Joint authors meaning

More staff and freelancers are now working from home on a regular basis. Consequently, more material is produced at home and uploaded or circulated online—for instance, teachers sharing with their pupils via video platforms. Where content is made in this setting, consider who owns the IP, any use of third‑party works, and potential breaches of third‑party rights. For more detail on matters raised by this Checklist, consult the following Practice Notes: Copyright—protectable works Copyright—authorship and ownership Copyright & associated rights—overview Copyright infringement Copyright—secondary infringement Intellectual property—remedies Copyright—permitted acts and defences Joint ownership of intellectual property rights Use the third column to note observations or remarks while progressing through the Checklist. Checklist | Further information | Notes (if any) Copyright origination ☐ Pinpoint the copyright work. Copyright is unregistered and arises automatically once a qualifying work is created...

In this issue: New technologies Internet Data protection Media Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Reputation management Telecommunications LexTalk®TMT: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information New technologies DSIT releases report and impact assessment on copyright and artificial intelligence DSIT, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and the Intellectual Property Office have jointly issued a report and an impact assessment exploring the use of works protected by copyright in the training and development of AI systems. These have been published pursuant to sections 135 and 136 of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025. See: LNB News 18/03/2026 44. EDPS unveils Compass on supervision and enforcement under the EU AI Act The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) has released its Compass setting out its expanded role under the EU AI Act as a market surveillance authority...

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—21 March 2024 Occupational disease CoA upheld findings that intermittent/low asbestos exposure in the 1950s–70s was not a foreseeable risk; White v SoS for Health; Cuthbert v Taylor Woodrow. Vicarious liability Piepenbrock v Michell: claims about a chambers profile were struck out—no pleaded entity, no vicarious liability, not authors/editors/publishers; out of time; extended civil restraint for three years. Abuse and criminal injuries AXO v FTT: UT misapplied para 49(1); no double recovery for lost parental services, but CICA may recoup £5,500 bereavement from £10,000 Article 2 damages. Costs Bill to amend s58AA CLSA 1990, reversing PACCAR; retrospective; second reading 15 April 2024. Hadley v Przybylo: fee earner attendance at rehab meetings not irrecoverable in principle; case-specific. Rainer Hughes v LV=: £3,000 wasted costs order upheld; solicitor negligence/breach; indemnity basis proper. Key PI & Clinical Negligence developments MoJ published February OIC Advisory Group minutes (data, policy, tariff review, commitments); next...

This Practice Note forms part of a cross-border guide that explains essential considerations in setting up specific business vehicles across worldwide jurisdictions. Leading law firms within the Multilaw global network respond to central questions on this area. This edition sets out the key points to consider when registering a registered overseas company in New Zealand. Current as at 13 January 2023. Authors: Mark Lowndes and Kerri Dewe, Tompkins Wake, a Multilaw member firm Common entities Which entity type does this questionnaire address? Which other commonly used entities in this jurisdiction are covered in a different questionnaire? This response concerns the registered overseas company (branch/representative office). The limited liability company (LLC) is dealt with in a distinct response prepared separately. Name other entity types available locally that are not presently covered by a questionnaire: Sole proprietorships Partnerships Limited liability partnerships Unincorporated joint ventures Trusts Look-through companies General principles...

Class actions—USA—Q&A guide This Practice Note presents a jurisdiction-specific Q&A on class actions in the USA, featured in the Lexology Getting the Deal Through series by Law Business Research (law stated at: 9 October 2022). Authors: Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP— Roger A Cooper; Lina Bensman; Allison Kim. 1. Outline the organisation of your court system as it relates to collective or representative actions (class actions). In which courts may class actions be brought? The American court structure comprises two parallel systems: the federal courts and the state court systems. The federal judiciary operates on three tiers: Trial courts, termed the ‘US District Courts’, located nationwide; Thirteen intermediate appellate courts, the ‘US Courts of Appeals’; The highest court, the ‘US Supreme Court’. The Supreme Court has jurisdiction over all matters brought in federal courts, and over cases from state courts that involve federal law. Broadly, state court systems reflect the same three-tiered model, although terminology can vary and,...

Film and TV glossary A–B | Film and TV glossary C–D | Film and TV glossary E–H | Film and TV glossary M–P | Film and TV glossary R–S | Film and TV glossary T–W Incidental inclusion (‘passing shot’ use) Including a copyright-protected work only incidentally within an artistic work, sound recording, film or broadcast does not infringe that copyright. For example, a film shot on location at the South Bank in London would not breach rights in buildings or in music audible in the background when their presence is incidental. What qualifies as ‘incidental’ hinges on the facts of each matter. See Practice Note: Copyright—permitted acts and defences. Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) IPSO is an independent, self-regulatory body that handles complaints about the editorial content (not advertising) of newspapers, magazines (not books) and their websites, as well as about certain kinds of behaviour by journalists working for those organisations. It replaced the Press Complaints Commission on 8 September 2014. See website: Independent Press Standards...