At what point does artistic appropriation become copyright infringement? A Jeff Koons sculpture has reopened the 50-year-old debate.
In its first-ever “State of the Commons” report, Creative Commons — the nonprofit that aims to facilitate the free sharing and licensing of creative work — revealed that there are at least 882 million Creative Commons–licensed works currently available online, and that sometime next year that figure is expected to pass one billion.
Museums and libraries in the United Kingdom are demanding copyright reform by leaving exhibits and display cases conspicuously empty in protest. The institutions are making a stand against a law that prevents them from showing millions of unpublished documents, particularly those dating from World War I.
National Geographic used artist Barrett Lyon’s internet image on the cover of its bookazine, 100 Scientific Discoveries that Changed the World, and in the book, The Big Idea, without Lyon’s permission.
A series of updates to UK copyright law are scheduled to go into effect tomorrow, finally allowing for the use of copyrighted material in the creation of parody, the BBC reported.
I’ve been called a lot of things (including, “lawyer”), but one thing I can be proud of is never having been called a liar.
A legal battle has ensued over who has legal rights to an artist’s photographic negatives.
What are the intellectual property rights of tattoo artists? Video games that depict athletes are testing the limits.
Earlier this month I wrote here that it would be very difficult to argue that a monkey could create a copyrightable work. Seems I was right.
Three street artists have filed a lawsuit against Terry Gilliam, alleging that the director “misappropriated” their copyrighted collaborative work in his upcoming film The Zero Theorem.
Apparently Wikimedia, the US-based organization behind Wikipedia, is refusing to remove an image of a monkey taken by … wait for it, wait for it … the monkey itself.
As mass-market fashion continues its longstanding tradition of ripping off independent designers, a twist in the narrative emerges: is a high-end designer now ripping off a mass-market company?