11. Qualification

2019 ◽  
pp. 208-211
Author(s):  
Paul Torremans
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Personal Relationship ◽  
Berne Convention ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
Artistic Works ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Principle Of National Treatment

This chapter discusses the qualification requirement for copyright protection in the UK. The UK copyright system is based on the principle of national treatment contained in the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works 1886, in the Universal Copyright Convention, and in the TRIPS Agreement. This requires that authors connected with another member state are to be treated in the same way as a member state’s own authors and should receive the same copyright protection. That connection with a member state might be provided in two ways: the author may have a personal relationship with the member state, or the work may be first published in that member state.

7. Duration of copyright

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Bently ◽  
B. Sherman ◽  
D. Gangjee ◽  
P. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Copyright Protection ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Moral Rights ◽  
Sound Recordings ◽  
Artistic Works ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Duration Of Protection ◽  
The Eu

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.

scholarly journals KEBERADAAN DAN IMPLIKASI PRINSIP MFN DAN NT DALAM PENGATURAN HAK KEKAYAAN INTELEKTUAL DI INDONESIA

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ni Ketut Supasti Dharmawan
Keyword(s):  
Research Methods ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
Legal Text ◽  
Unequal Size ◽  
Principle Of National Treatment

The WTO – TRIPs Agreement regulates the principle of non- discrimination which must be complied by its member countries. There are two principle of non discriminationnamely the principle of National Treatment ( NT ) and Most Favoured Nations principle (MFN).  This study focus to the adoption of MFN and NT principles into IntellectualProperty Rights  laws of Indonesia whether it harmony with the legal system in Indonesia.   This study uses the normative legal research methods by using  conceptual approachand statute approach . The  legal materials that studies in this research  consists of thePrimary Legal Materials : Act No.  19 of  2002 , Act No. No. . 15 of 2001, Act No. 14 of2001,  as well as the TRIPs Agreement.  Secondary legal materials studied in this research are  legal text books and law journals related to NT and MFN principle in the field of IntellectualProperty Rights.                                  .The results showed that the Principle of Non Discrimination System in the form of theprinciple of National Treatment (NT) expressly governed through  Article 3 TRIPsAgreement and the principle of Most Favoured Nations (MFN) regulated  through  Article 4TRIPS Agreement.  As a member of WTO-TRIPs Agreement, Indonesia should comply andadopt the MFN and NT principles into IPR laws. Currently those principles exist implicitlyand explicitly such as in the Act No. 19 of 2002, the Act No. 14 of 2001, and the Act No. 15of 2001.  Although the MFN and NT principles has already adopted, it is still need moreeffort to implement the principle of non Discrimination, especially in the relationshipbetween Indonesia and other unequal size countries, between developing and developedcountries.

29. Copyright protection for designs

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Bently ◽  
B. Sherman ◽  
D. Gangjee ◽  
P. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Artistic Works ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Design Protection

This chapter deals with the conditions under which copyright law might protect designs as well as the limitations on the term of design protection. It first considers the subsistence of copyright in designs via two routes: either directly, by protecting the form and decoration of articles as artistic works (particularly sculptures, engravings, or works of artistic craftsmanship), or indirectly, by protecting the author of a preliminary document on which a design is based. It then discusses section 52 of the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, which limited the term of protection of copyright for mass-produced designs to twenty-five years, and its demise.

12. The term of copyright

2019 ◽  
pp. 212-218
Author(s):  
Paul Torremans
Keyword(s):  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Basic Rule ◽  
Sound Recordings ◽  
Artistic Works ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

This chapter discusses the duration of copyright protection in the UK. The basic rule is that the term of copyright has been harmonized at life of the author plus 70 years in the EU. The basic rule applies to the original category of works (literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works) and to films. Entrepreneurial works, such as sound recordings and broadcasts, receive 50 years of copyright protection. Performances fixated in a phonogram will in future be protected for 70 years. The term of protection for typographical arrangements is 25 years.

4. Criteria for protection

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Bently ◽  
B. Sherman ◽  
D. Gangjee ◽  
P. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Sound Recordings ◽  
Original Works ◽  
The Common ◽  
Artistic Works ◽  
European Standards ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Material Form

This chapter examines the criteria used to determine whether a work is to be protected by copyright. More specifically, it considers the requirements for copyright protection: the work must be recorded in a material form; must be ‘original’; should be sufficiently connected to the UK to qualify for protection under UK law; and should not be excluded from protection on public policy grounds. The originality requirement applies to literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works (authorial works), not to entrepreneurial works (sound recordings, films, broadcasts, and typographical arrangements). The common characteristics of originality are also discussed, along with British conception of originality, harmonization of ‘originality’ in Europe, differences between British and European standards on originality, and the issue of whether the UK can-and does-protect non-original works. The chapter concludes by focusing on subject matter excluded from copyright protection.

Brexit and the EU Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deirdre Curtin
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Data Retention ◽  
Free Zone ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

UK involvement in the EU Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice (AFSJ) has been patchy. It never joined the Schengen border-free zone, and when in 2014 it exercised a block exit from all AFSJ measures, it selectively rejoined a substantial number. Even if partially outside, the UK has been a leader inside. Advanced intelligence capabilities meant it provided important support to the functioning of agencies such as Europol and UK laws inspired EU laws, for example, on data retention. The need to preserve some pragmatic forms of cooperation between the UK and the EU is obvious and shared by the UK security establishment. There is a partial institutional precedent . When Denmark rejected participation in Europol in a popular referendum, the Danish government obtained a deal from the EU institutions which allows it to remain associated to Europol as a ‘third country’ (and a Member State). The bespoke Brexit reality may prove even more complex.

scholarly journals Copyright and Copyright Protection

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 36
Author(s):  
Safet Emruli ◽  
Agim Nuhiu ◽  
Besa Kadriu
Keyword(s):  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Key Agreement ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Moral Rights ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Financial Reward ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
Bern Convention ◽  
Artistic Works ◽  
The Right

One of the legal intellectual property disciplines are copyrights which concerns artistic and literary works. Copyright is: bundle of exclusive legal rights that has to do with protection of literary and artistic works. It is granted to authors and artists to protect expressive works against unauthorized reproduction or distribution by third parties. Copyright protect “works”, expression of thoughts and ideas. Literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works must be original, it means not to be a copy. Copyright covers two other types of right: economic rights, the right of the owner to benefit financial reward from use of his work by others and moral rights which always have to do with original holder no matter if economic rights are transferred or not. Economic rights can be transferred. Bern Convention for the Protection of the Literary and Artistic Works is international key agreement and the oldest multilateral agreement in the field of copyright. Copyright subsists automatically on the creation of a work, no application needed, nor do any formalities apply. Nature of copyright is territorial and the minimum term of protection is life of the author plus 50 years after his/her death. In European Union and in certain number of countries, terms of protections of are extended to life of the author plus 70 years after his/her death.

The Flexible Copyright Exception for ‘Non-Enjoyment’ Purposes ‒ Recent Amendment in Japan and Its Implication

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatsuhiro Ueno
Keyword(s):  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
Theoretical Justification ◽  
Fair Dealing ◽  
The Us ◽  
General Clause ◽  
Copyright Exception ◽  
The Uk ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Text And Data Mining

Abstract After the long discussions in Japan over the introduction of a general clause on copyright exceptions since 2007, the ‘flexible’ provisions on copyright exceptions (Arts. 30-4, 47-4 and 47-5) were finally introduced into the Japanese Copyright Act in 2018 and came into effect in 2019. They differ widely from the US fair use clause and the UK fair dealing provisions. This article focuses on Art. 30-4, which comprehensively allows an exploitation of a work that is aimed at neither enjoying nor causing another person to enjoy the work. In particular, any exploitation for text-and-data mining (TDM) is widely permitted by any means under Art. 30-4, including for commercial purposes. The underlying theory behind this relates to the nature of copyright, or the justification for copyright protection that an exploitation not for ‘enjoyment’ purposes is beyond the inherent scope of copyright because it does not prejudice the opportunities of the copyright holders to receive compensation. While this might sound unusual, it is interesting to note that some similar theories can be found in Europe, some of which try to widely exclude TDM activities from the scope of copyright based on the idea of ‘a use as a work’. Considering such common characteristics of the theories regarding copyright and ‘enjoyment’ of a work, Art. 30-4 of the Japanese Copyright Act and the theoretical justification for it might have implications for other jurisdictions regarding copyright exceptions or the substantive scope of copyright.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document