With the development of technology, cameras and mobile phones now have various built-in shooting modes or parameters that enable photographers to shoot different scenes quickly. Traditionally, photographers would have had to adjust the parameters themselves. Notably, in two recent decisions the IP Court ruled that photographic works taken using built-in shooting modes or parameters can meet the Copyright Act s requirements for creativeness (originality).
In a judgment rendered on 22 October 2020 (Min-Zhu-Shang-Zi No 2), the IP Court stated that:
To evaluate whether a photographic work is of creativeness , one can no longer judge based on the adjustments of aperture, shutter, depth of field and amount of light and other photographic techniques performed in the manner that a traditional photographer would do. Instead, as long as the choice of shooting theme and shooting subject and the adjustment of shooting angle and composition in accordance with the original concept in the phot
contribute to the resolution of societal challenges; and
are properly registered in the patent system.
The National Institute for the Defence of Competition and Protection of Intellectual Property protects inventions that are duly patented. This guarantees the inventor s exclusivity rights, especially when the product enters the Peruvian market with a strictly commercial purpose.
However, universities, research centres and the scientific community have free access to patents because they are considered a valuable source of technical information.
For further information on this topic please contact
Mathnasium Center Licensing, LLC v Chang,
(1) the Court of Appeal allowed the defendant s appeal against a lower court s finding that he had made a false statement of truth with respect to an admission in a defence filed on behalf of a company. As is normal in such appeals, the Court of Appeal was reluctant to disturb a lower court s primary finding. However, in this case, the Court of Appeal considered that the lower court had been plainly wrong to make an order for committal for contempt of court. The Court of Appeal agreed with the lower court that, in principle, a person who makes a statement of truth in a pleading that verifies a false admission of fact can be committed for contempt of court. However, the admission must be clear and unqualified and this is where the Court of Appeal disagreed with the lower court. In this case, the defendant appears to have made a mistake, possibly as a result of an unfortunate miscommunication with the company s lawyers while under pressure to
The rule adopts Rule 13q-1 and amends Form SD to implement Section 13(q) of the Securities Exchange Act 1934. It will come into effect 60 days after its publication in the Federal Register.
This new rule implements the resource payment disclosure requirement of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 2010 and follows the SEC s effort in 2018 to modernise its disclosure requirements for mining company issuers, which came into effect for many issuers on 1 January 2021.(2)
The SEC also created an alternative reporting regime which enables issuers subject to certain foreign reporting regimes to comply with the new rules by providing copies of those foreign reports (see
Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a significant increase in the use of electronic platforms to provide access to health services. There are various types of platform, but most enable patients to consult with a medical practitioner or solicit responses to health-related questions. Often, these responses are generated through automated mechanisms and algorithms. These platforms seemingly push the legal boundaries of telemedicine.
Legal framework
When providing telemedicine services, health practitioners must comply with the General Ethical Guidelines for Good Practice in Telemedicine, which the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) issued under the Health Professions Act (56/1974) in August 2014.