Search

The JPAIR Multidisciplinary Research is a peer-reviewed journal that welcomes research articles from scholars around the world. The journal uses Digital Object Identifier (DOI) for each article and is published four times a year. The editorial review process relies on the cooperation of authors and reviewers. The journal has policies in place for retraction of articles, digital preservation, handling complaints, conflicts of interest, publication ethics, and peer review. The double-blind review process is used, and referees are selected based on their expertise in the field. The acceptance or rejection of a manuscript is based on the evaluations of the referees. The journal also accepts comments on previously published articles, and there are technology-based quality assurance measures in place, such as readability tests, plagiarism detection, and appropriate citation formats. Contributors are encouraged to perform word count, spelling, and grammar checks before submission. [Extracted from the article]

The article discusses the importance of attribution, especially in the context of the Supreme Court decision regarding the artist Andy Warhol's use of a copyrighted photograph. It reports that the proper attribution is crucial for transparency, provenance, and respecting the moral rights of creators, while also highlighting the need for transparency in the age of artificial intelligence and derivative works.

The article offers information on the challenges Artificial Intelligence (AI) presents under existing laws in the USA and the EU, particularly in the context of Copyright Law, focusing on the recognition of AI as an "author." Topics include the characteristics of AI systems and their creative capabilities, the impact of quantum computing on AI, and the question of whether AI can be considered an author under the Copyright Act.

This article explores the topic of intellectual property rights for artworks generated by artificial intelligence (AI). It discusses the advancements in AI technology that allow for the creation of art pieces that imitate the styles of famous artists. The article highlights the popularity of AI art technologies among the general public and the challenges that arise in terms of copyright protection. It examines the requirements for copyright protection in the United States, including originality and fixation, and discusses the issue of authorship in relation to AI-generated art. The article also explores how other countries are addressing these issues within their own copyright laws. [Extracted from the article]

NFTs, non-fungible tokens, can represent ownership of unique things based on a relatively new technology of blockchain (ethereum.org). Because of this mechanism, people use NFTs to sell, share and transfer various rights of digital media or tangible objects. Generally, museums, which tend to be risk-averse, are slow to examine or utilize NFTs. This paper discusses the current use cases of NFTs in the museum sector addressing both benefits and challenges that come with museum NFT use to answer how NFTs can be better utilized in the future. Despite a number of challenges, NFTs are untapped resources that could have a wider application for museums. Using the theory of the commons, this paper further develops a model for a common pool of NFT sharing based on the fair use doctrine of copyright and open access model among global museums that are willing to participate, where they can share their NFT collections digitally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When we as faculty assign remediation projects ("make a theatre history meme", or "turn your essay into a presentation with images"), we are inviting students to remix. In the first - before I emphasized citation - a classical Greekinspired design for I Oedipus Rex i featured a prophet Teiresias incongruously bearded and robed in black because the student Google-image-searched "Greek priest" and had come up with images of Orthodox clergy. Even in theatre-rich locations, the limitations of student schedules and finances mean that still images are an essential part of theatre and performance courses. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Critique of Law: Independent Legal Studies / Krytyka Prawa: Niezalezne Studia nad Prawem is the property of Akademia Leona Kozminskiego and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

With its fact-intensive inquiries and limited bright-line rules, copyright law is known for its ambiguity, and courts often differ in their interpretations of various doctrines. The fair use doctrine is no different, and was in fact designed to grant courts discretion in making their determinations, all with the aim of maintaining the true purpose of the copyright law. Recent technologies and popularized forms of art only complicate things, adding rougher terrain to an already confusing landscape. This Comment explores two relatively recent cases that consider the intersection of tattoos, copyrights, and video games, one stemming from the Southern District of New York and the other from the Southern District of Illinois. To properly consider these cases, this Comment first provides a brief overview of copyright law and the fair use doctrine as it is applied to allegedly infringing uses of copyrighted works. Next, this Comment discusses the copyrightability of tattoos as a general matter. After laying this groundwork, this Comment moves to summarize the two cases this Comment is designed to investigate--Solid Oak Sketches and Alexander--before considering which court "got it right." Lastly, this Comment considers available avenues for reaching consensus, or, at the very least, creating some type of predictability, in the hopes of providing authors and users with a consistent understanding of what can be permissibly used and what will constitute infringement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores copyright enforcement in the U.S., discussing traditional methods like notice and takedown and federal court litigation. It introduces the Copyright Claims Board (CCB) as a new option for resolving smaller disputes. It highlights potential fairness concerns for defendants and suggests solutions such as applying the fair use defense automatically and educating respondents.

Courts cannot predict the future, but their decisions are binding precedent on future generations. Technological changes—that courts could have never predicted— break down this system of stare decisis. What made sense yesterday no longer makes sense today. Leveraging an understanding of technology, the rule of law, and stare decisis, this Note proposes a new approach to copyright fair use decisionmaking that involves utility-expanding technologies, or tools that radically change the use of and access to copyrighted works. When applying past precedent, courts should carefully contextualize prior decisions’ analyses of the first and fourth fair use factors within the precedent’s time and perform a similar analysis for the current case in the current era. The more that the factual circumstances diverge between the two cases, the less weight the court should give to the past precedent. Moreover, when generating precedent on utility-expanding transformative fair uses, courts should narrow their fair use decisions to the dispute before the court and only rule on the specific technology in question—helping ensure that the balance between advancing technological interests and protecting the rights of content creators does not become rooted in shortsighted thinking from a materially different past. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the fair use doctrine in the context of museums using copyrighted works without permission. It specifically analyzes the case of Marano v. Metropolitan Museum of Art, where the museum reproduced a copyrighted photograph on its website without the photographer's permission. It explores the concept of transformative use in fair use analysis and how museums reproduction of works for historical context on different subjects can fall into a gray area of fair use.

The article focuses on the challenges faced by a librarian, Ms. Nesbitt, in engaging children with disabilities and limited interest in books. Topics covered include the use of universal design for learning principles to create accessible children's areas, the importance of adapted literacy materials for children with disabilities, and low-cost strategies such as adapting books with interactive elements, creating digital books and making squishy books to enhance engagement and accessibility.

Intellectual property (IP) is the legal mechanism that transforms intangible instances into tradeable commodities. While creating the conditions for extraction of value and capital accumulation across all domains of economic and social life, IP law defines at the same time the boundaries of commodification by determining the scope of the public domain. Within this traditional framework, opponents of neo-liberal market expansionism have championed the role of IP doctrines and principles such as fair use, exceptions and limitations. However, new informational capitalism relies primarily on non-IP forms of appropriation and de facto control. To a large extent, commodification of intangibles and capital accumulation is no longer distressed by -- and even benefits from -- traditional public-domain-enhancing IP doctrines. This challenges traditional IP narratives and calls for a new foundation for a truly counter-hegemonic discourse in IP law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores trademark considerations for nonfungible tokens (NFT). Topics discussed include conflict around the use of NFT, trademark cases involving ethereum and infringement, trademark principles of creative expression under protection of the First Amendment and of fair use, and dilemma in the enforcement of trademark infringement law.

The article focuses on the U.S. Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit's reversal of a district court decision in McGucken v. Pub Ocean Ltd., highlighting the challenge of analyzing fair use, particularly the impact of transformativeness on the analysis of the other factors. Topics include the Copyright Act's aim to protect artists and scientists, the fair use doctrine's role in safeguarding the interests of secondary creators, and the tension between copyright law's goal of promoting science.

This document summarizes the Supreme Court case of Jack Daniel's Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, which involved a dispute over the use of Jack Daniel's trademarks on a dog toy. The article explores the limitations of the Rogers test in trademark law, which balances the purpose of the Lanham Act with First Amendment protections. The district court initially ruled in favor of Jack Daniel's, but the Ninth Circuit reversed the decision, applying the Rogers test and finding that the dog toy was protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court ultimately held that the Rogers test does not apply when trademarks are used as source identifiers, protecting the rights of trademark holders while providing guidelines for creators using trademarks for expressive purposes. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright law provides that when two or more authors create a single work with the intent of merging their contributions into inseparable or interdependent parts of a unitary whole, the authors are considered joint authors. For photographic works, judicial precedent establishes that the creative contributions necessary to support a copyright claim include the author's choices concerning elements such as lighting, pose, garments, background, facial expression, and angle. In many visual works, however, those creative elements are determined not solely by a photographer, but also by the subject, who can sulk or smile, stand with good posture or stoop, and be situated in full light or obfuscated by shadow, among many other options. A subject's rights in photographs have not been fully explored. The Supreme Court avoided deciding the issue more than a century ago. Today, paparazzi and celebrities make high-stakes legal assertions about copyright infringement and fair use through litigation. Certain portrait photographs of an individual person may be works of joint authorship, the co-authors being the photographer and the subject. While it is established across the globe that photographs merit copyright protection, and that the rights in a photograph generally vest in the photographer, it is a mistake to allow the authorial inquiry into every photograph to end there. Copyright law is accustomed to doing the hard work of specific factual analysis; its fair use doctrine requires such scrutiny, and an apportionment of joint authorship should be no different. The construction of joint authorship is legally flexible, at least in the manner that it is codified. This Article proposes making better use of a framework that already exists in US copyright law. No legislative change is necessary, but courts' current interpretation of joint authorship requires recalibration to permit more flexibility. Such a stance will more accurately reflect how creative people work together and will bestow rights more fairly and on creative parties, which will sometimes include photographic subjects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The following article is a composite review and critique of copyright systems in the United States and their impacts upon creators and individuals alike. The public domain is rapidly dwindling due to changes in copyright law that have greatly prolonged the length of copyright protections. The primary beneficiaries of these increased protections are the large entertainment corporations that can easily afford to contest what, in many cases, would otherwise be considered fair use of copyrighted material. This article argues the substantial need for collective action and stewardship of publicly owned information in order to generate a better and stronger public domain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Information literacy is a crucial topic in the library science profession. The information needs and perceptions of the information literacy of preservice and early-career school librarians were explored in this research using a survey and interviews distributed nationally over a 5-month time frame. These participants, who have been employed in the field for 5 years or less or are currently completing coursework, were queried about their perceptions of information literacy and how the profession had changed through the course of their graduate work and early-career experiences. Participants felt well prepared and believed their schooling met their need for information in the areas of readers' advisory and the use of copyright and fair use and for for teaching these topics to students. They also reported that they were well prepared for teaching with educational technology. Participants were least prepared in the area of facilitation of classroom teacher/school librarian collaborations, even though this aspect of their library school experience was highly emphasized. Once graduates were in a library position, they met their information needs by reaching out to mentors, more experienced school librarians, and their professional learning community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The right to criticize or parody has always been a fundamental human right. In today's world of technology and the Internet, parodies or caricatures of someone's work are not uncommon. Technology has become so readily available that anyone can create a parody or caricature of another person's work. The main task of the nowadays researchers is find balance between one person's right to the inviolability of his property and the right of other persons to imitate it. The aim of this article is to analyze the concept of parody and caricature, as well as the case law of different countries - exploring how case law assesses whether an imitated work can be defined as a parody, or whether it is an "unsuccessful" imitation. Where is the line where an author has created a parody or has already infringed the rights of another author?. The methodological basis of this article is based on general scientific approaches (analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction, comparison, analogy and a systemic and structural-functional approach). The article also draws on court decisions, legislation, legal literature, publications and doctrine. Conclusions are drawn using the method of scientific induction and deduction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article attempts to resolve the three-way circuit court split on the nominative fair use doctrine. Topics discussed are differences in the approaches of the Ninth Circuit, Third Circuit and Second Circuit to the nominative fair use doctrine, relationship between the Lanham Act and the policy rationale involved in resolving the circuit split, nominative fair use doctrine as a necessary defense and as an affirmative defense expanding the freedoms of trademark defendants.

The article argues that Nintendo could not restrict The Big House annual Super Smash Bros. Melee (SSBM) video game tournament series from using the emulator Dolphin and game modification Project Slippi but could restrict them from streaming their tournament on websites under the fair use doctrine of the Copyright Act of 1976. Topics include the history of Nintendo's disputes with SSBM, a background on Dolphin and Slippi, and an explanation of the Copyright Act of 1976 and its fair use doctrine.

Copyright of Artnodes is the property of Universitat Oberta de Catalunya and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The author discusses the "Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for the Visual Arts," developed and published by the College Art Association (CAA) in 2015. Topics explored include the acknowledgment of the fair use provision of the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976, the responsibility of visual arts professionals with regard to the use of copyrighted materials, and the way museums and publishers may support public access to artworks.