Moral Rights under Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances

The Beijing Treaty was adopted on 26 June 2012 by the Diplomatic Conference on the Protection of Audiovisual Performances of the World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”) but only ratified recently by most signatories. As a result, what does this treaty mean for the film industry and copyright for audiovisual performances and moral rights? Continue reading “Moral Rights under Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances”

Thoughts on VCAST and private copying

On the 29th November 2017, the CJEU purported to hand down its judgment in the VCAST case.[1] What was meant to be another judgment on article 5(2)(b) of the InfoSoc Directive—the private-copying exemption—[2] turned into another ruling on the making available right under article 3. Rather than addressing the specific questions referred to it from the Tribunale di Torino (District Court, Turin, Italy), the CJEU took the peculiar step of analysing the business “service” of VCAST holistically.[3] Continue reading “Thoughts on VCAST and private copying”

“Can Artists be Replaced? – Who should be the Author of Work Created by Artificial Intelligence”

With Google’s new “Deep Mind” software, it looks like soon there will be no need for artists. The software creates music based from recordings it listens to. “The Next Rembrandt” project creates software which attempts to create art mimicking Rembrandt. But who should own the work created? Continue reading ““Can Artists be Replaced? – Who should be the Author of Work Created by Artificial Intelligence””

Summary of EC Anti-Competition Decision Against Google

The European Commission has fined Google €2.42 billion for breaching EU antitrust rules. Google abused its market dominance as a search engine by giving an illegal advantage to another Google product, its comparison shopping service. Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, who is in charge of competition policy stated, “[Google] denied other companies the chance to compete on the merits and to innovate. And most importantly, it denied European consumers a genuine choice of services and the full benefits of innovation.” Continue reading “Summary of EC Anti-Competition Decision Against Google”

Opinion: GDPR impact on Insurance Fraud

The new General Data Protection Regulation (thereafter “GDPR”), which is to enter into force on 28th May 2018 will have significant impact on companies with data processing especially in the insurance arena in the European Union (“EU”). The European insurance industry is heavily regulated and has always been overlooked by individual national authorities. Continue reading “Opinion: GDPR impact on Insurance Fraud”

Summary of Life Technologies Corporation v. Promega Corporation

The United States Supreme Court has come out with a controversial patent decision on February 22, 2017, limiting the scope of protection for U.S. patents. Life Technologies Corporation v. Promega Corporation, dealt with an international intersection supply chain and a patent. The science behind the patent is extremely complicated, but essentially the issue of the case was whether a single enzyme that was supplied to a facility in the U.K., which was a component that made up the DNA test kit, infringed the patent. The majority opinion, which was given by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, stated that shipping a single component that makes up a patent is not enough to constitute infringement. Continue reading “Summary of Life Technologies Corporation v. Promega Corporation”

De Minimis and the Meltwater Case

My last article for this blog focused on the decision of the Designers Guild case and the function of the substantial part test to copyright law in cases which deal with the “altered copying” of an artistic work. My reflections on this case attempted to highlight the need for a de minimis threshold before it is concluded that a substantial part of a work has been infringed. Continue reading “De Minimis and the Meltwater Case”

Blurred Lines: Circuit Split in Copyright Infringement of Musical Compositions

The current US circuits split on non-literal copyright in musical composition cases are thoroughly murky; many are not even holdings on what is copyrightable. Although this may seem tedious, it is important to implement expert testimony especially when sometimes our visceral reaction may be “this song is copied” and, in reality, it is not. The courts thus far have only been chipping at the surface of musical copyright protection by only looking at the lyrics and melody but there are other aspects of music including rhythm, tempo and the pattern, which should be protected and it is important that the courts address it in their holdings. Continue reading “Blurred Lines: Circuit Split in Copyright Infringement of Musical Compositions”