The Experts below are selected from a list of 14124 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Andrew F Christie - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • making it simple how Copyright Legislation can be simplified
    2011
    Co-Authors: Andrew F Christie
    Abstract:

    The Copyright Legislation of common law countries is marked by great length, detail and complexity. The hallmarks of complexity are multiple protected subject matters, in respect of which multiple exclusive rights are granted, and to which multiple exceptions apply. This article continues an exploration, commenced by this author more than a decade ago, about how Copyright Legislation can be simplified. It begins by considering the nature and purpose of complexity in Copyright Legislation, and the reasons for simplification of Copyright Legislation. Approaches to simplification are illustrated through application to actual Legislation (in this case, the New Zealand Copyright Act 1994). Simplifications are proposed for the categories of protected subject matters, for the exclusive rights that are granted to those protected subject matters, and for the exceptions that apply to those exclusive rights. The article concludes by noting the role that simplification can play in reforming Copyright to respond to the challenges of digital technology.

  • making it simple how Copyright Legislation can be simplified
    New Zealand Intellectual Property Journal, 2011
    Co-Authors: Andrew F Christie
    Abstract:

    – it nevertheless exhibits the hallmarks of structural complexity. These hallmarks are multiple protected subject matters, in respect of which multiple exclusive rights are granted, and to which multiple exceptions apply. This article continues an exploration, commenced by this author more than a decade ago, about how Copyright Legislation can be simplified.

  • A Proposal for Simplifying United Kingdom Copyright Law
    SSRN Electronic Journal, 2001
    Co-Authors: Andrew F Christie
    Abstract:

    The Copyright Legislation of most common law countries is, in all respects, complex. How might such Legislation be simplified? Is simplification necessary or even desirable? This article considers and answers these questions, using the United Kingdom Copyright Legislation as an example. The article begins by noting that the UK Legislation is not only unnecessarily complex in its conceptual structure, but also is unjustifiably discriminatory and "technologically challenged" (ie found wanting in its response to digital technology). It then postulates that a simplification of the UK Copyright Legislation, along lines similar to that proposed for Australia's Copyright law, is both a possible and a desirable way to remedy these shortcomings. The article identifies a set of principles on which a simplified Copyright law should be modelled. These principles are the use of broad and inclusively defined categories of protected subject matters, the adoption of innovation thresholds based on degree of creativity, and the removal of the distinction between tangible and intangible embodiments of Copyright material. The article then illustrates how these principles could be implemented in practice; this being the proposed approach. The article concludes that the proposed approach is not radical. Rather, it is argued that the proposed approach is fully consistent with the UK's obligations under the Berne Convention, and is the logical and desirable continuation of an international trend which began in 1996 with the adoption of the World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright and neighbouring rights Treaties.

John Williamson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Cooperation and Conflict: The British Musicians' Union, Musical Labour and Copyright in the UK
    MUSICultures, 2014
    Co-Authors: John Williamson
    Abstract:

    Using examples drawn from the archives of the British Musicians' Union (MU), this article examines the role of the representatives of musical labour in shaping Copyright Legislation in the UK. Arguing that this has rarely been acknowledged in the narrative surrounding music Copyright, it seeks to show how the recording industry and the MU have worked together to protect very different interests. It notes, however, that this has often resulted in conflict within the union, as it battled to preserve a collectivist philosophy in the face of both internal and external pressures.

  • CooperationandConflict: TheBritishMusicians'Union, Musical Labour and Copyright in the UK
    2014
    Co-Authors: John Williamson
    Abstract:

    Using examples drawn from the archives of the British Musicians' Union (MU), this article examines the role of the representatives of musical labour in shaping Copyright Legislation in the UK. Arguing that this has rarely been acknowledged in the narrative surrounding music Copyright, it seeks to show how the recording industry and the MU have worked together to protect very different interests. It notes, however, that this has often resulted in conflict within the union, as it battled to preserve a collectivist philosophy in the face of both internal and external pressures.

Aaron Perzanowski - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • the penumbral public domain constitutional limits on quasi Copyright Legislation
    2010
    Co-Authors: Aaron Perzanowski
    Abstract:

    This Article attempts to reconcile the breadth of the modern Commerce Clause with the notion of meaningful and enforceable limits on Congress' Copyright authority under Article I, Section 8, Clause 8. The Article aims to achieve two objectives. First, it seeks to outline a general approach to identifying and resolving inter-clause conflicts, sketching a methodology that has been lacking in the courts' sparse treatment of such conflicts. Second, it applies that general framework to the Copyright power in order to outline the scope of constitutional prohibitions against quasi-Copyright protections. In particular, this application focuses on the federal anti-bootlegging statutes and the Second Circuit's recent analysis of them in United States v. Martignon. In broad terms, the limits inherent in Clause 8 divide into two categories: limits on the sorts of works in which Congress can grant exclusive rights and limits on the types of exclusive rights Congress can use to protect those works. Those limits constrain Congress any time it attempts to legislate within the core subject matter of its Copyright power-grants of exclusive rights in expression. Otherwise, they are effectively stricken from the Constitution, violating the basic canon of construction that rejects readings that render text superfluous. Once the limits of Clause 8 are understood to apply regardless of the power Congress employs, a component of the public domain firmly and permanently rooted in the Constitution emerges. This public domain, defined by the limits of Clause 8, includes both unoriginal and unwritten expressive works - two classes of works that, as a constitutional matter, cannot be the subject of federal grants of exclusive rights. By extending exclusive rights to unwritten live performances, the anti-bootlegging statutes run afoul of the external limits of Clause 8.

  • the penumbral public domain constitutional limits on quasi Copyright Legislation
    University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, 2008
    Co-Authors: Aaron Perzanowski
    Abstract:

    Congress's authority to establish Copyright laws, like every grant of legislative authority, contains limits on the scope of federal power. Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 provides Congress with the authority 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 Discoveries."' In broad terms, the limits inherent in Clause 8 divide into two categories: limits on the sorts of works in which Congress can grant exclusive rights and limits on the types of exclusive rights that Congress can use to protect those works. The outer edges of this power, at least as much as any other legislative grant, were "defined, and limited... [so] that those limits may not be mistaken, or forgotten., 2

Hayley Collins - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Copyright for teaching TOP
    2015
    Co-Authors: Hayley Collins
    Abstract:

    Just because something is made available on the internet doesn't mean it is not protected by Copyright! Everything on the internet is covered by Copyright and can only be used as licensed by the Copyright owner or permitted under Copyright Legislation.

  • Copyright for students TOP
    2015
    Co-Authors: Hayley Collins
    Abstract:

    Just because something is made available on the internet doesn't mean it is not protected by Copyright! Everything on the internet is covered by Copyright and can only be used as licensed by the Copyright owner or permitted under Copyright Legislation.

Anne-catherine Lorrain - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • delineating and promoting an online legal offer a proper task for Copyright Legislation
    Journal of Intellectual Property Information Technology and Electronic Commerce Law, 2012
    Co-Authors: Anne-catherine Lorrain
    Abstract:

    JIPITEC 3 (2012) 2 - Legislations tackling the issue of illegal downloading of Copyrighted content, notably those enabling so-called “graduated response” mechanisms, often present and promote the idea of “legal offers”, designed to encourage consumers to acquire cultural content legally, as the positive counterpart to their sanctioning provisions. The paper argues that such legal rationales are actually underpinned by ambiguous concepts, bearing underestimated consequences on both practical and theoretical levels. The legislative promotion for the development of socalled “legal” services instills uncertainty in the online market place, thereby affecting online business practices but also the core tenets of Copyright law.

  • Delineating and Promoting an Online 'Legal Offer': A Proper Task for Copyright Legislation?
    2012
    Co-Authors: Anne-catherine Lorrain
    Abstract:

    Legislations tackling the issue of illegal downloading of Copyrighted content, notably those enabling so-called “graduated response” mechanisms, often present and promote the idea of “legal offers”, designed to encourage consumers to acquire cultural content legally, as the positive counterpart to their sanctioning provisions. The paper argues that such legal rationales are actually underpinned by ambiguous concepts, bearing underestimated consequences on both practical and theoretical levels. The legislative promotion for the development of so-called “legal” services instills uncertainty in the online market place, thereby affecting online business practices but also the core tenets of Copyright law.