Episode #125 of the Stack Overflow podcast is here. We talk Tilde Club and mechanical keyboards. Listen now
Search type Search syntax
Tags [tag]
Exact "words here"
Author user:1234
user:me (yours)
Score score:3 (3+)
score:0 (none)
Answers answers:3 (3+)
answers:0 (none)
isaccepted:yes
hasaccepted:no
inquestion:1234
Views views:250
Sections title:apples
body:"apples oranges"
URL url:"*.example.com"
Favorites infavorites:mine
infavorites:1234
Status closed:yes
duplicate:no
migrated:no
wiki:no
Types is:question
is:answer
Exclude -[tag]
-apples
For more details on advanced search visit our help page
Results tagged with Search options user 4595

For questions about the property right inherent in a creative work. Please see the tag wiki and FAQ before asking the question.

2
votes
You don't seem to be distinguishing properly between "original artwork" and photographs of it. A 19th-century painting will be out of copyright, so you can set up an easel copy it yourself, or even … take a photo if the owners don't mind; your copy can be used however you please. However, other people can't use your photograph without your permission. Similarly, if you want to reuse a photograph used in an art book, the important thing is the copyright on the photograph, not the painting. …
answered Apr 5 '18 by Tim Lymington
0
votes
It doesn't appear that Ketchap is violating a trademark, in that putting a skin on your basketball is not doing the same thing as an actual Pokeball. What they may be doing is passing off, which requi …
answered Jan 14 '17 by Tim Lymington
0
votes
"Intellectual property is something unique that you physically create. An idea alone is not intellectual property. For example, an idea for a book doesn’t count, but the words you’ve written do" (from …
answered Jul 19 '17 by Tim Lymington
4
votes
copied a work but did not appropriate property, he is not a thief, full stop. (He may, of course, be called "a robber and and a villain", and he may be guilty of copyright infringement, which is a tort and sometimes a crime.) …
answered Jan 14 '17 by Tim Lymington
0
votes
, which is illegal under copyright law, cannot be justified under the 'backup copy' exception. As a matter of logic Nintendo seem to be in the right, though I cannot say whether a judge would actually … damage: and that this copy may not be used in other ways that would bypass copyright (for example, lending it to a friend so that you can both play the game at the same time). The facts of each case will determine the result. …
answered Jun 7 by Tim Lymington
1
vote
You seem to be assuming that if the translator has copyright in a translation (which he may or may not have), the original author has no copyright in it. This is not correct; it is possible for both … parties to have copyright, so that publishing requires an agreement between the two (and presumably a division of royalties or other income). Though I am no expert in the area, it would seem that …
answered Feb 19 by Tim Lymington
1
vote
It appears that the contract as signed is legal and enforceable, but the attempt to require the use of this particular software (since it requires either a breach of another term or illegality) can b …
answered Jun 7 by Tim Lymington
1
vote
. Although it is difficult to prove a negative, I don't think there is any specific crime or cause of action here. The copyright legislation summary makes no mention of falsely claiming copyright (though bear …
answered Sep 19 '18 by Tim Lymington