Pub Date : 2018-08-01DOI: 10.1093/HE/9780198823223.003.0019
Robert M. Abbey, M. Richards
This chapter considers the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, Part II, which provides security of tenure for the majority of business tenants by giving them a statutory right to renew their lease or tenancy. It explains the need for ‘tenancy’; need for ‘occupation’; need for ‘the purposes of a business’; key methods of termination under the Act; section 40 notices; interim rent applications; landlord’s statutory grounds of opposition; tenant’s right to compensation; and the terms of the new tenancy.
{"title":"19. Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, Part II","authors":"Robert M. Abbey, M. Richards","doi":"10.1093/HE/9780198823223.003.0019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HE/9780198823223.003.0019","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter considers the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, Part II, which provides security of tenure for the majority of business tenants by giving them a statutory right to renew their lease or tenancy. It explains the need for ‘tenancy’; need for ‘occupation’; need for ‘the purposes of a business’; key methods of termination under the Act; section 40 notices; interim rent applications; landlord’s statutory grounds of opposition; tenant’s right to compensation; and the terms of the new tenancy.","PeriodicalId":88929,"journal":{"name":"Marquette intellectual property law review","volume":"63 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76194541","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-08-01DOI: 10.1093/HE/9780198823223.003.0017
Robert M. Abbey, M. Richards
This chapter discusses issues relating to the sale of new properties. It covers acting for a developer or buyer, road and sewer agreements, structural defects insurance, and synchronizing completion of a related sale when acting for the buyer of new property.
{"title":"17. New Properties","authors":"Robert M. Abbey, M. Richards","doi":"10.1093/HE/9780198823223.003.0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HE/9780198823223.003.0017","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter discusses issues relating to the sale of new properties. It covers acting for a developer or buyer, road and sewer agreements, structural defects insurance, and synchronizing completion of a related sale when acting for the buyer of new property.","PeriodicalId":88929,"journal":{"name":"Marquette intellectual property law review","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77372220","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-08-01DOI: 10.1093/he/9780198715832.003.0013
M. Richards
Completion is the moment in time when the buyer pays over the balance of the purchase price to the seller in exchange for the deeds (if any), executed purchase deed, keys, and, if the contract so provides, vacant possession. This chapter discusses the how, where, and when for completion; deeds and unregistered land; postal completions; dealing with the discharge of the seller’s mortgage; the Land Registry’s electronic discharge (e-DS1) scheme; and the outcome of completion.
{"title":"13. Completion","authors":"M. Richards","doi":"10.1093/he/9780198715832.003.0013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198715832.003.0013","url":null,"abstract":"Completion is the moment in time when the buyer pays over the balance of the purchase price to the seller in exchange for the deeds (if any), executed purchase deed, keys, and, if the contract so provides, vacant possession. This chapter discusses the how, where, and when for completion; deeds and unregistered land; postal completions; dealing with the discharge of the seller’s mortgage; the Land Registry’s electronic discharge (e-DS1) scheme; and the outcome of completion.","PeriodicalId":88929,"journal":{"name":"Marquette intellectual property law review","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74460298","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-08-01DOI: 10.1093/HE/9780198823223.003.0006
Robert M. Abbey, M. Richards
This chapter examines pre-contract searches and enquiries. Searches are requests for information about the subject property made by conveyancers that are sent to various agencies that hold that information, like local authorities. Enquiries are questions about the subject property that are sent to a seller to answer. These are interesting and important subjects within the conveyancing process and cover a lot of points that can be of considerable consequence to a buyer.
{"title":"6. Pre-Contract Searches and Enquiries","authors":"Robert M. Abbey, M. Richards","doi":"10.1093/HE/9780198823223.003.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HE/9780198823223.003.0006","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines pre-contract searches and enquiries. Searches are requests for information about the subject property made by conveyancers that are sent to various agencies that hold that information, like local authorities. Enquiries are questions about the subject property that are sent to a seller to answer. These are interesting and important subjects within the conveyancing process and cover a lot of points that can be of considerable consequence to a buyer.","PeriodicalId":88929,"journal":{"name":"Marquette intellectual property law review","volume":"91 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83767916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-28DOI: 10.1093/he/9780198823223.003.0004
Robert M. Abbey, M. Richards
This chapter discusses initial activities in the conveyancing process including advising joint buyers on co-ownership; advising buyers to have a survey of the property carried out before exchange of contracts; estate agents; capital gains tax; stamp duty land tax; client care and advice on costs; professional conduct; the Law Society’s National Conveyancing Protocol; and advising on finance.
{"title":"4. Taking Instructions and Other Initial Matters","authors":"Robert M. Abbey, M. Richards","doi":"10.1093/he/9780198823223.003.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198823223.003.0004","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter discusses initial activities in the conveyancing process including advising joint buyers on co-ownership; advising buyers to have a survey of the property carried out before exchange of contracts; estate agents; capital gains tax; stamp duty land tax; client care and advice on costs; professional conduct; the Law Society’s National Conveyancing Protocol; and advising on finance.","PeriodicalId":88929,"journal":{"name":"Marquette intellectual property law review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88220158","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In a society that constantly consumes information — news, celebrity gossip, trends and fashions — the interview is an invaluable mainstay of the information age. Journalists rely on interviews with politicians, celebrities, and intellectuals to draw in readers, who are in turn fascinated by interviews for their insight into the minds and lives of public figures. For such a ubiquitous and pervasive form of journalistic reporting, the law is astonishingly unclear about the copyright ownership of interviews. Courts have come to several contradictory holdings about the copyright ownership of interviews. Because of this lack of consensus, interviewees are able to chill journalistic speech by claiming a potentially unfounded copyright interest in their interviews, and interviewers are susceptible to interviewee demands of payment for republication rights. Until this issue is settled conclusively, interviewees’ claims of copyright interests in interviews could have serious ramifications for the business practices of journalists, resulting in costly and complicated negotiations that lead to higher transaction costs. This Note sets forth and analyzes the ways that courts have attempted to deal with the question of interview ownership, and proposes an alternative solution that addresses the interview as a singular, unified work, with copyright ownership based on the concept of “authorship” rather than individual statements made by separate parties.
{"title":"Wrestling Over Republication Rights: Who Owns the Copyright of Interviews?","authors":"Mary Catherine Amerine","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2878800","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2878800","url":null,"abstract":"In a society that constantly consumes information — news, celebrity gossip, trends and fashions — the interview is an invaluable mainstay of the information age. Journalists rely on interviews with politicians, celebrities, and intellectuals to draw in readers, who are in turn fascinated by interviews for their insight into the minds and lives of public figures. For such a ubiquitous and pervasive form of journalistic reporting, the law is astonishingly unclear about the copyright ownership of interviews. Courts have come to several contradictory holdings about the copyright ownership of interviews. Because of this lack of consensus, interviewees are able to chill journalistic speech by claiming a potentially unfounded copyright interest in their interviews, and interviewers are susceptible to interviewee demands of payment for republication rights. Until this issue is settled conclusively, interviewees’ claims of copyright interests in interviews could have serious ramifications for the business practices of journalists, resulting in costly and complicated negotiations that lead to higher transaction costs. This Note sets forth and analyzes the ways that courts have attempted to deal with the question of interview ownership, and proposes an alternative solution that addresses the interview as a singular, unified work, with copyright ownership based on the concept of “authorship” rather than individual statements made by separate parties.","PeriodicalId":88929,"journal":{"name":"Marquette intellectual property law review","volume":"21 1","pages":"159"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68413064","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-09-01DOI: 10.1093/he/9780198769958.003.0005
L. Bently, B. Sherman, D. Gangjee, Phillip Johnson
This chapter examines the concept of authorship, as it is understood in copyright law, as well as the first ownership of copyright and the various exceptions to this rule. It begins by discussing the author of a work as defined in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 before elaborating on the task of determining who the author of a work is. Authorship of literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works and of entrepreneurial works is then considered, along with joint authorship. The chapter also looks at exceptions to first ownership, including works created by employees, those governed by Crown copyright or made under the direction or control of Parliament, and commissioned works. Finally, it analyses the issue of harmonization with respect to authorship and the position of employed authors.
{"title":"5. Authorship and first ownership","authors":"L. Bently, B. Sherman, D. Gangjee, Phillip Johnson","doi":"10.1093/he/9780198769958.003.0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198769958.003.0005","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines the concept of authorship, as it is understood in copyright law, as well as the first ownership of copyright and the various exceptions to this rule. It begins by discussing the author of a work as defined in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 before elaborating on the task of determining who the author of a work is. Authorship of literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works and of entrepreneurial works is then considered, along with joint authorship. The chapter also looks at exceptions to first ownership, including works created by employees, those governed by Crown copyright or made under the direction or control of Parliament, and commissioned works. Finally, it analyses the issue of harmonization with respect to authorship and the position of employed authors.","PeriodicalId":88929,"journal":{"name":"Marquette intellectual property law review","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84671996","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-09-01DOI: 10.1093/he/9780198769958.003.0007
L. Bently, B. Sherman, D. Gangjee, Phillip Johnson
This chapter examines the debate over the question of the appropriate period of protection that ought to be granted to copyright works, with emphasis on literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works as well as films and entrepreneurial works (sound recordings, broadcasts, and typographical arrangements of published editions). It begins by considering the provisions of the EU Term Directive with regards to the duration of protection for such works and then discusses a number of exceptions to the general rule that the duration of copyright works is life plus 70 years. It also analyses moral rights of integrity and attribution in the UK in relation to copyright, as well as the so-called publication right in works in which copyright has lapsed. The chapter concludes with an assessment of the optimal term of copyright protection.
{"title":"7. Duration of copyright","authors":"L. Bently, B. Sherman, D. Gangjee, Phillip Johnson","doi":"10.1093/he/9780198769958.003.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198769958.003.0007","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines the debate over the question of the appropriate period of protection that ought to be granted to copyright works, with emphasis on literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works as well as films and entrepreneurial works (sound recordings, broadcasts, and typographical arrangements of published editions). It begins by considering the provisions of the EU Term Directive with regards to the duration of protection for such works and then discusses a number of exceptions to the general rule that the duration of copyright works is life plus 70 years. It also analyses moral rights of integrity and attribution in the UK in relation to copyright, as well as the so-called publication right in works in which copyright has lapsed. The chapter concludes with an assessment of the optimal term of copyright protection.","PeriodicalId":88929,"journal":{"name":"Marquette intellectual property law review","volume":"66 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86281186","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-09-01DOI: 10.1093/HE/9780198769958.003.0035
L. Bently, B. Sherman, D. Gangjee, Phillip Johnson
This chapter focuses on the process of registration for trade marks in the UK, the European Union, and other countries. It begins by explaining the differences in procedures and documentation needed in filing trade mark applications at the national, regional, and international levels. The role of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) in processing applications in the EU is considered, along with the international filing systems established under the 1891 Madrid Agreement and the 1989 Madrid Protocol. The chapter concludes by presenting possible avenues through which to acquire trade mark protection. It briefly considers the possible impacts of Brexit.
{"title":"35. Trade mark registration","authors":"L. Bently, B. Sherman, D. Gangjee, Phillip Johnson","doi":"10.1093/HE/9780198769958.003.0035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HE/9780198769958.003.0035","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter focuses on the process of registration for trade marks in the UK, the European Union, and other countries. It begins by explaining the differences in procedures and documentation needed in filing trade mark applications at the national, regional, and international levels. The role of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) in processing applications in the EU is considered, along with the international filing systems established under the 1891 Madrid Agreement and the 1989 Madrid Protocol. The chapter concludes by presenting possible avenues through which to acquire trade mark protection. It briefly considers the possible impacts of Brexit.","PeriodicalId":88929,"journal":{"name":"Marquette intellectual property law review","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81186955","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-09-01DOI: 10.1093/HE/9780198769958.003.0030
L. Bently, B. Sherman, D. Gangjee, Phillip Johnson
This chapter focuses on unregistered design right as a means to protect designs in the UK under Part III of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. It begins by considering the subsistence of the UK unregistered design right, with emphasis on the requirement that there be a ‘design’ and exclusions to design protection by the unregistered design right. It then discusses issues of ownership, duration, and infringement as well as the defences available in cases of infringement of unregistered designs. The chapter concludes with a brief explanation of sui generis right involving semiconductor chips.
{"title":"30. Uk unregistered design right","authors":"L. Bently, B. Sherman, D. Gangjee, Phillip Johnson","doi":"10.1093/HE/9780198769958.003.0030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HE/9780198769958.003.0030","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter focuses on unregistered design right as a means to protect designs in the UK under Part III of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. It begins by considering the subsistence of the UK unregistered design right, with emphasis on the requirement that there be a ‘design’ and exclusions to design protection by the unregistered design right. It then discusses issues of ownership, duration, and infringement as well as the defences available in cases of infringement of unregistered designs. The chapter concludes with a brief explanation of sui generis right involving semiconductor chips.","PeriodicalId":88929,"journal":{"name":"Marquette intellectual property law review","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75191490","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：