's behaviour, the most noticeable change we have seen is an upsurge in interest in our kind of politics. I doubt this was the BPI's intention.
We must not hand courts and governments censorship powers without public debate. The Lib Dems and Conservatives need to decide where policy is headed, not just make noises about digital rights. Until that point it is left to the Pirate party to defend them."
Friday, November 6, 2009
Judge orders US music website to drop Beatles songs; Sydney Morning Herald, 11/6/09
Sydney Morning Herald; Judge orders US music website to drop Beatles songs:
"A judge on Thursday ordered a California online music service to stop delivering Beatles songs to users, according to a copy of the ruling posted online.
US District Court Judge John Walter in Los Angeles sided with British music giant EMI, which filed suit this week accusing Bluebeat.com and its parent company Media Rights Technologies of infringing on its rights to Beatles songs.
Walter brushed aside Bluebeat's contention that it wasn't violating copyright laws because Beatles tunes at its website were re-recorded "audio visual performances with related sounds."
Bluebeat did not submit any reliable evidence to support its claim that it "independently developed their own original sounds," the judge said in his ruling.
Walter issued a restraining order barring Bluebeat from streaming or selling Beatles digital downloads of Beatles music and said he believed EMI was likely to win its legal case against the Internet firm."
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-technology/judge-orders-us-music-website-to-drop-beatles-songs-20091106-i1l9.html
"A judge on Thursday ordered a California online music service to stop delivering Beatles songs to users, according to a copy of the ruling posted online.
US District Court Judge John Walter in Los Angeles sided with British music giant EMI, which filed suit this week accusing Bluebeat.com and its parent company Media Rights Technologies of infringing on its rights to Beatles songs.
Walter brushed aside Bluebeat's contention that it wasn't violating copyright laws because Beatles tunes at its website were re-recorded "audio visual performances with related sounds."
Bluebeat did not submit any reliable evidence to support its claim that it "independently developed their own original sounds," the judge said in his ruling.
Walter issued a restraining order barring Bluebeat from streaming or selling Beatles digital downloads of Beatles music and said he believed EMI was likely to win its legal case against the Internet firm."
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-technology/judge-orders-us-music-website-to-drop-beatles-songs-20091106-i1l9.html
Monday, October 6, 2008
Judge's Top Secret Decision Blocks Sale of DVD-Copying Software - Wired.com, 10/6/08
Judge's Top Secret Decision Blocks Sale of DVD-Copying Software:
"U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel, who previously presided over the original Napster litigation, issued the tentative decision late Friday, the sources said...
The MPAA, in seeking to block RealDVD sales, claims (.pdf) the software is illegal and a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The group says the software illegally circumvents technology designed to keep DVDs from being copied. "
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/judges-top-secr.html
"U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel, who previously presided over the original Napster litigation, issued the tentative decision late Friday, the sources said...
The MPAA, in seeking to block RealDVD sales, claims (.pdf) the software is illegal and a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The group says the software illegally circumvents technology designed to keep DVDs from being copied. "
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/judges-top-secr.html
Judge temporarily halts sales of RealDVD in wake of lawsuit - ars technica, 10/5/08
Judge temporarily halts sales of RealDVD in wake of lawsuit:
"Real has been ordered to temporarily suspend distribution of its new DVD ripping and archiving product, RealDVD, thanks to a lawsuit filed by the MPAA claiming that it facilitates copyright infringement...
From the moment Real first announced RealDVD, the company was aware that there would be legal questions about the product, but seemed to think that everything would be fine since the company said it had "licensed the DVD technology for a legal right to play back DVD content."...
"RealNetworks' RealDVD should be called StealDVD," MPAA executive vice president and general counsel Greg Goeckner remarked about the product."
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081005-judge-temporarily-halts-sale-of-realdvd-in-wake-of-lawsuit.html
"Real has been ordered to temporarily suspend distribution of its new DVD ripping and archiving product, RealDVD, thanks to a lawsuit filed by the MPAA claiming that it facilitates copyright infringement...
From the moment Real first announced RealDVD, the company was aware that there would be legal questions about the product, but seemed to think that everything would be fine since the company said it had "licensed the DVD technology for a legal right to play back DVD content."...
"RealNetworks' RealDVD should be called StealDVD," MPAA executive vice president and general counsel Greg Goeckner remarked about the product."
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081005-judge-temporarily-halts-sale-of-realdvd-in-wake-of-lawsuit.html
Monday, September 8, 2008
"Harry Potter" author Rowling Wins Copyright Infringement Suit; Insufficient Transformative Use by Plaintiff, Vander Ark - New York Times, 9/8/08
‘Potter’ Author Wins Copyright Ruling: "Judge Robert P. Patterson of Federal District Court said Ms. Rowling had proved that Steven Vander Ark’s “Harry Potter Lexicon” would cause her irreparable harm as a writer. He permanently blocked publication of the reference guide and awarded Ms. Rowling and her publisher $6,750 in statutory damages...He added that he ruled in Ms. Rowling’s favor because the “Lexicon appropriates too much of Rowling’s creative work for its purposes as a reference guide.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/business/media/09potterweb.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/business/media/09potterweb.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)