Copyright: The Mark of McCain

Shortly after I started this blog in 2005 I reported on a spat between Angela Merkel and the Rolling Stones over her use of their classic Angie as their campaign anthem (see "Stoned! The Difference between Copyright and Rights in Performances" 23 Aug 2005).   It now looks as if presidential hopeful John McCain is in similar lumber with Jackson Browne over "Running on Empty" though he is applying to strike out the claim (see Ben Shefner's "Copyrights & Campaigns" 24 Jan 2009). Ben, who advised McCain, links through to sites from which you can actually read what we would probably call "skellies"  - that is, if you can bear to trawl through 53 pages of argument on behalf of McCain, 25 for Browne and 14 of McCain's reply. 

Much more entertaining are the voces populi on the TMZ site to which Ben links.    A lady called Melissa writes:
"Glad he didn't win the Presidency but here's hoping he wins this one. I hate whiny washed up actors/musicians/dancers who think they are still relevant."
On the other hand, Assamite writes:
" I believe the term that fits is "using the song for personal gain". Which of course MacJ was doing. Since the song itself is not within public domain, the rights to the song and how it may be used belong to the artist. MacJ should just wrap his shredded linen shrouds about his stooped shoulders, shuffle back to his sarcaphogus (sic?), pull the lid closed and shut his whiney ass up!"
Speaking as a foreigner, I have to say that McCain may have been one of the best presidents America never had. I am not talking about the 2008 election.   Had I been an American I would certainly have voted for Obama. But I think he would have made a much better fist of the last 8 years had he been the Republican candidate in 2000 rather than Bush. Even in this election McCain had his moments.  His concession speech was full of grace and generosity.

The return date for the application is 2 Feb 2009 at 09:00.   I will follow Ben's blog and other US sources and let you know what happens.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Copyright in Photographs: Temple Island Collections and Creation Records

Image
In our very first NIPC newsletter which we published in June 1997 I wrote a case note on Mr. Justice Lloyd's decision in  Creation Records Ltd. and Others v News Group Newspapers Ltd   [1997] EMLR 444, [1997] EWHC Ch 370, (1997) 16 Tr LR 544. In that case Mr. Noel Gallagher of Oasis and others applied for an interlocutory injunction to restrain The Sun from offering for sale and selling a poster of Oasis that featured a photo of an elaborate set that included a white Rolls Royce in a country club swimming pool. The Sun's photograph was very similar to the photograph that appeared on an Oasis album cover. The similarity arose because The Sun's photographer shot the same scene at roughly the same time and from the same angle as Mr. Gallagher's photographer but he did not reproduce any part of Oasis's print or negative. The learned judge held that the plaintiffs had no arguable case for infringement of copyright though he accepted that they had an arguable case for br
Read more

Copyright: Primary Infirngement - Copying

The right to copy a copyright work is restricted to the copyright owner by s.2 (1) and s.16 (1) (a) of the  Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 . The restriction applies to every description of copyright work though different provisions apply to different types of work (s.17 (1)). This right to restrict copying is referred to as the right of reproduction in art 9 of the Bern Convention and art 2 of the "Copyright in the Information Society" or  Copyright and Related Rights Directive  (Directive 2001/29). Literary Musical, Dramatic or Artistic Works Copying in relation to an artistic, dramatic, literary or musical work  work means reproducing the work in any material form including storing the work in any medium by electronic means. In the case of an artistic work this includes making a copy in 3 dimensions of a 2 dimensional work and the making of a copy in 3 dimensions of a 3 dimensional work. Films and Broadcasts S.17 (4) of the 1988 Act as amended  includes within the
Read more

Patents - Gilead Sciences Inc v NuCana Plc

Image
  Jane Lamber t Patents Court  (Mr Justice Meade) G ilead Sciences Inc and another NuCana PLC  [2023] EWHC 611 (Pat) (21 March 2023) This was an action by Gilead Sciences Inc. and its British subsidiary Gilead Sciences Ltd ("Gilead") for revocation of two European Patents (UK) that had been granted to NuCana Plc ("NoCana"), namely  EP 2 955 190 B1 (“EP190”)  and   EP 3 904 365 B1 (“EP365”) .  NuCana complained that Gilead's product  sofosbuvir  infringed its patents. Mr Justice Meade, who tried the action, could see no real defence to the counterclaim if the claims of the patents were valid. Grounds of Revocation Gilead sought revocation of the patents on the following grounds: Added matter in that the  Markush group definitions of the claims  of the patents are not clearly and unambiguously disclosed in the original application; Lack of plausibility in that the Patents do not plausibly disclose any technical contribution common to substantially all the claimed
Read more