©-LAW

The work at the centre of this litigation Does the inclusion of a work  [the photograph on the right hand side]  — which is freely accessible to all internet users on a third-party website with the consent of the copyright holder — on a person’s own publicly accessible website constitute an act of communication to the public within Article 3(1) of the  InfoSoc Directive  if the work is first copied onto a server and is uploaded from there to that person’s own website? This is the question that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has been asked to address in  Land Nordrhein-Westfalen v Renckhoff , C-161/17 . This morning Advocate General (AG) Campos Sánchez-Bordona delivered his  Opinion   [ not yet available in English] , and answered in the negative. Let’s see what happened. Background Well, the background is quite ... ridiculous (in the sense that it is ridiculous that litigation is brought in the first place in instances like the present one),

Naruto  😍 If you thought that the infamous Monkey Selfie case was over, well, you were ... wrong! A few weeks ago IP enthusiasts were in fact 'thrilled' to learn that - despite the out-of-court settlement agreement concluded in 2017 - the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit would rule anyway on the case brought by PETA (as next friend) against  now economically struggling  wildlife photographer David Slater over copyright ownership of a series of selfies taken by Celebs crested macaque Naruto. Today, the Court has  ruled  that 'an animal ha[s] constitutional standing  [ Article III standing ]  but lack[s] statutory standing to claim copyright infringement of photographs known as the "Monkey Selfies."'  More specifically, the panel confirmed that the "[US] Copyright Act does not expressly authorize animals to file copyright infringement suits." Background But what happened before today's ruling? Here's a quick recap. In

Charging Bull and Fearless Girl A little over a year ago The IPKat  reported  that  Italian-born sculptor  Arturo Di Modica , ie the author of  the well-known  Charging Bull   in Manhattan's Financial District, intended to file a formal complaint with the Office of the New York City Mayor over the decision of the latter to allow the positioning (and stay for a few months) of   Kristen Visbal 's   Fearless Girl  right just opposite the famous bull. Initially an advertisement  for an  index fund  which comprises gender diverse companies that have a higher percentage of women among their senior leadership,  Fearless Girl  has become a popular sight in Manhattan.  The reason why Di Modica was unhappy about the positioning of  Fearless Girl  is explained in his  complaint  to the Mayor.  His sculpture was meant to symbolize, initially, the 'strength and power of the American people and, then (after it was moved to its current location), the 'hope of the American peop

Casa Bosco To what extent can an architectural project be modified without the express consent of the architect without such modifications being an infringement of their moral right of integrity? This is the question that not long time ago the District Court of Milan (Tribunale di Milano) addressed in  Boeri v Agnoletto , decision No 1568/2018 . Background In late 2000s well-known architect  Stefano Boeri  was commissioned to realize an architectural project - then become ' Casa Bosco ' - for ‘residential standardized units – Low Cost housing units’ in Milan by virtue of a contract that foresaw that the architect and the commissioning party would have the co-ownership of any resulting rights, and also that any separate use of the project – including for marketing purposes – by either party should be authorized in writing by the other party. Following the finalization of the project and the decision of Boeri to leave it due to his political commitment with t

I am attending what every year is a great conference in one of the greatest cities: the  Fordham IP Conference  in New York City. Now in its 26 th  edition, every year this event gathers IP enthusiasts from all over the world to “Learn. Debate. Have Fun.”  [official hashtag: #fordhamip] Yesterday I was part of a panel moderated by  Ted Shapiro  (Wiggin) and composed of  Shira Perlmutter  (USPTO),  Giuseppe Mazziotti  (TCD), and  Jerker Rydén  (National Library of Sweden). The session was devoted to discussing the state of the EU copyright reform debate. My short talk  [slides  here ]  focused on three main points:  (1) the progress of the EU reform debate and where we stand now at both the Council and European Parliament levels;  (2) whether what are being called ‘compromise’ proposals may be actually said to be compromises, given that that the discussion remains extremely polarized and such as not to focus really – or just – on the details of the various draft prov