©-LAW

The IPKat's favourite fictional character Last year, I was fortunate enough to be invited by  Associate Professor Yann Basire (Director-General of CEIPI)  to participate in a great (and cool!) conference he organized in Strasbourg on  Pop Culture and IP . The topic I was asked to discuss was trade mark protection of fictional characters, and the contribution will be published in 2020 as part of a collection edited by Yann and entitled  Propriété Intellectuelle et Pop Culture  (LexisNexis, coll. IRPI). But what about copyright protection of fictional characters: is it possible? how far could it go? Copyright protection is available to any work in a  Berne  and, now, EU sense. While no particular issues arise in relation to the literary, artistic or dramatic works that feature certain characters, in that they are regarded as ‘traditional’ copyright subject matter, whether copyright also vests in fictional characters as such has occasionally proved controversial

Readers will recall that back in 2015 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decided the important  Soulier and Doke  case   [Katposts  here ] , ruling that EU law mandates the recognition of the ‘author principle’, that is the need for the consent - whether express of implied (the latter is however to be strictly defined) - of authors to the doing, by third parties, of acts restricted by copyright in relation to their works. Indeed, the protection afforded by copyright is not solely concerned with the  enjoyment  of rights, but also with their  exercise . The CJEU held that that authors must be  individually  informed of the future third-party uses of their works and the means available to prohibit them if so they wish. In the absence of any actual prior information relating to that future use, authors are not in a position to prohibit such use, if necessary, so that the very existence of implicit consent appears purely hypothetical in that regard. Thus, witho

From confidentiality to disclosure in 3 Kat-steps (DIY instructions  here ) By reading the very interesting  EU Law Live Blog , The IPKat has discovered an intriguing decision ( Herbay v Hungary , Appl. No. 11608/15 ) that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) issued just a few days ago on the thorny issue of whether an employee’s own confidentiality obligations trump their freedom of expression and information under Article 10 of the  European Convention on Human Rights  (ECHR).  The answer?  Great news for IPKat bloggers  An employment contract can go far, but not too far. Let's see what happened and how the Court ruled. Background   In 2006, the applicant worked as a human resources management expert at a financial institution (Bank O.) in Hungary. In this capacity, he undertook the analysis and calculation of salaries and staffing management. Among other things, he contributed to his employer’s remuneration policy reform.  According to the code of

When the room you booked on Airbnb is already occupied Earlier this week, The IPKat received an intriguing couple of questions from a reader who is currently studying IP law: does someone renting out their spare bedroom on  Airbnb  around 50% of the time have to acquire a separate licence for the TV set which they have in said room? and what if they also have a radio set that allows guests to play music in said environment?  From an EU perspective, issues of this kind require consideration of the string of case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the right of communication to the public under the  InfoSoc  and  Rental and Lending Rights  Directives, including a pending referral -  Stim and SAMI , C-753/18   [Katpost  here ]   ( the Opinion of the appointed Advocate General is  expected  on 15 January 2020) - asking whether: the hiring out of cars equipped as standard with radio receivers qualifies as an act of communication to a public (in successio