Written by Raquel Acosta Edited by Albert Wang and Vicki Blohm Editorial Policy I. Introduction The current copyright framework is becoming obsolete as we try to make a digital world run on an analog legal system. The Copyright Act covers “original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be visually perceived, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.” 17 U.S.C. § 401. The ability of ... Read More...
Archive for the ‘Art’ Category
by Michael Adelman Copyright Suit Fails to Prevent Memorial Day Weekend Release of The Hangover: Part II On Tuesday May 24, the New York Times reported that Judge Catherine D. Perry of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri denied tattoo artist Victor Whitmill’s preliminary injunction that would have halted the release of the film The Hangover: Part II over Memorial Day weekend. Mr. Whitmill claims that Warner Brothers has infringed on his exclusive rights to the ... Read More...
Appropriation artist found to have infringed copyrights after failing to show transformative use By Matthew Becker – Edited by Chinh Vo Cariou v. Prince, No. 08 Civ. 11327 (DAB) (S.D.N.Y. March 18, 2011) Slip Opinion hosted by Scribd In a closely watched copyright case, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted summary judgment for the plaintiff, Patrick Cariou, ruling that the appropriation artist Richard Prince, in conjunction with the Gagosian Gallery, infringed Cariou’s copyrighted ... Read More...
Seventh Circuit Denies Moral Rights Protection to Chicago Garden By Albert Wang – Edited by Matthew Gelfand Kelley v. Chicago Park District, Nos. 08-3701 and 08-3712 (7th Cir. Feb. 15, 2011) Slip Opinion The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the Northern District of Illinois’ judgment in favor of the Chicago Park District on Chapman Kelley’s Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) claim, while reversing the court’s judgment in favor of Kelley on his claim of implied contract. The ... Read More...
Chippendales’ “Professional and Classy Sexy Fun” Deemed Not Inherently Distinctive. By Phillip Hill – Edited by Ian C. Wildgoose Brown In re Chippendales USA, Inc., Serial No. 78/666,598 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 1, 2010) Opinion On October 1, the United States Court for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, which ruled that Chippendales USA, Inc. could not register its “abbreviated tuxedo” costume, the “Cuffs & Collar,” as an inherently distinctive mark. The Court held that even though live adult entertainment typically involves “revealing and provocative” ... Read More...
