Hylly
Henkilönnimi Schwope, Lukas, kirjoittaja.
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö Efficacy of the ‘Best-Seller Clause’ in Article 20 DSM Directive — game changer or just a bone thrown at authors? A German perspective
Julkaistu Oxford University Press, Oxford : 2022.
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, ISSN 1747-1532 ; 17(2)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. Since Articles 15 and 17 of the DSM Directive 2019/790 (‘DSMD’)1 have arguably claimed most public and academic attention within the DSMD drafting and transposition process, the contract-related provisions in the directive, including Article 20 DSMD, have so far fallen relatively under the radar. This does however do no justice to their crucial importance, given that they tackle authors’ and performers’ contractual exploitation of copyright and performances and their position vis-á-vis their contracting counterparts. All the above said, it remains uncertain whether Article 20 DSMD can fulfil its purpose in practice, also considering that several European Union (EU) Member States have yet to transpose the DSMD into national law.2 Thus, this article seeks to provide clarification in that regard by elaborating—first—on the provision’s purpose and requirements and then by providing an analysis of the practical value of a similar German provision that has now existed for years. Such national experience allows to draw some conclusions which may also be of value to future practice across the EU.
Asiasana
Maantieteellinen nimi asiasanana
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Sarjalisäkirjaus - yhtenäistetty nimeke Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 1747-1532 ; 17(2)
*000 ab a ar
*00117631
*008 s2022||||xxk|||||||||||||||||eng||
*040 $aFI-CUTE$bfin$erda
*0410 $aeng
*1001 $aSchwope, Lukas,$ekirjoittaja.
*24510$aEfficacy of the ‘Best-Seller Clause’ in Article 20 DSM Directive — game changer or just a bone thrown at authors? A German perspective /$cLukas Schwope.
*264 1$aOxford :$bOxford University Press,$c2022.
*300 $as. 92–96
*336 $ateksti$btxt$2rdacontent
*337 $akäytettävissä ilman laitetta$bn$2rdamedia
*338 $anide$bnc$2rdacarrier
*4901 $aJournal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice,$x1747-1532 ;$v17(2)
*520 $aSince Articles 15 and 17 of the DSM Directive 2019/790 (‘DSMD’)1 have arguably claimed most public and academic attention within the DSMD drafting and transposition process, the contract-related provisions in the directive, including Article 20 DSMD, have so far fallen relatively under the radar. This does however do no justice to their crucial importance, given that they tackle authors’ and performers’ contractual exploitation of copyright and performances and their position vis-á-vis their contracting counterparts. All the above said, it remains uncertain whether Article 20 DSMD can fulfil its purpose in practice, also considering that several European Union (EU) Member States have yet to transpose the DSMD into national law.2 Thus, this article seeks to provide clarification in that regard by elaborating—first—on the provision’s purpose and requirements and then by providing an analysis of the practical value of a similar German provision that has now existed for years. Such national experience allows to draw some conclusions which may also be of value to future practice across the EU.
*650 7$atekijänoikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p2346$2yso/fin
*650 7$atekijänoikeuslaki$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p9817
*650 7$aEU-oikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p20733$2yso/fin
*650 7$aEU-direktiivit$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p10768$2yso/fin
*651 7$aSaksa$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p105087$2yso/fin
*653 $aDSM-direktiivi
*653 $aDSM-direktiivi
*653 $aArtikla 15
*653 $aArtikla 17
*653 $aArtikla 20
*830 0$aJournal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice,$x1747-1532 ;$v17(2)
*852 $hSA-JIPLP
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.