ENTERTAINMENT LAW REVIEW LATEST ISSUE


The January 2005 issue of Sweet & Maxwell's journal Entertainment Law Review is now on the streets. It contains, among other things, the following features:

* Barrister Phillip Johnson (Department of Trade and Industry) writes on the current state of the defence of "public interest" in an action for copyright infringement, which was developed through a large volume of case law before the implementation of the Human Rights Act 1998 and which is now of uncertain application in its case law form;

* Paloma Pertusa (ex-Alicante and University of London postgrad and a friend of the IPKat) explains the legal regime for the protection of photographs under Spanish copyright law;

* Solicitor Peter Groves provides a case note on the copyright case of Sawkins v Hyperion Records.

The IPKat likes the Entertainment Law Review but fervently wishes it had more pages in it, particularly in view of its high price.
ENTERTAINMENT LAW REVIEW LATEST ISSUE ENTERTAINMENT LAW REVIEW LATEST ISSUE Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, January 03, 2005 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. “We cannot live for ourselves alone. Our lives are connected by a thousand invisible threads, and along these sympathetic fibers, our actions run as causes and return to us as results.”
    - Herman Melville

    RSS is the way of the Future...
    yahoo rss feed

    ReplyDelete

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.