scholarly journals Copyright Problems - Introduction: Copyright Law Revision and Libraries; Copyright, Libraries, the Public Interest; Photocopying and Fair Use; Copyright Notice; Deposit of Copies of Copyright Works in the Library of Congress

1960 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 212-222
Author(s):  
Benjamin Kaplan ◽  
Edward G. Freehafer ◽  
Joseph W. Rogers ◽  
Rutherford D. Rogers
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
Library Of Congress ◽  
Copyright Notice ◽  
The Public

Technische Universitaät Darmstadt v. Eugen Ulmer KG

2015 ◽  
Vol 109 (1) ◽  
pp. 161-167
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie Carstens
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Attention ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Mass Digitization

In Technische Universität Darmstadt v. Eugen Ulmer KG, the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ or Court) addressed several important copyright issues stemming from a practice that continues to confound many legal practitioners and adjudicators: the mass digitization of library collections. The judgment adds to an emerging body of jurisprudence decided in the context of a trend toward greater digitization that could ultimately facilitate the development of a global, digital library. To date, the jurisprudence has largely been formed by cases challenging mass digitization that are percolating through the United States courts and have attracted international attention and criticism. The ECJ decision thus provides an important point of reference for evaluating how different jurisdictions balance the rights of authors against the public interest, as served by relevant fair use exceptions consistent with their international obligations under traditional copyright treaties, the 1996 WIPO Copyright Treaty, and the 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) applicable to all WTO member states.

International Protection of Intellectual Property Rights: Special Refrence with Intangible Properties and Copyright Laws.

LAW REVIEW ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohit P Singh ◽  
Shiv Kumar Tripathi
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
International Protection ◽  
The Public ◽  
Copyright Laws ◽  
Rapid Pace

In view of the rapid pace of technological, scientific and medical innovations in India and abroad, the intellectual property rights i.e., copyright, patent and other neighboring rights, have been recognized in Indian and foreign jurisdiction. Moreover, its scope and content have expanded pursuant to statutory amendments over the years. Growing recognisiont, expansion and protection of IPRs needs to harmonised with the public interest. Within this backdrop, copyright law, patent law etc. have made elaborate provisions and endeavours have also been made at international level to strike a balance between protection of individual’s IPRS and social interest. The present article tries to examine the contours of protection of IPRS at national and international levels with special reference to copyright law.

Parody and Moral Rights

2019 ◽  
pp. 167-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabine Jacques
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Moral Rights ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Personal Interests ◽  
Scope Of Protection

This chapter examines the relationship between parody and an author’s moral rights. It first traces the evolution of the concept of moral rights as a means of providing protection not only of the authors’ personal interests but also the public interest before discussing the reasons why moral rights might conflict with parodies. It considers two competing theories underlying the protection of authorial interests—the ‘monist’ theory and the ‘dualist’ theory—and their implications for the parody exception. It also explains how jurisdictions differ in the nature and scope of protection afforded to moral rights, noting that the parody exception in ‘copyright’ law does not extend to moral rights. The chapter goes on to explore the author’s paternity and integrity rights as well as their right against false attribution. It shows that, in the case of parodies, an overlap exists between the regimes applied to moral and economic rights.

2. Copyright

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Press
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Substantial Part ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Dramatic Works ◽  
Sound Recordings ◽  
Fair Dealing ◽  
The Public ◽  
Musical Works

This chapter defines copyright as arising whenever a work is created under qualifying conditions. The Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA) defines eight types of work that fall under two categories: works that must be original or ‘authorial works’, including literary works, dramatic works, musical works, and artistic works; and works that need not be original or ‘entrepreneurial works’: films, sound recordings, broadcasts, and the typographical arrangement of published editions. Copyright is infringed by copying or communicating the whole or a substantial part of a work—referred to as primary infringement—or by dealing in infringing copies of a work-referred to as secondary infringement. There are some major and many minor defences to copyright infringement including the ‘fair dealing’ defences and the public interest. Many aspects of copyright law have been harmonized by the European Union.

scholarly journals Contesting algorithms: Restoring the public interest in content filtering by artificial intelligence

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 205395172093229
Author(s):  
Niva Elkin-Koren
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
Content Filtering ◽  
The Public ◽  
Intelligence System ◽  
Dramatic Shift ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
Democratic Principles

In recent years, artificial intelligence has been deployed by online platforms to prevent the upload of allegedly illegal content or to remove unwarranted expressions. These systems are trained to spot objectionable content and to remove it, block it, or filter it out before it is even uploaded. Artificial intelligence filters offer a robust approach to content moderation which is shaping the public sphere. This dramatic shift in norm setting and law enforcement is potentially game-changing for democracy. Artificial intelligence filters carry censorial power, which could bypass traditional checks and balances secured by law. Their opaque and dynamic nature creates barriers to oversight, and conceals critical value choices and tradeoffs. Currently, we lack adequate tools to hold them accountable. This paper seeks to address this gap by introducing an adversarial procedure— – Contesting Algorithms. It proposes to deliberately introduce friction into the dominant removal systems governed by artificial intelligence. Algorithmic content moderation often seeks to optimize a single goal, such as removing copyright-infringing materials or blocking hate speech, while other values in the public interest, such as fair use or free speech, are often neglected. Contesting algorithms introduce an adversarial design which reflects conflicting values, and thereby may offer a check on dominant removal systems. Facilitating an adversarial intervention may promote democratic principles by keeping society in the loop. An adversarial public artificial intelligence system could enhance dynamic transparency, facilitate an alternative public articulation of social values using machine learning systems, and restore societal power to deliberate and determine social tradeoffs.

Why Lakoff still matters: Framing the debate on copyright law and digital publishing

First Monday ◽  
2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane Gurman
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Digital Publishing ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
Scholarly Journals ◽  
Digital Resources ◽  
Political Issues ◽  
The Public ◽  
George Lakoff ◽  
Cognitive Scientist

In 2004, linguist and cognitive scientist George Lakoff popularized the idea of using metaphors and “frames” to promote progressive political issues. Although his theories have since been criticized, this article asserts that his framing is still relevant to the debate over copyright law as applied to digital publishing, particularly in the field of scholarly journals. Focusing on issues of copyright term extension and the public domain, open access, educational fair use, and the stewardship and preservation of digital resources, this article explores how to advocate for change more effectively — not by putting a better “spin” on proposed policies — but by using coherent narratives to frame the issues in language linked to progressive values.

scholarly journals PENERAPAN DOKTRIN FAIR USE TERHADAP PEMANFAATAN HAK CIPTA PADA PLATFORM DIGITAL SEMASA COVID 19 DI INDONESIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 130-148
Author(s):  
Rika Ratna Permata ◽  
Tasya Safiranita ◽  
Yuliana Utama ◽  
Reihan Ahmad Millaudy
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
Internet Archive ◽  
Digital Platforms ◽  
The Public ◽  
Potential Market ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Almost All

The Covid-19 pandemic has resulted in more people doing activities from home, so almost all activities are carried out online, including for educational activities. The problems on this research are how the comparison between fair use regulations in Indonesia and in the United States during the pre-Covid-19 pandemic? How the regulations of the doctrine of fair use to anticipate the occurrence of a new phenomenon regarding the use of copyright on digital platforms during and/or after the Covid-19 pandemic? The method used in writing this law is a normative juridical method. The results of the study conclude that Fair use rules in Indonesia already regulate that fair use will not harm the legitimate interests of creators but does not provide clear parameters regarding fair interests. While the Fair use Arrangements in the United States are regulated in 17 U.S. Code 107. In this regulation, there are 4 factors, namely: the purpose and character of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the quantity and importance of the material used, the effect of the use upon potential market or value of the copyrighted work. The Covid-19 pandemic gave rise to fair use cases that had never occurred before the outbreak of Covid-19, e.g. the case of The Internet Archive, it can be observed that there is an encouragement from the public to further relax copyright protection because of the Covid-19 pandemic resulting in the public interest having to be carried out rather than the creators and copyright holders.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document