.
World Screen reports that Endemol, makers of the Big Brother reality TV show, have won a copyright victory in Croatia against Nova TV. Nova used the Big Brother name for a reality TV show in 2003. In 2004, Nova threatened to launch the Croatian version of Big Brother”. Endemol showed Big Brother in Croatia in the same year. Nova TV has been prohibited from preparing, producing, publicly announcing, transmitting or using in any other manner the television broadcast of Big Brother without the approval of Endemol by the Zagreb court and has also been ordered not to use the Big Brother trade mark.
Endemol is heralding the case as a “major step towards proper protection of our TV formats”.
The IPKat notes the similarity between television programme formats, plots of books and the “look and feel” of computer programs, all of which are tricky to protect by copyright
World Screen reports that Endemol, makers of the Big Brother reality TV show, have won a copyright victory in Croatia against Nova TV. Nova used the Big Brother name for a reality TV show in 2003. In 2004, Nova threatened to launch the Croatian version of Big Brother”. Endemol showed Big Brother in Croatia in the same year. Nova TV has been prohibited from preparing, producing, publicly announcing, transmitting or using in any other manner the television broadcast of Big Brother without the approval of Endemol by the Zagreb court and has also been ordered not to use the Big Brother trade mark.
Endemol is heralding the case as a “major step towards proper protection of our TV formats”.
The IPKat notes the similarity between television programme formats, plots of books and the “look and feel” of computer programs, all of which are tricky to protect by copyright
OH BROTHER!
![OH BROTHER!]()
Reviewed by Anonymous
on
Tuesday, August 09, 2005
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
No comments:
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