Improves the ability and consistency for obtaining injunctions against infringers by restoring and codifying the rebuttable presumption of irreparable harm where a likelihood of confusion is shown.Why This is All Super Relevant NowĬongress recently passed the 2021 Appropriations Act, which according to Norton Rose Fulbright makes it easier for any brand, large or small to take action against any they believe is “infringing” on their works. So if they do not take down the models after notification, then they could get into trouble as well. But, and a big but, they have to take down the items once notified. In summary, seller platforms cannot really be attacked directly, as long as they don’t create the content. So the good news is, places like MMF (or Cults, etc) will generally be affected little by claims such as these as long as they themselves comply with any requests like the one they received by GW. In the case above, My Mini Factory is most likely protected from any actions that GW is taking against Duncan.
this design, which it seems that Duncan may dispute with GW. So part of the CDA “safe harbor” provisions is that the service provider (MMF in this case) is protected from liability if they take potentially “bad” things down once they’re notified of it.
In a very recent law, which was made to protect places like YouTube from Copyright issues, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects platforms from what its users do. The double-headed Aquila, for instance, is probably trademarked, so that has stronger protection since that’s “the brand” and not just a particular design. Branding is related to trademark law, which is somewhat different. The other item Duncan mentioned, trademarks, is a little different.
If you re-shot it as “Star Whores” and made it into a porno that only loosely followed the script, that would probably fall under the “parody” exception to copyright. For example, if you did a scene for scene re-shoot of Star Wars but used glowing katanas instead of lightsabers and called it “space ninjas” that would likely be considered copyright infringement.
0 kommentar(er)
