Hylly
Henkilönnimi Saw, Cheng Lim, kirjoittaja.
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö Distinguishing the fair use and fair dealing doctrines in copyright law : much ado about nothing?
Julkaistu Oxford University Press, Oxford : 2023.
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, ISSN 1747-1532 ; 18(12)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. It is often assumed and taken for granted that there is a gulf separating the fair use and fair dealing doctrines in copyright law arising principally from the ‘open v closed’ distinction that is made of the statutory schemes in the respective fair use and fair dealing jurisdictions. It will be argued in this article, after a comparative and comprehensive study of the case law and of the various (overlapping) fairness factors, that this distinction merely reflects a difference as to legislative form, rather than the substance of the fairness analysis that may ultimately bear on the outcome of a fairness determination. Both doctrines, in actuality, are far more aligned than may be immediately apparent and this is where having recourse to US fair use jurisprudence—including the infamous transformative use doctrine—in appropriate cases may well assist in a court’s assessment of fairness in the fair dealing context.
Asiasana
Maantieteellinen nimi asiasanana
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Sarjalisäkirjaus - yhtenäistetty nimeke Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 1747-1532 ; 18(12)
*000 ab a ar
*00124291
*008 s2023 xxk e |||| 0|eng |
*040 $aFI-CUTE$bfin$erda
*0410 $aeng
*1001 $aSaw, Cheng Lim,$ekirjoittaja.
*24510$aDistinguishing the fair use and fair dealing doctrines in copyright law :$bmuch ado about nothing? /$cCheng Lim Saw.
*264 1$aOxford :$bOxford University Press,$c2023.
*300 $as. 848–866
*336 $ateksti$btxt$2rdacontent
*337 $akäytettävissä ilman laitetta$bn$2rdamedia
*338 $anide$bnc$2rdacarrier
*4901 $aJournal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice,$x1747-1532 ;$v18(12)
*520 $aIt is often assumed and taken for granted that there is a gulf separating the fair use and fair dealing doctrines in copyright law arising principally from the ‘open v closed’ distinction that is made of the statutory schemes in the respective fair use and fair dealing jurisdictions. It will be argued in this article, after a comparative and comprehensive study of the case law and of the various (overlapping) fairness factors, that this distinction merely reflects a difference as to legislative form, rather than the substance of the fairness analysis that may ultimately bear on the outcome of a fairness determination. Both doctrines, in actuality, are far more aligned than may be immediately apparent and this is where having recourse to US fair use jurisprudence—including the infamous transformative use doctrine—in appropriate cases may well assist in a court’s assessment of fairness in the fair dealing context.
*650 7$atekijänoikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p2346$2yso/fin
*650 7$atekijänoikeuslaki$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p9817
*650 7$adoktriinit$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p10353
*651 7$aYhdysvallat$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p105078
*651 7$aKanada$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p105377$2yso/fin
*651 7$aIso-Britannia$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p104990
*651 7$aAustralia$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p105116$2yso/fin
*653 $afair use
*653 $atekijänoikeusjärjestelmä
*653 $atransformative use
*653 $amuunnelmat
*830 0$aJournal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice,$x1747-1532 ;$v18(12)
*852 $hSA-JIPLP
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.