First Circuit Rules Markhamâ€™s Development of â€˜The Game of Lifeâ€™ Was Work Made For Hire Not Subject to Termination Rights â€” Markham argued that the Supreme Court’s decision in CCNV v. Reid, which interpreted the work for hire provisions of the 1976 Copyright Act, was applicable to works protected under the 1909 act. The First Circuit disagreed, holding that the “instance and expense” test still applied to such works.
Unicolors v. H&M Raises Some Thorny Issues for Copyright Owners â€” David Newhoff looks at the first copyright case the Supreme Court has agreed to hear for its next term.
Just What Is the Case with the CASE Act? A Brief Overview â€” “The phrase ‘creators have rights, but no remedies’ is likely familiar to those aware of the current landscape of copyright protection for individual creators and small businesses. While the Copyright Act of 1976 grants a bundle of rights to Creators for the protection of their works, for years Creators have faced an uphill battle enforcing those rights against infringers. There are many who are optimistic, however, that things might soon change with the passage of ‘The Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act of 2020’ (CASE Act).”
The Beijing Treaty: A step forward in the protection of related rights in audiovisual performances â€” “For the first time, an international instrument confers express protection to performing artists for fixations of their work on an audiovisual medium, acknowledging their right to decide the time and manner in which their audiovisual works are used abroad, while also receiving a share of the profits obtained from their exploitation, even in the digital environment. Up to now, only sound fixations enjoyed this protection (see the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty â€“ WPPT â€“ approved in 1996 and in force since 2002).”