Paternity Rights of Authors under Iraqi and English Law: A Comparative Study in the Field of Copyright and Author Rights

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Ali Mohammed Khalaf al-Fatlawi

Abstract Historically, Iraqi law has followed the Latin approach in the ambit of civil law, while English law is the creator of the ‘common law approach’. This has had an effect on the Iraqi doctrine for the protection of works in the field of intellectual property law. Therefore, Iraqi author rights have followed French law which grants authors many, in particular moral, rights on their works whilst English law restricts the rights of the author in kind of the moral rights. However, both laws grant authors important ‘paternity rights’ that prevent anyone from using a work without first receiving license from the author. Due to its importance in both laws, this article will try to explain paternity rights and its differences in Iraqi and English laws. This article will examine the scope paternity rights under both systems of law.

Author(s):  
Shyamkrishna Balganesh

Intellectual property law remains a body of private law, but for reasons that transcend its reliance on ideas and concepts from the common law of property and tort. This essay argues that the connection between forms of intellectual property law and private law is rooted in a form of autonomy that characterizes private law regimes—known as “redressive autonomy.” It shows how a strong commitment to redressive autonomy undergirds the unique right–duty structure of intellectual property, informs intellectual property’s central doctrines, and injects an additional layer of normative complexity into its functioning.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-117
Author(s):  
Camylla Soraya Angelino Oliveira ◽  
Eliaquim Ferreira dos Santos ◽  
Fabiana da Silva Santos ◽  
Laryssa Matias de Lima Santos ◽  
Paulo Ricardo Silva Lima ◽  
...  

RESUMO: O trabalho objetivou investigar o entendimento de alguns autores quanto ao assunto, além de estudar o que são os direitos fundamentais ligados aos direitos da personalidade e direito à imagem e o que as doutrinas hodiernas falam sobre considerar direitos da personalidade direitos fundamentais, no âmbito do Direito Civil e no Direito da Propriedade Intelectual. Muito se tem discutido se o Direito à Imagem e de personalidade estariam no campo de proteção do Direito Civil ou no Direito da Propriedade Intelectual, com base no que dispõe o caput do art. 24 da Lei de Direitos Autorais que dispõe sobre a proteção aos direitos morais do autor, inclusive o de se manter no anonimato, através das obras pseudônimas ou de não ver publicado certas obras por este escritas, mantendo-as inéditas ou escritas por outras pessoas, mas que digam respeito a sua pessoa. O STF em decisão unânime declarou inexigível o consentimento de pessoa biografada relativamente a obras biográficas literárias ou audiovisuais. A problemática residiu na possibilidade da existência desses direitos e na possibilidade da tutela transversal, onde o uso não autorizado de imagem encontra limitações firmadas pela doutrina e jurisprudência, como a exploração econômica da vítima que teve suas obras expostas na mídia sem autorização e, a depender do conteúdo, a denegrição da imagem. Concluiu-se que os direitos supramencionados são frutos de uma evolução jurídica em que os sistemas jurídicos contemporâneos se constituem com o dos Direitos estudados. Para tanto se utilizou do método de revisão bibliográfica qualitativa de abordagem dedutiva.PALAVRAS CHAVE: Direitos autorais, Direitos morais do autor, Responsabilidade civil. Right to Image and the Right to Personality: a parallel between Civil Law and Intellectual Property Law ABSTRACT: This work aims to investigate the understanding of some authors on the subject, as well as to study what are the fundamental rights related to personality rights and the right to image and what current doctrines speak about considering rights of personality fundamental rights in the scope of Law Civil and Intellectual Property Law. Much has been debated whether the Right to Image and personality would be in the field of protection of Civil Law or Intellectual Property Law, based on what the caput of art. 24 of the Copyright Law that provides for the protection of the author's moral rights, including to remain anonymous, through pseudonymous works or not to see published works by this writing, keeping them unpublished or written by other people, but which concern your person. The STF in a unanimous decision declared the consent of a person biographical in relation to biographical literary or audiovisual works unenforceable. The problem lies in the possibility of the existence of these rights and in the possibility of transverse protection, where the unauthorized use of image has limitations established by the doctrine and jurisprudence, such as the economic exploitation of the victim who had his works exposed in the media without authorization and depending of content, denigrating the image. It is concluded that the above rights are the result of a legal evolution in which the contemporary legal systems are constituted with the rights studied. For this purpose, the method of qualitative bibliographical review of the deductive approach will be used.KEYWORDS: Copyright, Author's moral rights, Civil liability.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 141-152
Author(s):  
Dilan Thampapillai ◽  
Sam Wall

Abstract There is undoubtedly a consensus within the international community that ‘vaccine nationalism’ is an undesirable state of affairs. However, states are self-interested actors and in the absence of constraints imposed by international economic law this pursuit of rational self-interest is likely to result in an outcome that is unjust on a global scale. The recent proposal by India and South Africa to suspend TRIPS obligations for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic has been rejected within the WTO. This proposal constitutes a recognition of the inadequacies surrounding the TRIPS compulsory licensing scheme. Yet, the immersion of intellectual property law within international investment law together with the proliferation of free trade agreements containing TRIPS-plus obligations would likely have made such a proposal unworkable. We argue that the fundamental problem is that the TRIPS Agreement lacks a defined concept of conscience that governs both its operation and interpretation. Such a principle exists in the common law within the field of private law. The principle, in its various doctrinal iterations, navigates the tensions between different parties while serving an underlying purpose of justice within the common law. It has much to offer international intellectual property law.


Author(s):  
Daniel Visser

Unjustified enrichment confronted both civil and common lawyers with thinking which was often completely outside the paradigm to which they had become accustomed. The recognition of unjustified enrichment as a cause of action in its own right in English law created a new arena of uncertainty between the systems. This article argues that comparative lawyers can make an important contribution to the future of the fractured and fractious world of unjustified enrichment. It may help to uncover the enormous wealth of learning of which both the common law and the civil law are the repositories, and so bring the same level of understanding to the law of unjustified enrichment which has, over the years, been achieved between the systems in regard to contract and tort.


2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 267
Author(s):  
Nader Ghanbari ◽  
Hassan Mohseni ◽  
Dawood Nassiran

Comparing the legal systems is a specific method in which due to its important function is considered as a separate branch in law. None of the branches in law can place its knowledge merely on ideas and findings within the national borders. Several basic objections have been given regarding the definition and purpose of comparative study in civil procedure. In addition there are specific problems regarding studying practically the similar systems in a legal system like differences in purpose, definition and concept. In different legal systems like civil law and common law systems in which there is a divergence, even the judicial system`s organs and judges` appointment and judicial formalism are different, which add to the problems of the comparative study. Reviewing these differences could lead to a better understanding of these legal systems and recognizing the common principles in making use of each other`s findings considering these differences and indicate the obstacles of comparative study in this regard.


2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Nikhil Agarwal ◽  
Vinayak Ojha

In the wake of increasing globalization and technical advancements in the digital field, the dissemination of creative work has become easier than ever. However, this development has come with its own set of challenges, particularly for Intellectual Property Law, as most of online transfer of information is unregulated. Digitalization has lead to the imminent need for standardized and stringent protection of an author‟s work. While this protection is mainly conceived as commercial right of the author on his work, there is another fundamental element to it, which is equally important and cannot be neglected, i.e., moral rights. These rights include right of attribution and integrity and are so inextricably related, that they stay with the author, even after transfer of economic rights on the work. In order to ensure effective globalized protection, there is a requirement for minimum standards of protection in all domestic laws, as was provided in the TRIPS agreement. This paper analyzes the Moral Rights regime as envisaged by the TRIPS agreement, and the monoist and dualist approaches that have been adopted by different countries. It also analyzes the evolution of moral rights in India.


Author(s):  
Tim Press

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. Intellectual Property Concentrate is the essential study and revision guide for intellectual property law students. The clear, succinct coverage enables you to quickly grasp the fundamental principles of this area of law and helps you to succeed in exams. After an introduction to intellectual property and common themes, the book covers: copyright; computer programs and databases; moral rights; performers’ rights; trade secrets and confidential information; patents; designs; and passing-off and trade marks. Written by experts and covering all the key topics so you can approach your exams with confidence, the book is: clear, concise, and easy to use, helping you get the most out of your revision; full of learning features and tips to show you how best to impress your examiner; and accompanied by online resources including multiple-choice questions and interactive flashcards to test your understanding of topics. Its ‘Exam essentials’ feature prepares you for your intellectual property law exam by giving help and guidance on how to approach questions, structure answers, and avoid common pitfalls.


property is form of property means that what you have learnt abut property law will be of some use in this area too. Property can be divided into several different categories. There is tangible property and there is intangible: there is real property (land) and there is personal property: and there are choses in possession and choses in action. Intellectual property is a species of chose in action. It is recoverable by the owner by action. It can be owned but not possessed. However, it can be stolen: the definition of property in the Theft Act 1968 is broad enough to embrace intellectual property, though the sort of act that amounts to an infringement lacks the actus reus of theft. In fact, patents are not strictly speaking choses in action. Section 30(1) and Schedule 2 of the Patents Act 1977 reverse the common law position (see Re Heath’s Patent (1912) 56 Sol Jo 538 and Edwards and Co v Picard [1909] 2 KB 903, 905 (CA), per Vaughan Williams LJ and, on future patent rights, see Printing and Numerical Registering Co v Sampson (1875) LR 19 Eq 462) and declare that patents are not choses in action. Sir Raymond Evershed, the then Master of the Rolls, stated in 1952: ‘An English patent is a species of English property of the nature of a chose in action and peculiar in character’, British Nylon Spinners Ltd v ICI Ltd [1953] Ch 19, 26 [1952] 2 All ER 780, 783, CA, cited in the substantive hearing of the same case [1955] Ch 37, 51, [1954] 3 All ER 88, 91. See also Beecham Group plc v Gist-Brocades NV [1986] 1 WLR 51, 59, HL, per Lord Diplock. Copyright has also been expressly stated by the courts to be a chose in action. See Chaplin v Leslie Frewin (Publishers) Ltd [1966] Ch 71, [1965] 3 All ER 764, CA; Patterson Zochonis and Co Ltd v Mefarkin Packaging Ltd [1986] 3 All ER 522 (CA); Cambell Connolly & Co Ltd v Noble [1963] 1 All ER 237, [1963] 1 WLR 252. And as a leading text of its era said:


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document