Hylly
Henkilönnimi Kiškis, Mindaugas, kirjoittaja.
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö Dissuasive outcomes for rightholders : examining recent Lithuanian copyright law cases under Directive 2004/48/EC
Julkaistu Oxford University Press, Oxford : 2023.
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, ISSN 1747-1532 ; 18(6)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. This article examines two recent copyright law cases in Lithuania, where rightholders attempted to enforce their rights against online copyright pirates. These cases exposed essential limitations and difficulties in interpreting IP enforcement rules under Directive 2004/48/EC (IPRED) and the pertinent national copyright law. While the rightholders ultimately won both cases, the legal victories proved to be Pyrrhic. The courts delivered very restrictive interpretations of the substantive rules, which proved discouraging and disproportionately costly for any rightholder attempting to enforce their copyright against online infringers.
Asiasana
Maantieteellinen nimi asiasanana
Sarjalisäkirjaus - yhtenäistetty nimeke Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 1747-1532 ; 18(6)
Elektronisen aineiston sijainti ja käyttö (URI) https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpad046 Linkki verkkoaineistoon
*000 ab a ar
*00121308
*008 s2023||||xxk|||||||||||||||||eng||
*040 $aFI-CUTE$bfin$erda
*0410 $aeng
*1001 $aKiškis, Mindaugas,$ekirjoittaja.
*24510$aDissuasive outcomes for rightholders :$bexamining recent Lithuanian copyright law cases under Directive 2004/48/EC /$cMindaugas Kiškis.
*264 1$aOxford :$bOxford University Press,$c2023.
*300 $as. 462–472
*336 $ateksti$btxt$2rdacontent
*337 $akäytettävissä ilman laitetta$bn$2rdamedia
*338 $anide$bnc$2rdacarrier
*4901 $aJournal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice,$x1747-1532 ;$v18(6)
*520 $aThis article examines two recent copyright law cases in Lithuania, where rightholders attempted to enforce their rights against online copyright pirates. These cases exposed essential limitations and difficulties in interpreting IP enforcement rules under Directive 2004/48/EC (IPRED) and the pertinent national copyright law. While the rightholders ultimately won both cases, the legal victories proved to be Pyrrhic. The courts delivered very restrictive interpretations of the substantive rules, which proved discouraging and disproportionately costly for any rightholder attempting to enforce their copyright against online infringers.
*650 7$atekijänoikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p2346$2yso/fin
*650 7$atekijänoikeuslaki$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p9817
*650 7$aInternet$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p20405$2yso/fin
*650 7$apiratismi$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p11912$2yso/fin
*650 7$aoikeustapaukset$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p7219
*650 7$aEU-oikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p20733$2yso/fin
*650 7$aEU-direktiivit$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p10768$2yso/fin
*651 7$aLiettua $0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p94268$2yso/fin
*830 0$aJournal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice,$x1747-1532 ;$v18(6)
*852 $hSA-JIPLP
*856 $uhttps://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpad046$yLinkki verkkoaineistoon
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.