Computer-generated Works under the CDPA 1988

2021 ◽  
pp. 177-195
Author(s):  
Jyh-An Lee
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Policy Perspective ◽  
Human Creativity ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
Joint Authorship

Copyright protection in some commonwealth jurisdictions extends to computer-generated works. Although many scholars deem the right over computer-generated works to be a neighbouring right, it is still not clear under what circumstances a work is a computer-generated work. With the increasing application of artificial intelligence (AI), the copyright controversies associated with computer-generated works have become even more complicated. This chapter focuses on policy and legal issues surrounding the output of AI and copyright protection of computer-generated work under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act (CDPA) 1988 in the UK. The CDPA approach to computer-generated work deviates from the mainstream international copyright practices, where human creativity is essential for authorship and copyright protection. From a policy perspective, it is important to explore whether this deviation can be justified. This chapter also investigates authorship issues concerning computer-generated works based on case law and its application, in particular who the person making the necessary arrangements is, and what the necessary arrangements in the AI environment are. Other issues relevant to computer-generated work, such as copyright term and joint authorship will be analysed as well.

Artificial intelligence: HR friend or foe?

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 47-51
Author(s):  
Peter Hogg
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Business Leaders ◽  
Business Decision ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Use Of Technology ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
Productivity Dilemma

Purpose While the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the workplace is on the rise, few understand how it will affect our jobs. Will it be a hindrance? A threat? Or the solution to the current productivity dilemma? As with any new, and largely untested, technology, AI brings both challenges and opportunities that we need to be conscious of. Design/methodology/approach The current and potential future implementation of AI technologies at Schneider Electric is assessed. Findings In HR, it is our responsibility to help navigate business leaders towards making the best business decision, often with the use of technology. AI, like analytics before it, has huge potential. Originality/value What we know for sure, is that the development of human talent has become one of the top priorities for global CEOs. With severe talent shortages in the UK, finding the right candidates for the job and investing in their professional development and well-being to keep them for longer look like no-brainers.

scholarly journals Right of Access under GDPR and Copyright

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-246
Author(s):  
Angela Sobolčiaková
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Main Question ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Access Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
Data Subject

The paper discusses the right to obtain a copy of personal data based on the access right guaranteed in Articles 15 (3) and limited in 15 (4) of the GDPR. Main question is to what extent, the access right provided to data subject under the data protection rules is compatible with copyright. We argue that the subject matter of Article 15 (3) of the GDPR - copy of personal data – may infringe copyright protection of third parties but not a copyright protection attributed to the data controllers.Firstly, because the right of access and copyright may be in certain circumstances incompatible. Secondly, the data controllers are primarily responsible for balancing conflicting rights and neutral balancing exercise could only be applied by the Data Protection Authorities. Thirdly, the case law of the CJEU regarding this issue will need to be developed because the copy as a result of access right may be considered as a new element in data protection law.

From the gut? Questions on Artificial Intelligence and music

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 503-513
Author(s):  
Florian Koempel ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Music Industry ◽  
Training Process ◽  
Sound Recordings ◽  
Legal Requirement ◽  
Human Creativity ◽  
Musical Works ◽  
Youtube Videos ◽  
The Eu

AI applications are manifold in the music industry, both as tools assisting composers in creating and as music generating machines. AI applications assisting composers are widely used, for example in providing drum sequences or mastering services. AI-generated music is mainly used as production music, for example in synchronizing YouTube videos. Copyright implications relate initially to the use of existing works to train the computer, and secondly to the copyright protection for AI-generated musical works or sound recordings. This article firstly looks at the copyright acts involved in the training process in the EU, UK and US as well as potentially applicable exceptions. Secondly, it addresses the copyright position of AI-generated music and in particular the legal requirement of human creativity as the basis of copyright protection for musical works. The situation for sound recordings might be different.

scholarly journals Interpreting retained EU private law post-Brexit: Can commonwealth comparisons help us determine the future relevance of CJEU case law?

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 15-38
Author(s):  
Paula Giliker
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

In June 2016, the United Kingdom voted in a referendum to leave the European Union (EU). The consequences of Brexit are wide-ranging, but, from a legal perspective, it will entail the repeal of the European Communities Act 1972. The UK government does not intend to repeal EU law which is in existence on exit day, but, in terms of the interpretation of retained law, decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) will no longer be binding after Brexit. Nevertheless, s. 6(2) of the EU (Withdrawal) Act 2018 does allow the UK courts to continue to pay regard to EU law and decisions of the CJEU ‘so far as it is relevant to any matter before the court’. This article will consider the meaning of the phrase ‘ may have regard to anything…so far as it is relevant’. In empowering the courts to consider post-Brexit CJEU authority subject to the undefined criterion of relevancy, how is this power likely to be exercised? A comparison will be drawn with the treatment of Privy Council and the UK case law in Commonwealth courts following the abolition of the right of appeal to the Privy Council, with particular reference to the example of Australia. It will be argued that guidance may be obtained from the common law legal family which can help us predict the future relevance and persuasiveness of CJEU case law in the interpretation of retained EU private law.

School Bans on the Wearing of Religious Symbols: Examining the Implications of Recent Case Law from the UK

2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erica Howard
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Religious Symbols ◽  
Article 9 ◽  
European Court ◽  
Religious Clothing ◽  
Religious Dress ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

AbstractThis article examines school bans on the wearing of religious symbols and starts with a discussion of the arguments for the imposition of a ban and the counter arguments against these. The question whether a ban on the wearing of religious clothing in schools is a violation of the right to manifest one's religion as guaranteed by Article 9 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) is analyzed using the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and of the English courts in relation to such bans in education. The cases appear to suggest that such bans can be considered an interference with the right to manifest one's religion under Article 9(1), but that these bans can be justified under Article 9(2) in certain circumstances. Two important considerations in the decision of the courts are the way decisions to ban certain forms of religious dress are made and whether alternative ways of manifesting the religion are available.

Some Constitutional Thoughts about the Islamic Full Veil Ban in Europe

ICL Journal ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Benito Aláez Corral
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Space ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Spaces ◽  
Public Institutions ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Countries ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

AbstractThis work deals critically with the Islamic full veil ban in public spaces, that is start­ing to be adopted in some European countries and is being echoed in some regulations in Spanish municipalities. After a brief analysis of the general bans recently passed in Belgium and France and of the partial bans adopted in schools by other countries, like Germany, Ita­ly or the UK, the article analyses the constitutionality of the recently approved municipal bans in Spain from a constitutional perspective, including the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. The author reaches the conclusion that according to the Sp Const 1978 an adequate interpretation of the limitations to the freedom of religion and the right to one’s own image, involved when wearing an Islamic full veil, would make a general ban on the full veil in each and every public space unconstitutional, but would allow its partial ban regarding the access to municipal buildings or services or regarding teachers and pupils at schools, as far as these partial bans could be justified by constitutional values like safeguarding of public institutions or services, or protecting the fundamental rights of others. `

scholarly journals Schengen and the Administration of Exclusion: Legal Remedies Caught in between Entry Bans, Risk Assessment and Artificial Intelligence

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 485-507
Author(s):  
Evelien Brouwer
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Information System ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Order ◽  
Security Risk ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection

Abstract To create an area in which persons can move freely, the Schengen states committed to control their external borders to prevent irregular immigration and the entry of third-country nationals (TCN s) who are considered to be ‘a public order and security risk’. The exclusion of ‘unwanted aliens’ can be based on the mutual enforcement of national decisions, such as entry bans reported in the Schengen Information System, or objections against the issuing of a Schengen visa, based on the consultation procedure in the Visa Code. This contribution focuses on the right of TCN s to have access to effective remedies, both with regard to existing and newer mechanisms of exclusion. It argues that when dealing with the use of large-scale databases and risk assessment as basis for excluding admission, existing rules and case-law by the CJEU should be taken into account to ensure access to effective judicial protection for TCN s.

The Law and Regulation of Medicines and Medical Devices

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Feldschreiber
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Regulatory Policy ◽  
Product Liability ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Senior Executives ◽  
Medicinal Products ◽  
Technical Issues ◽  
The Uk ◽  
And Function

This book focuses on the science and regulatory policy and law surrounding the discovery, development, and marketing of new medicines. It reviews consumer protection and intellectual property laws that are applicable to the development and commercialisation of medicinal products. It also provides a deeper understanding of the scientific and technical issues for lawyers and legal issues for those involved with regulatory policy and decision-making, such as senior executives in the pharmaceutical industry. The book covers the European and UK legislation on medicines and healthcare products together with the UK implementing legislation and instruments, and key case law. It discusses the structure and function of the regulatory authorities, applications to carry out clinical trials, intellectual property issues, product liability issues, and litigation.

Can a Patent Be Granted for an AI-Generated Invention?

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (11) ◽  
pp. 1123-1129
Author(s):  
Andreas Engel
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
European Patent Office ◽  
European Patent ◽  
Patent Office ◽  
Policy Perspective ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Rule Out ◽  
Formal Rules

Abstract Three patent offices had to answer the question of whether a patent can be granted for an invention for which an Artificial Intelligence (AI) system called DABUS was named as inventor. All applications were dismissed, but for different reasons. While the European Patent Office focused on formal rules, the UK Intellectual Property Office considered more substantive aspects, and the US Patent and Trademark Office relied on statutory language. From a policy perspective, the decisions find support in the fact that there is no clear consensus for AI to be recognized as an inventor, and that difficult questions would ensue if this were accepted. From a doctrinal perspective, the decisions do not rule out the patentability of AI-assisted inventions in general, as it remains possible to designate a human inventor when AI has merely facilitated the inventive process. This leaves the question of who should own a patent for an AI-generated invention, if patentability for such inventions is considered desirable. A possible solution could be to grant ownership directly to the company operating or owning the AI.

scholarly journals The Right to a Fair Trial in Automated Civil Proceedings

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-44
Author(s):  
Maria Dymitruk
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Reasonable Time ◽  
European Court ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Right

Challenges associated with the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in law are one of the most hotly debated issues today. This paper draws attention to the question of how to safeguard the right to a fair trial in the light of rapidly changing technologies significantly affecting the judiciary and enabling automation of the civil procedure. The paper does not intend to comprehensively address all aspects related to the right to a fair trial in the context of the automation of civil proceedings but rather seeks to analyse some legal concerns from the perspective of the Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. Section 1 discusses the issues of using artificial intelligence in the justice and automation of the judicial proceedings. Section 2 is devoted to the judge supporting system based on artificial intelligence and psychological requirements of its practical use. Section 3 presents the right to a fair trial in civil cases established by the Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, while subsequent sections characterize its elements with respect to the possibility to automate civil proceedings: a right to have case heard within a reasonable time in section 4 and a right to a reasoned judgment in section 5.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document