Business Issues : Trade Dress Under The Lanham Act

I don’t think this invention can be a copyright since it’s not an artistic creation or printed matter like literary, dramatic, musical work.

The Supreme Court held the decision that Varsity Brand’s had a right to copyright their designs because the feature can be perceived as a two- or three-dimensional work of art separate from the useful article, and it would qualify as a protectable pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work, either on its own or fixed in some other tangible medium of expression arrangements of lines, chevrons, and colorful shapes appearing on surface of cheerleading uniforms were eligible for copyright protection as separable

This is important to protect a creator 's moral and economic rights and integrity of their work: So they are recognised as the creator of their work (no one else is identified as the creator) able to protect their work from derogatory treatment; inappropriate modification, distortion or other interference with its integrity. Appropriation is not copying or visual plagiarism.

A trademark protects well-known brand logos and helps differentiate them from similar products or services. When you register for a trademark, you are entitled to display the ® symbol (registered trade mark). If you are registered for this, others must request permission If they wish to use your brand. If permission is not requested, legal action can be

The second approach to copyright is the democratic approach. All works of art are ideas built on a foundation of other ideas. The democratic approach advocates that intellectual property belongs to the society and should be available for the general good of the public. If the particular usage is intended to derive financial benefit or any other business-related benefits, it is considered inappropriate usage. If the utilization of factual work were more usable than the use of someone’s creative work, then that would not be fair use. There is no specified edge to the amount of quoted work that can be called “fair use.” The courts exercise common sense to determine if it was too much. If the utilization of the material created market or stirred a competition, and if the fair use diminishes demand for the original product, it is not considered as appropriate use (Crews, 1993).

Some artists also have the rights of attribution and integrity, meaning they can claim authorship and prevent the use of their name for works that are not theirs. There are different time constraints for a work to be copyright-protected in the United States according to the Artists Rights Society. They also explained that any changes in copyright terms have occurred over the years, but now there is a total of 95 years of copyright protection of works published before January 1, 1978, and a term of the lifetime of the artist plus 70 years for works published after January 1, 1978. The term of copyright protection is different from country to country and depends on what the individual nations decide to do. On the “Copyright Basics” page of Artists Rights Society, they state that in 1994, the European Union, as a whole, established a term of the lifetime of the artist plus 70 years. Understanding the background information about copyright in the United States is helpful when discussing the specific issues right for artists.

Different forms of intellectual property protection have certain limitations on the time period they are in effect. The duration a patented design lasts is for 10 years. Fees are paid to make sure this protection remains. A registered design prevents third parties from utilizing the product for up to 25 years if it is renewed each five year period. Proof must be given that a person has created a design. These could be copies or photographic evidence of the design. The aspects of a design that are forbidden for use by others are the appearance, shape, arrangement and decoration. There are some criteria the design must meet in order for it to be protected. It must be new, not offensive, not contain already protected designs and is not

Thesis: In this paper I will be talking about fair use, how fair use has developed into appropriation art, and how copyright has changed over time.

It does not deal with credit being given, and its main purpose is for the common good. However in some school projects, students are required to cite the locations of the images they use. Copyright grants an artist exclusive rights over their work, but it does not always work in the favor of the artist or owner of the work. It is inevitable that someone would either use, repurpose, or steal an artwork, and it is not something that can be prevented. However, there are methods for an artist to use for their

The Lanham Act defines the term trademark to include “any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof . . . to identify and distinguish his or her goods . . . and to indicate the source of the goods, even if that source is unknown.” The United States Patent and Trademark Office and the U.S. federal courts have interpreted the definition liberally allowing a breath of nontraditional marks to be registered if it.

In the nineteenth century, a variety of legal, extra-legal, and illegal control and violence were used against women and men of the nineteenth century. Cross-dressing laws, night rides, lynching, and rape are some of the forms of control and violence enforced. Cross-dressing laws were enacted to control people who the public thought of as going against the social and gender norms of the nineteenth century. In contradiction to this, cross-dressing laws were only enforced in public spaces and areas (Sears 62). If a person was to cross-dress in the privacy of their own home, then no action was to be taken against them due to the private setting. Cross-dressing laws were also used to prohibit feminist dress reformers and impersonators of the opposite gender (62). Feminist dress reformers referring to women who dressed in male clothing styles, such as trousers and top hats instead of skirts and bonnets. The cross-dressing laws that were enacted, particularly in San Francisco between the years 1860s to 1890s, made women and men hide their differences and preferences behind closed doors. The only way that cross-dressing males and females could be allowed in the public was through entertainment venues. Entertainment venues such as theatres, museums, tours of the slums, and even freak show exhibits (97). Through these venues, the public created an attachment of strangeness and weirdness around non-entertainment cross-dressers. Another form of control over the people of the nineteenth

To those who are not familiar with the processes within the fashion industry, this world of style is characterized by a peaceful coexistence between all the stakeholders. To those in the know however, this is far from the truth with the fashion industry. The value of the United Kingdom fashion industry is large contributing to about 20 billion pounds into the country’s economy on an annual basis. To have a better understanding, the contribution made by the fashion industry to the country’s Gross Domestic Product is almost twice that being brought in by car manufacturers which is valued at 10.1 billion so fashion is no doubt a major business and clothing designs one of the core assets. In considering this, it is therefore a surprise that businesses that are operating within this industry within this industry are not given the opportunity to do more to protect the designs that they have. This paper puts forward the assertion that based on the case law of J Choo(Jersey) Limited v Towerstone Limited and Others, the system of intellectual property protection available in United Kingdom law is not fit for use in the fashion industry in its present condition.

Copyright protects almost all works of creative expression “fixed in a tangible medium of expression” but it

According to the Stanford University webpage fair use is “any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose.” “Transformative” in this interpretation refers to the process by which copyrighted works are used in creative or alternative manners in which something new is created or made use of. The nature of how transformative a work is often aids in determining the eligibility for the first of the fair use factors. When determining the legality of copyright issues, Courts often look to four factors which have been laid out as qualifiers and evaluators for fair use in a given dispute. These four factors are not concrete in interpretation and therefore results of given disputes can vary based on the Court

Copyright protection extends to expressions and not to ideas . Originality is the threshold standard of requirement of copyright. The case Walter v Lane [1900] AC 539 expounded the three essential elements (labour, skill and judgment ) of originality. The court adapted to sweat of brow test with no element of creativity require to make the work original. Copyright can be granted if a work is created through the effort of an individual despite the work containing statement of facts and no creative input by an author.