Friday fustigations

The IPKat's 'Forthcoming Events' feature, in the left-hand side-bar of his front page, is well worth keeping an eye on: there's always something fascinating in the pipeline. So don't forget to check it out!

strong>Are you a non-UK solo IP practitioner? If so, the SOLO IP weblog would like to hear from you. The UK-based solo IP practitioners are networking very well with each other now, but after their most successful and exciting foray into foreign parts, when they attended the INTA Meeting in Berlin earlier this month, they discovered how many solo IP practitioners there were from other countries--and how much they all had in common.

Right: every solo practitioner is a bit of a one-man band (illustration here from Freaker's Ball)

Please feel free to share your experiences and your thoughts with SOLO IP, particularly if you'd like to post the occasional article. If SOLO IP's for you, contact Barbara Cookson or Shireen Smith.

Last year the IPKat backed the call by his fellow bloggers at SpicyIP to support its petition to the Prime Minister of India, requesting the creation of an electronic database covering full patent information and thereby increasing transparency at the Indian Patent Office. The Indian government has responded positively to this request and hopes to have the database fully functional during the year 2009 (it's partially operational already: you can check it out here). The IPKat and Merpel congratulate Shamnad Basheer and his colleagues at SpicyIP for all their campaigning, which shows how the power of the weblog may be brought to bear; they also congratulate the Indian government for their constructive response.

The increasingly enjoyable WIPO Magazine carries an item that surprised the IPKat, supplied to WIPO by the Kat's friends Franck Soutoul and Jean-Philippe Bresson (INLEX, Paris), contributors to the IP Talk legal newsletter, via a recommendation from Jack McVooty. Apparently

"A publishing company had brought an infringement case against some magazines which had reproduced photographs for which the plaintiff had earlier acquired copyright ownership from paparazzi photographers. On December 5, 2007, the Paris Court of Appeal denied the claim and ruled that copyright protection does not apply to paparazzi pictures.

Right: after years of disappointment, Cyril had to concede that he just didn't have the instincts of a perfect paparazzo ...

Article L. 112-2 of the French Intellectual Property Code includes photographs amongst artistic works liable to enjoy copyright protection as long as they are original. The judge looked at whether the pictures in this case should be considered original artistic works. He found the work of the paparazzi to be passive and focused only on material aspects. The lack of any artistry in the composition of the photograph, the angle of the camera or the choice of the moment was also brought to bear in the consideration of originality. Some economic considerations also weighed in the balance.

To consider Paparazzi photographers as technical persons rather than artistic creators from a copyright perspective makes good sense. This decision does not however definitively exclude paparazzi pictures from copyright protection in France. The reasoning of the Court leaves the door open for French copyright protection to be given to photographs which demonstrate an artistic effect".

Brought up in the common law tradition the IPKat finds it difficult to persuade himself that the sweat of the paparazzis' brows would not entitle them to copyright, however much he may dislike their professional conduct. Merpel says, but just think what a few decisions like this could do for the market for invasive photos.
Friday fustigations Friday fustigations Reviewed by Jeremy on Friday, May 30, 2008 Rating: 5

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:

Powered by Blogger.