Design Patent Infringement Needs A Free Expression Essay

Question:

Discuss about the Design Patent Infringement Needs a Free Expression.

Answer:

The Canadian law protects the moral rights that are under the Copyright Act of Canada. Moral rights are different from economic rights. Moral rights are something that is derived from the reflection of an individual’s personality in her or his work. Therefore, yes, moral rights exist in copyright (Joyce et al., 2016, p.85). The rights of creators of copyrighted are usually identified under civil law jurisdictions and to some common law jurisdictions. Moral rights consist of the right of attribution and the right to have a work published anonymously. The right to the integrity of the work is also included among moral rights. Moral rights include paternity rights, right to privacy of photos, derogatory treatment and false attribution. The existence of moral rights is essential since it raises a significant additional element in the negotiation and drafting of certain agreements. Authors and directors are advised to insist upon their rights in any dealings or activities related to the copyright works. Paternity rights are concerned with the author of a copyright literary, musical or artistic work or the director of the copyright film and it has the right to identify being either director of the work. A person who takes photographs or makes a film where copyright exists has no right to make copies of the work issued or broadcasted in public. A person should not have the right to have a literary, musical work falsely attributed to the public as an author (Peltz-Steele, R& Clifford, 2017, p.210). The author of a copyright, artistic work or musical has the right to not have their work that is related to derogatory treatment. However, since Abigail had sold her copyright to Tom, her moral rights in the prints will exist.
Abigail’s right consists of the right to continue using her pseudonym on the prints since she was the owner of the copyright. However, she had sold the copyright of her painting to Tom, a publisher. Abigail did that to increase the revenue of her painting. Tom had published the prints by diminishing the pseudonym but Abigail will still have the right to use pseudonym on the prints.
Abigail had the right to prevent Tom from using her prints in support of opposing a toxin free environment (Schwanen & Jacobs, 2017, p.177). This is because Abigail was presently the face of global organization whose aim was to end the use of toxins. Therefore, Abigail will still have the right to prevent Tom from using her prints for opposing a toxin free environment.
Infringement of moral rights refers to a situation when an individual does not showcase the name along with his work or treats the work in such a way to hurt the reputation. This process constitutes an infringement of moral rights (Stokes, 2014, p.325). For instance, a failure to attribute the author or a derogatory treatment of the author’s work will be treated as an infringement of moral rights.
In this particular case study, if Abigail had to pursue her rights against Tom the outcome will be that Abigail will fail to sue him because she had sold the copyright of her painting to Tom.

References:

Joyce, C., Ochoa, T. T., Carroll, M. W., Leaffer, M. A., & Jaszi, P. (2016). Copyright law (p. 85). Carolina Academic Press.

Peltz-Steele, R. J., & Clifford, R. D. (2017). Design Patent Infringement Needs a Free Expression Defense.

Schwanen, D., & Jacobs, A. (2017). Patents, Copyright and Competition: Assessing the Impact of Trade Deals on Canada.

Stokes, S. (2014). Digital copyright: law and practice. Bloomsbury Publishing.

How to cite this essay: