We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-4 of 4

Inspiration, imitation or illegal misappropriation? Courts reject artists’ taking others’ photographs as source material for new works

  • Hogan Lovells
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 21 2011

In two decisions issued within the past few months one in New York and one in California artists engaged in “appropriation art” were held to have violated the U.S. Copyright Act by incorporating others’ copyrighted photographs into their own artworks

U.S. court rejects settlement on Google book search

  • Hogan Lovells
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 14 2011

On 22 March 2011, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York denied its approval of a proposed settlement in the class action proceedings regarding Google’s digital library project

Dead or alive: U.S. high court agrees to hear free speech challenge against foreign copyrights "restored" from the public domain by international treaty

  • Hogan Lovells
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 14 2011

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to hear a constitutional challenge from orchestra conductors, educators, performers, publishers, archivists, and distributors, who use and rely on works that are in the public domain, against the restoration of U.S. copyright protection for certain foreign works as a result of international agreements entered into over 15 years ago

Appellate court finds that digital downloads are "licenses", not traditional sales, under music recording agreement

  • Hogan Lovells
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 28 2011

In the first appellate decision addressing royalties under a standard recording agreement, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on 3 September 2010 reversed a decision of the United States District Court for the Central District of California that addressed the question of whether digital music distribution is more properly characterized as a sale or as a license