Theory of Property Rights and Copyright Protection of Computer Programs in Europe

1994 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-97
Author(s):  
MICHAEL LEHMANN
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Computer Programs

scholarly journals Peran Lembaga Manajemen Kolektif Sebagai Bentuk Perlindungan Hukum Pencipta Lagu Dan Pemilik Hak Terkait

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (01) ◽  
pp. 37-54
Author(s):  
Elly Hernawati
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Copyright Holder ◽  
Business Climate ◽  
Management Agency ◽  
Collective Management ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Right

Copyright is one of the Intellectual Property Rights components and should be paid attention to. Even more in technology era that developing, copyright protection needed to be enhanced, so that the right of creator, Copyright holder or owner of relevant rights can be protected and urge people to create. Indirectly, good and healthy business climate could be fostered.  Not all people have skill to create, that is why those people who have skill to create must be protected and even awarded, hoping that people urged to create. One of the creations that protected are song and music. In creating song or music, creator involve recording producer, music director or arranger. Regarding the creation, creator holds moral and economy rights, while parties involved hold the relevant rights to it. Collective Management Agency is an agency that help creator or relevant rights owner in managing and distributing the creation which is song or music that being commercialized. Yet the creator must be the member of the agency beforehand. Commercialization of a song or music by user can rise problem. Protection to the song or music is for the whole thing, including lyric, notation, arrangement and song title. The utilization of a song or music should be still protecting the parties that hold the copyright and the relevant right to it.

Legal and Economic Justifi cation for Software Protection

2011 ◽  
pp. 328-339
Author(s):  
Bruno de Vuyst
Keyword(s):  
Reverse Engineering ◽  
Open Source ◽  
Open Source Software ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
Computer Programs ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Software Protection ◽  
National Patent ◽  
The U.S

This chapter discusses legal and economic rationale in regards to open source software protection. Software programs are, under TRIPS1, protected by copyright (reference is made to the Berne Convention2). The issue with this protection is that, due to the dichotomy idea/expression that is typical for copyright protection, reverse engineering of software is not excluded, and copyright is hence found to be an insufficient protection. Hence, in the U.S., software makers have increasingly turned to patent protection. In Europe, there is an exclusion of computer programs in Article 52 (2) c) EPC (EPO, 1973), but this exclusion is increasingly narrowed and some call for abandoning the exclusion altogether. A proposal by the European Commission, made in 2002, called for a directive to allow national patent authorities to patent software in a broader way, so as to ensure further against reverse engineering; this proposal, however, was shelved in 2005 over active opposition within and outside the European parliament. In summary, open source software does not fit in any proprietary model; rather, it creates a freedom to operate. Ultimately, there is a need to rethink approaches to property law so as to allow for viable software packaging in both models.

USE OF COPYRIGHT PROTECTED WORKS IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 607
Author(s):  
Liene Vindele ◽  
Renāte Cāne
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Educational Process ◽  
Step Test ◽  
Legal Norms

Copyright is one of the intellectual property rights whose main activity is to promote creativity and protect the ownership of the author. However, these rights are not absolute and are subject to certain restrictions.In the Berne Convention, Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and also WIPO Copyright Treaty embodied so-called “three-step test” allowing exceptions to copyright protection. They state that exceptions to copyright protection are admissible only in specific cases; if they comply with the rules of normal exploitation of the author's work; and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate rights of the author.While respecting the restrictions contained in international conventions, the Latvian Copyright Law also lays down various restrictions, when the author's work can be used without a special permit for the use of the author's work or for free, such as in the educational or research process. The free use of copyright-protected materials constitutes a restriction on the economic rights of copyright holders. These restrictions aim to strike a balance between the rights of the author and the interests of the public. Although copyright-protected works can be used in education almost everywhere in the world, restrictions on the exercise of these rights have not been clearly established.The aim of this paper is to research limits use of copyright-protected works in the educational process. Basis for this analysis will be the international and national legal framework about copyright exceptions in educational process.In the development of the research used an analytical method of scientific research, as well as a method of interpreting grammatical, teleological and historical legal norms. For the conclusions used inductive and deductive method of scientific research. 

An Introduction to the Management and Protection of Intellectual Property Rights

2011 ◽  
pp. 223-248
Author(s):  
Bill Vassiliadis
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Digital Rights Management ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Web Engineering ◽  
Protecting Intellectual Property ◽  
Self Protection ◽  
Business Requirements

Copyright protection is becoming an important issue for organizations that create, use, and distribute digital content through e-commerce channels. As online corruption increases, new technical and business requirements are posed for protecting Intellectual Property Rights, such as watermarking, use of metadata, self-protection, and self-authentication. This chapter gives a review of the most important of these methods and analyses of their potential use in Digital Rights Management systems. We focus especially on watermarking, and argue that it has a true potential in e-business because it is possible to embed and detect multiple watermarks to a single digital artifact without decreasing its quality. In conjunction with parallel linking of content to metadata there is true potential for real life copyright-protection systems. Furthermore we attack the problem of DRM systems’ interoperability with Distributed License Catalogues (DLCs). The DLC concept, borrowed from Web engineering, makes available (‘advertises’) content or services concerning DRM functionalities, enabling multiparty DRM eco-systems.

Legal and Economic Justification for Software Protection

2009 ◽  
pp. 2831-2842
Author(s):  
Bruno de Vuyst ◽  
Alea Fairchild
Keyword(s):  
Reverse Engineering ◽  
Open Source ◽  
Open Source Software ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
Computer Programs ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Software Protection ◽  
National Patent ◽  
The U.S

This chapter discusses legal and economic rationale in regards to open source software protection. Software programs are, under TRIPS1, protected by copyright (reference is made to the Berne Convention2). The issue with this protection is that, due to the dichotomy idea/expression that is typical for copyright protection, reverse engineering of software is not excluded, and copyright is hence found to be an insufficient protection. Hence, in the U.S., software makers have increasingly turned to patent protection. In Europe, there is an exclusion of computer programs in Article 52 (2) c) EPC (EPO, 1973), but this exclusion is increasingly narrowed and some call for abandoning the exclusion altogether. A proposal by the European Commission, made in 2002, called for a directive to allow national patent authorities to patent software in a broader way, so as to ensure further against reverse engineering; this proposal, however, was shelved in 2005 over active opposition within and outside the European parliament. In summary, open source software does not fit in any proprietary model; rather, it creates a freedom to operate. Ultimately, there is a need to rethink approaches to property law so as to allow for viable software packaging in both models.

Copyright Protection for Software 2.0?

2021 ◽  
pp. 323-340
Author(s):  
Hao-Yun Chen
Keyword(s):  
Neural Network ◽  
Neural Networks ◽  
Network Structure ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Computer Programs ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
Copyright Laws ◽  
Neural Network Structure ◽  
Over Time

Traditionally, software programmers write a series of hard-coded rules to instruct a machine, step by step. However, with the ubiquity of neural networks, instead of giving specific instructions, programmers can write a skeleton of code to build a neural network structure, and then feed the machine with data sets, in order to have the machine write code by itself. Software containing the code written in this manner changes and evolves over time as new data sets are input and processed. This characteristic distinguishes it markedly from traditional software, and is partly the reason why it is referred to as ‘software 2.0’. Yet the vagueness of the scope of such software might make it ineligible for protection by copyright law. To properly understand and address this issue, this chapter will first review the current scope of computer program protection under copyright laws, and point out the potential inherent issues arising from the application of copyright law to software 2.0. After identifying related copyright law issues, this chapter will then examine the possible justification for protecting computer programs in the context of software 2.0, aiming to explore whether new exclusivity should be granted or not under copyright law, and if not, what alternatives are available to provide protection for the investment in the creation and maintenance of software 2.0.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document