Hylly
Henkilönnimi Hyland, Mark, kirjoittaja.
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö Communication to the Public (Transport) : Has the ECJ Added an Extra Layer of Complexity to the Requirement for an Act of Intervention
Julkaistu Sweet & Maxwell, London : 2023.
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa European Intellectual Property Review, ISSN 0142-0461 ; 45(10)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. In Joined Cases Blue Air Aviation and UPFR, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) recently ruled that the broadcasting of protected works via address systems installed in airplanes and trains (respectively) would constitute an act of communication to the public. However, interestingly, when such systems are installed for public safety reasons, the installation of such systems does not in itself constitute an act of communication to the public. As this decision arguably represents different interpretations of some of the principles used to determine the liablility for an act of communication to the public, this article examines the reasons for the decision, and assesses the likely implications of it.
Yhteisönnimi
Asiasana
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Sarjalisäkirjaus - yhtenäistetty nimeke European Intellectual Property Review, 0142-0461 ; 45(10)
*000 ab a ar
*00122046
*008 s2023||||xxk|||||||||||||||||eng||
*040 $aFI-CUTE$bfin$erda
*0410 $aeng
*1001 $aHyland, Mark,$ekirjoittaja.
*24514$aCommunication to the Public (Transport) :$bHas the ECJ Added an Extra Layer of Complexity to the Requirement for an Act of Intervention /$cDr Mark Hyland.
*264 1$aLondon :$bSweet & Maxwell,$c2023.
*300 $as. 628-631
*336 $ateksti$btxt$2rdacontent
*337 $akäytettävissä ilman laitetta$bn$2rdamedia
*338 $anide$bnc$2rdacarrier
*4901 $aEuropean Intellectual Property Review,$x0142-0461 ;$v45(10)
*520 $aIn Joined Cases Blue Air Aviation and UPFR, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) recently ruled that the broadcasting of protected works via address systems installed in airplanes and trains (respectively) would constitute an act of communication to the public. However, interestingly, when such systems are installed for public safety reasons, the installation of such systems does not in itself constitute an act of communication to the public. As this decision arguably represents different interpretations of some of the principles used to determine the liablility for an act of communication to the public, this article examines the reasons for the decision, and assesses the likely implications of it.
*610 7$aEuroopan unioni$0(FI-ASTERI-N)000035482
*650 7$atekijänoikeuslaki$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p9817$2yso/fin
*650 7$atekijänoikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p2346$2yso/fin
*650 7$aEU-oikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p20733$2yso/fin
*650 7$ajoukkoliikenne$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p9912$2yso/fin
*650 7$asävellykset$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p1515$2yso/fin
*650 7$amusiikki$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p1808
*650 7$aäänitteet$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p12687
*650 7$aoikeustapaukset$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p7219
*650 7$ataustamusiikki $0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p1807$2yso/fin
*653 $ayleisölle välittäminen
*830 0$aEuropean Intellectual Property Review,$x0142-0461 ;$v45(10)
*852 $hSA-EIPR
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.