Hylly
Henkilönnimi
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö Liability of service providers in copyright infringement over the internet = La responsabilité des fournisseurs de moyens face à la contrefaçon sur Internet
Julkaistu
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa Revue internationale du droit d'auteur, ISSN 0035-3515 ; 258
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. Sanctions, remedial or punitive, are the conventional solutions to copyright infringement . In response to new forms of copyright infringement over the internet, legislators also have recourse to remedial sanctions, which come in a variety of forms. Old texts have been adapted and new texts adopted. Legislators have thus chosen multiple responses to copyright infringement . Sanctions are directed not only at those supplying and consuming illicit content on the internet, but also at service providers. While the former are obviously those behind the infringement , rightholders encounter numerous difficulties in holding them liable. Issues arise regarding the location, identification and solvency of those engaged in copyright infringement , but also social acceptability when action involves individuals. This has led to a certain extent, particularly for considerations of expediency relating to reputation and solvency, to action being taken against providers such as shareware publishers, internet access providers and hosting providers. The place held by these digital stakeholders implicated in copyright infringement over the internet prompts scrutiny of the possibility of holding them liable, specifically for the role they play in infringement . As the legal provisions regarding technical intermediaries are currently very favourable to these stakeholders, issues of how an intermediary can benefit from these often arise upstream of their application (I). In fact, rather than use existing safe harbour mechanisms, the legislators have chosen to adopt special arrangements specific to these actors (II), which are not always advantageous in protecting against copyright infringement over the internet (III).
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
*00002937nab a22003974a 4500
*00113295
*00520201106111842.0
*007tu
*008190226s2018\\\\fr\|||||\||||\|||||0fre|c
*035 $a26046
*035 $a(PLib-conv)0000026046
*0410 $afre$aeng
*090 $aOMA:SA-RE20
*1001 $aThoraval, Léa.
*24510$aLiability of service providers in copyright infringement over the internet =$bLa responsabilité des fournisseurs de moyens face à la contrefaçon sur Internet /$cLéa Thoraval.
*260 $c2018.
*300 $a45-94.
*4900 $aRevue internationale du droit d'auteur,$x0035-3515 ;$v258
*520 $aSanctions, remedial or punitive, are the conventional solutions to copyright infringement . In response to new forms of copyright infringement over the internet, legislators also have recourse to remedial sanctions, which come in a variety of forms. Old texts have been adapted and new texts adopted. Legislators have thus chosen multiple responses to copyright infringement . Sanctions are directed not only at those supplying and consuming illicit content on the internet, but also at service providers. While the former are obviously those behind the infringement , rightholders encounter numerous difficulties in holding them liable. Issues arise regarding the location, identification and solvency of those engaged in copyright infringement , but also social acceptability when action involves individuals. This has led to a certain extent, particularly for considerations of expediency relating to reputation and solvency, to action being taken against providers such as shareware publishers, internet access providers and hosting providers. The place held by these digital stakeholders implicated in copyright infringement over the internet prompts scrutiny of the possibility of holding them liable, specifically for the role they play in infringement . As the legal provisions regarding technical intermediaries are currently very favourable to these stakeholders, issues of how an intermediary can benefit from these often arise upstream of their application (I). In fact, rather than use existing safe harbour mechanisms, the legislators have chosen to adopt special arrangements specific to these actors (II), which are not always advantageous in protecting against copyright infringement over the internet (III).
*653 $aTEKIJÄNOIKEUSRIKKOMUS
*653 $aINTERNET
*653 $aVERKKOPALVELUT
*653 $aHAKUKONEET
*653 $aJULKAISIJAT
*653 $aTIETOKONEOHJELMAT
*653 $aINFRINGEMENT
*653 $aTECHNICAL INTERMEDIARY
*653 $aHOST
*653 $aSEARCH ENGINES
*653 $aPUBLISHER
*653 $aSOFTWARE
*653 $aCOMPUTER PROGRAM
*653 $aPROVISION OF MEANS
*852 $hSA-RE20$cTHORAVAL
*979 $a0000026046
*999 $aMikroMarc$b[Article]$x7
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.