Interested in Rickless V United Artists? On this page, we have collected links for you, where you will receive the most necessary information about Rickless V United Artists.
https://swarb.co.uk/rickless-v-united-artists-corporation-ca-1988/
Jul 13, 2018 · Rickless v United Artists Corporation: CA 1988. References: [1988] QB 40, [1987] 1 All ER 679, [1987] 2 WLR 945 Coram: Hobhouse J, Sir Nicolas Browne-Wilkinson V-C, Bingham LJ Ratio: The Act created a private right to performers. Although it might appear to provide criminal sanctions only, performers had the right to give or withhold consent to ...
https://swarb.co.uk/rickless-v-united-artists-corporation-ca-1987/
Rickless v United Artists Corporation: CA 1987 The Act created a private right to performers. Although it might appear to provide criminal sanctions only, performers had the right to give or withhold consent to the use of their performances and to enforce that right by action in the civil courts.Estimated Reading Time: 1 min
https://www.copyrightuser.org/educate/episode-3-case-file-26/
One famous case, known as the Peter Sellers case (Rickless v. United Artists Corp (1988)), is understood to have played a significant role in the introduction of the performers’ rights regime. A dispute arose between the makers of the sixth ‘Pink Panther’ film – Trail of the Pink Panther – Blake Edwards and United Artists on the one hand, and the relatives of comedian Peter Sellers on the other.Estimated Reading Time: 8 mins
https://www.copyrightuser.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/CU_CaseFile_26.pdf
THE CASE: RICKLESS v. UNITED ARTISTS CORP (1988) Performers’ rights were a relatively late addition to UK law. There were only introduced in 1988, in their current form. One famous case, known as the Peter Sellers case (Rickless v. United Artists Corp (1988)), is understood to have played a significant role in the introduc-
https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1842/2188/Audio%20visual%20performers%20UK%20report%20to%20WIPO.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Rickless v United Artists Corp [1988] 1 QB 40 a civil cause of action was accorded to performers. In that case, United Artists Corp. made a film using take-outs from previous films in the Pink Panther series, starring the late Peter Sellers. Rickless, as owner of rights of Peter Sellers services as an actor, sued for infringement of s2 of the
https://ecollections.law.fiu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1417&context=lawreview
Rickless v. United Artists Corp. [1986] FSR 502, 524–25 (for copyright); General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Firestone Tyre & Rubber Co. [1975] 1 WLR 819, 826 (for patent). 12. Marathon Asset Mgmt. LLP v. Seddon [2017] EWHC (Comm) 300, [2017] ICR 791 [261]; CF Partners (UK) LLP v. Barclays Bank PLC [2014] EWHC (Ch) 3049 [1195]. 13. See. Douglas v ...
https://quizlet.com/208139413/breach-of-statutory-duty-flash-cards/
Rickless v United Artists Corporation (1988) Facts: Dramatic + Musical Performers Protection Act 1958 gave performers (and their representatives) civil remedy if performance was exploited without consent. -D made Pink Panther films, after C died, D used old clips without C's representative's permission.
We hope you have found all the information you need about Rickless V United Artists through the links above.
