Hylly
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö Supreme Court (Nejvyšší soud), decision of 28 July 2023 – 23 Cdo 2178/2022 : Parody of Audio-Visual Works ‒ ČEZ v Greenpeace Česká Republika
Julkaistu Verlag C.H. Beck, München : 2024.
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa GRUR International, ISSN 2632-8623 ; 73(2)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. Headnotes by Pavel Koukal and Michal Ježek. 1. For the purposes of parody (within the meaning of the statutory exception under Sec. 38g of the Copyright Act), it is possible to use an audio-visual work that has been modified by the insertion of some new footage. 2. When parodying copyrighted works, copyright exceptions are not contingent on whether the parody successfully achieves its intended humorous or mocking effect. The assessment of this effect from the perspective of different audiences is not decisive. What matters is the creator’s artistic intent, expressed through the purposeful use of the original work to convey an artistic expression contrasting with the original content. Supreme Court (Nejvyšší soud), decision of 28 July 2023 – 23 Cdo 2178/2022. Facts of the case and proceedings before lower courts 1. The Municipal Court in Prague, by its judgment dated 25 January 2021, case No. 32 C 2/2019-118, suspended, in ruling I, the proceedings regarding the proposal to impose an obligation on the defendant to remove the advertising video titled ‘Kde jinde’ promoting the ČEZ group1 (plaintiff) from the defendant’s Facebook profile located on the website domain facebook.com. In ruling II, the court obliged the defendant to refrain from unauthorised use of the copyrighted work ‒ the advertising video ‘Kde jinde’. In ruling III, the court obliged the defendant to publish an apology in the manner and wording specified in the ruling on the defendant’s profile on the website facebook.com. In ruling IV, the court obliged the defendant to pay the plaintiff’s costs from the proceedings.
Asiasana
Maantieteellinen nimi asiasanana
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Sarjalisäkirjaus - yhtenäistetty nimeke GRUR International, 2632-8623 ; 73(2).
*000 ab a ar
*00124246
*008 s2024 gw e| |||||0|eng |
*040 $aFI-CUTE$bfin$erda
*0410 $aeng
*24500$aSupreme Court (Nejvyšší soud), decision of 28 July 2023 – 23 Cdo 2178/2022 :$bParody of Audio-Visual Works ‒ ČEZ v Greenpeace Česká Republika /$cAct No. 121/2000 Coll. (Copyright Act), Sec. 38g.
*264 1$aMünchen :$bVerlag C.H. Beck,$c2024.
*300 $as. 172–179
*336 $2rdacontent$ateksti$btxt
*337 $2rdamedia$akäytettävissä ilman laitetta$bn
*338 $2rdacarrier$anide$bnc
*4901 $aGRUR International,$x2632-8623 ;$v73(2)
*520 $aHeadnotes by Pavel Koukal and Michal Ježek. 1. For the purposes of parody (within the meaning of the statutory exception under Sec. 38g of the Copyright Act), it is possible to use an audio-visual work that has been modified by the insertion of some new footage. 2. When parodying copyrighted works, copyright exceptions are not contingent on whether the parody successfully achieves its intended humorous or mocking effect. The assessment of this effect from the perspective of different audiences is not decisive. What matters is the creator’s artistic intent, expressed through the purposeful use of the original work to convey an artistic expression contrasting with the original content. Supreme Court (Nejvyšší soud), decision of 28 July 2023 – 23 Cdo 2178/2022. Facts of the case and proceedings before lower courts 1. The Municipal Court in Prague, by its judgment dated 25 January 2021, case No. 32 C 2/2019-118, suspended, in ruling I, the proceedings regarding the proposal to impose an obligation on the defendant to remove the advertising video titled ‘Kde jinde’ promoting the ČEZ group1 (plaintiff) from the defendant’s Facebook profile located on the website domain facebook.com. In ruling II, the court obliged the defendant to refrain from unauthorised use of the copyrighted work ‒ the advertising video ‘Kde jinde’. In ruling III, the court obliged the defendant to publish an apology in the manner and wording specified in the ruling on the defendant’s profile on the website facebook.com. In ruling IV, the court obliged the defendant to pay the plaintiff’s costs from the proceedings.
*650 7$atekijänoikeuslaki$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p9817
*650 7$aoikeustapaukset$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p7219
*650 7$aparodia$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p9240$2yso/fin
*650 7$aaudiovisuaalinen aineisto$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p6545
*651 7$aTšekki$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p107480$2yso/fin
*653 $atekijänoikeuden poikkeukset
*830 0$aGRUR International,$x2632-8623 ;$v73(2).
*852 $hSA-GRUR International
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.