Actually I don’t understand why the Ariana Grande’s lamentation about a photographer to claim copyright over a photo he took of her should be either an issue or a news. A photographer is the sole owner of the pictures he takes, and if the portrayed person wants to use is it he must pay for that (remember the day of your wedding, and the fact that the photographer did not give you the film or the RAW files? This is why.) That’s the basis of the right of author law.
An advertising video titled “The Hunt” and aimed at promoting the “Leica experience” raised controversy in China because of a frame showing a lens that mirrors the Tank Man picture portraying the activist that in Tien An Men Square blocked a PRC Tank just refusing to give way.
As a result for what has been perceived as an infringement of the chinese social networking platfrom Weibo terms and conditions, the word “Leica” (both in English and Chinese) is banned from the platform.
Furthermore, the partnership between Leica and HwaWei to establish a Chinese presence of the German camera manufacturer seems to having being jeopardized, at least for now. Continue reading “Weibo vs Leica Camera AG: Social Networks and the loss of control over corporate brands”
Contrary to the public opinion, copryight’s abuses don’t belong to “pirates” only.
Using the “weight” of his business size, singer Ariana Grande allowed photographers to participate to her show only if they surrender their copyright over the picture they shoot.
That’s rather interesting and disturbing because to criticize this decision, f the photography industry “shouted fire” claiming an infringement of the freedom of press.
But the Arianagrandegate is about money, not freedom, and it is unfair – to say the least -to invoke free speech to protect a pure business interest.
So, it will be interesting to see how this will evolve: copyright fishes that peacefully swim in the same pond now discover that friends has become foes.
End everybody knows what happens when a smaller fish meets a bigger one.
This paper advocates that cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin or Ethereum don’t challenge the current legal system, since they fit comfortably enough into the immaterial asset legal definition. As such, while a blockchain-based cryptocurrency can’t be considered as legal tender or electronic money, it can be exchanged on a contractual basis as it happens with every other kind of good. Continue reading “A contribution to the analysis of the legal status of cryptocurrencies”
I took this picture in Liverpool (UK) back in 2006 while I was hired to assist a Swiss Television crew shooting a documentary on the Echelon’s station at RAF Menwith Hill base. Continue reading “The Early 2000th BT Way to Sell the Internet”