scholarly journals So Dark the Con(tu) of Man: The Quest for a Software Derivative Work Right in Section 117

2007 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lateef Mtima
Keyword(s):  
Computer Software ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Copyright Holder ◽  
User Adaptation ◽  
New Public ◽  
Derivative Work ◽  
Software Programs ◽  
Exclusive Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Judicial Recognition

Computer software programs have various unique characteristics as copyrightable works. Among other things, unlike traditional copyrightable works, it is necessary to copy and often to modify software programs in order to use them. In addition, as functional works, the development of additional programs, an overarching goal of copyright protection, often requires the “efficient reuse” of protected elements of preexisting programs. The copyright law currently provides an ambiguous and contradictory response to these issues. While section 117 of the Copyright Act provides program users with the privilege to prepare “adaptations” of copyrighted programs, section 106 reserves to copyright holders the exclusive right to prepare derivative versions of their programs. This article proposes that user adaptation privileges can be distinguished from, and reconciled with, copyright holder derivative work exclusive rights by virtue of the impact that a user-prepared adaptation will have upon the market for the original copyrighted program: “market benign” adaptations should be treated as privileged adaptations, while “market pernicious” adaptations should be treated as derivative works and therefore, subject to the rights of the copyright holder in the original program.In addition, the “practical-use versus market-impact” balancing rationale used to draw the foregoing distinction can also be used to reconstruct the traditional derivative work right into a narrower “software derivative work right.” This software derivative work right would limit the copyright holder’s exclusive right to that of creating derivative programs that are likely to compete with, or otherwise have an undue impact on the market for, the original copyrighted software program. This would enable judicial recognition of a new “public derivative work privilege” to create non-competitive derivative software programs from preexisting works.

scholarly journals So Dark the Con(tu) of Man: The Quest for a Software Derivative Work Right in Section 117

2008 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lateef Mtima
Keyword(s):  
Computer Software ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Copyright Holder ◽  
User Adaptation ◽  
New Public ◽  
Derivative Work ◽  
Software Programs ◽  
Exclusive Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Judicial Recognition

Computer software programs have various unique characteristics as copyrightable works. Among other things, unlike traditional copyrightable works, it is necessary to copy and often to modify software programs in order to use them. In addition, as functional works, the development of additional programs, an overarching goal of copyright protection, often requires the “efficient reuse” of protected elements of preexisting programs. The copyright law currently provides an ambiguous and contradictory response to these issues. While section 117 of the Copyright Act provides program users with the privilege to prepare “adaptations” of copyrighted programs, section 106 reserves to copyright holders the exclusive right to prepare derivative versions of their programs. This article proposes that user adaptation privileges can be distinguished from, and reconciled with, copyright holder derivative work exclusive rights by virtue of the impact that a user-prepared adaptation will have upon the market for the original copyrighted program: “market benign” adaptations should be treated as privileged adaptations, while “market pernicious” adaptations should be treated as derivative works and therefore, subject to the rights of the copyright holder in the original program. In addition, the “practical-use versus market-impact” balancing rationale used to draw the foregoing distinction can also be used to reconstruct the traditional derivative work right into a narrower “software derivative work right.” This software derivative work right would limit the copyright holder’s exclusive right to that of creating derivative programs that are likely to compete with, or otherwise have an undue impact on the market for, the original copyrighted software program. This would enable judicial recognition of a new “public derivative work privilege” to create non-competitive derivative software programs from preexisting works.

scholarly journals Urgensi Perubahan Delik Biasa Menjadi Delik Aduan dan Relevansinya terhadap Perlindungan dan Penegakan Hak Cipta

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 347-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanafi Amrani
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Active Role ◽  
Copyright Infringement ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Copyright Holder ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Exclusive Right

This article discusses two main issues: first, what is the urgency of the change in nature of offences from ordinary offence to be complaint offence in the copyright law; second, how is the relevance of the change in the nature of the offense to protect and enforce copyright. The urgency of changes in offenses is usually an offense against complaints because copyright is an exclusive right that is personal and civil rights. This personal and civil right indicate the absolute right of the creator or the copyright holder to the results of their work, including the right to report or not to infringe their copyright. Therefore conceptually this personal and civilian nature emphasizes the alignment of mindset that the complaint offence is more appropriately applied to copyright infringement. Whereas the relevance of complaint offence for protection and enforcement of copyright can be seen from the significant role of the creator or copyright holder in the law enforcement process. The creator or copyright holder can play an active role in providing information and evidence of copyright infringement so that the law enforcement process becomes more effective and efficient. Abstrak Artikel ini membahas dua permasalahan pokok: pertama, apa urgensi perubahan delik biasa menjadi delik aduan dalam Undang-undang Hak Cipta; kedua, bagaimana relevansi perubahan sifat delik tersebut terhadap perlindungan dan penegakan hukum hak cipta. Urgensi perubahan delik biasa menjadi delik aduan adalah karena hak cipta merupakan hak eksklusif yang bersifat personal dan keperdataan. Sifat personal dan keperdataan ini mengindikasikan adanya hak mutlak dari pencipta atau pemegang hak cipta atas hasil karya ciptanya, termasuk hak untuk melaporkan atau tidak atas pelanggaran hak ciptanya. Oleh karena itu secara konseptual sifat personal dan keperdataan ini lebih mengedepankan keselarasan pola pikir bahwa delik aduan lebih tepat diterapkan terhadap pelanggaran hak cipta. Sedangkan relevansi delik aduan terhadap perlindungan dan penegakan hak cipta dapat dilihat dari peran yang signifikan dari pencipta atau pemegang hak cipta dalam proses penegakan hukum. Pencipta atau pemegang hak cipta dapat berperan aktif dalam memberikan keterangan dan bukti-bukti dari pelanggaran hak cipta tersebut sehingga proses penegakan hukum dapat berjalan lebih efektif dan efisien.

scholarly journals A LEGAL AWARENESS OF COPYRIGHT ON REGIONAL SONG CREATORS

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 49
Author(s):  
Muchtar A H Labetubun
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Specific Information ◽  
Copyright Holder ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Collective Management ◽  
Right To Copy ◽  
The Right ◽  
Exclusive Right ◽  
Economic Standpoint

Copyright as an exclusive right for the creator or copyright holder to carry out the results of his ideas or ideas in the form of specific information or certain. Basically, copyright is the right to copy, adapt or produce a work, copyright is possible for the right holder to limit the copying or in any form without the illegitimate permission of a work, it can be realized by registration copyright, in its application, of course, there are obstacles that exist in the enforcement of copyright law itself. One example is the lack of awareness in registration copyright of songs by the creator. The research objective was to determine and analyze the legal awareness of regional pop songwriters to register their copyright. The research method uses normative research through a conceptual approach and a statue approach. The results show that the composers of regional pop songs know the importance of recording copyright because it is in accordance with the mandate of Act No. 28 of 2014 concerning Copyright and has also participated in the socialization carried out by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, but songwriters do not record their work. Some songwriters consider that the registration is of no use because, from an economic standpoint, they cannot profit or lose personally, besides that their aspirations have not been fully channeled by the related institutions they shelter in this case the Collective Management Institute. Therefore to decide on the sale of the song's copyrighted work rather than registering it to the Ministry of Law and Human Rights in the Field of Intellectual Property.

scholarly journals PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP PENCIPTA LAGU “LAGI SYANTIK” ATAS PERUBAHAN LIRIK TANPA IZIN PEMEGANG HAK CIPTA

Yurispruden ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Lully Tiyas Junita
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Copyright Infringement ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Copyright Holder ◽  
Legal Regulations ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Exclusive Right

ABSTRACTCopyright is an exclusive right that arises automatically based on declarative principles after the creation is in real or visualized form. Legal protection for songwriters is regulated in Law Number 28 of 2014 concerning Copyright. This research covers two main problems. First one, how is the implementation of copyright infringement on the song "Lagi Syantik" which is sung without permission from the copyright holder? The second, how is the legal protection of authors for songs whose lyrics have been changed without the permission of the copyright holders? This paper uses normative juridical research. This research uses 2 types of approaches, such as the statute approach and the case approach. The result of the research were the cover version of the song is not a prohibited activity if it is carried out based on applicable legal regulations and legal protection for copyright holders is regulated in the Copyright Law, Criminal Law, and Civil Law. Keyword: Copyright, The Copyright Holder, Legal Protection, Song. ABSTRAKHak Cipta adalah hak eksklusif yang timbul secara otomatis berdasarkan prinsip deklaratif setelah ciptaan sudah dalam bentuk nyata atau sudah divisualkan. Perlindungan hukum untuk pencipta lagu telah diatur di dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 28 Tahun 2014 tentang Hak Cipta. Permasalahan penelitian ini meliputi yaitu Pertama, bagaimana bentuk pelanggaran hak cipta atas lagu “Lagi Syantik” yang dinyanyikan ulang tanpa izin dari pemegang hak cipta? Kedua, bagaimana perlindungan hukum terhadap pencipta atas lagu yang diubah lirik tanpa seizin pemegang hak cipta?. Penulisan ini menggunakan penelitian yuridis-normatif. Penelitian ini menggunakan 2 jenis pendekatan, yakni pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach) dan pendekatan kasus (case approach). Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah cover version lagu bukan kegiatan yang dilarang jika dilakukan sesuai aturan hukum yang berlaku dan perlindungan hukum terhadap pemegang hak cipta diatur dalam Undang-Undang Hak Cipta, Hukum Pidana, dan  Hukum Perdata. Kata Kunci: Hak Cipta, Pemegang Hak Cipta, Perlindungan Hukum, Lagu

scholarly journals The Neoliberal University in Ireland: Institutional Bullying by Another Name?

Societies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 52
Author(s):  
Margaret Hodgins ◽  
Patricia Mannix McNamara
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Public Management ◽  
New Public Management ◽  
Academic Staff ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Decent Work ◽  
New Public ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Health And Well Being

New managerialism and the pervasive neoliberalisation of universities is by now a well-established phenomenon. Commentaries explore the political and economic drivers and effects of neoliberal ideology, and critique the impact on higher education and academic work. The impact on the health and well-being of academic staff has had less attention, and it is to that we turn in this paper. Much academic interest in neoliberalism stems from the UK, Australia and the United States. We draw particularly on studies of public Irish universities, where neoliberalism, now well entrenched, but something of a late-comer to the new public management party, is making its presence felt. This conceptual paper explores the concept of neoliberalism in higher education, arguing that the policies and practices of new public management as exercised in universities are a form of bullying; what we term institutional bullying. The authors are researchers of workplace culture, workplace bullying and incivility. Irish universities are increasingly challenged in delivering the International Labour Organisation (ILO) principles of decent work, i.e., dignity, equity, fair income and safe working conditions. They have become exposed in terms of gender imbalance in senior positions, precariat workforce, excessive workload and diminishing levels of control. Irish universities are suffering in terms of both the health and well-being of staff and organisational vibrancy. The authors conclude by cautioning against potential neoliberal intensification as universities grapple with the economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper reviews neoliberalism in higher education and concludes with insight as to how the current pandemic could act as a necessary catalyst to stem the tide and ‘call out’ bullying at the institutional level.

The New Copyright Act, or How to Get into a Heap of Trouble Without Really Trying

1977 ◽  
Vol 10 (01) ◽  
pp. 6-8
Author(s):  
Nicholas Henry
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
James Madison ◽  
Section 8 ◽  
Exclusive Right

On January 1st, 1978, a new Copyright Act will go into effect. It is the first revision of copyright law since 1909.Copyright is perhaps the oldest public policy extant in America. Indeed, its origins can be traced back to colonial times prior to the adoption of the Constitution in 1787. By that year, only Delaware of the original thirteen colonies had failed to establish its own copyright law. When the Constitution was adopted, Article 1, Section 8 (which likely was penned by James Madison, a person with substantial intellectual interests), stated that “Congress shall have the Power to Promote the Progress of Science and Useful Arts, by securing for Limited Times to Authors and Inventors the Exclusive Right to their respective Writings and their Discoveries.” In 1790, Congress passed the first national Copyright Act.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document