Tekijänoikeuden erikoiskirjasto

Communication to a New Public? : three Reasons Why EU Copyright Law Can Do Without a New Public
Muistilista on tyhjä
Vis
Hylly
  • HUGENHOLTZ SA-II10
Henkilönnimi
  • Hugenholtz, P. Bernt.
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö
  • Communication to a New Public? : three Reasons Why EU Copyright Law Can Do Without a New Public
Julkaistu
  • 2016.
Ulkoasutiedot
  • 797-816.
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa
  • IIC : International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, ISSN 0018-9855 ; 47 (7)
Yleinen huomautus
  • This article is partly based on a master’s thesis written by Sam van Velze in the Research Master in Information Law programme of IViR, under the supervision of Bernt Hugenholtz.
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms.
  • This article critically examines the “new public” test in EU copyright law, which was developed by the CJEU when interpreting the right of communication to the public in cases of retransmission and hyperlinking. As the authors seek to demonstrate, this test is flawed for at least three reasons: historical, conceptual and economic. EU copyright law can well do without a “new public” test.
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Henkilönnimi
  • van Velze, Sam C.
*00001603nab a22003134a 4500
*00111164
*00520201106111828.0
*007tu
*008170117s2016\\\\xx\|||||\||||\|||||0eng|c
*035  $a23852
*035  $a(PLib-conv)0000023852
*0410 $aeng
*090  $aOMA:SA-II10
*1001 $aHugenholtz, P. Bernt.
*24510$aCommunication to a New Public? :$bthree Reasons Why EU Copyright Law Can Do Without a New Public /$cP. Bernt Hugenholtz, Sam C. van Velze.
*260  $c2016.
*300  $a797-816.
*4901 $aIIC : International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law,$x0018-9855 ;$v47 (7)
*500  $aThis article is partly based on a master’s thesis written by Sam van Velze in the Research Master in Information Law programme of IViR, under the supervision of Bernt Hugenholtz.
*520  $aThis article critically examines the “new public” test in EU copyright law, which was developed by the CJEU when interpreting the right of communication to the public in cases of retransmission and hyperlinking. As the authors seek to demonstrate, this test is flawed for at least three reasons: historical, conceptual and economic. EU copyright law can well do without a “new public” test.
*653  $aTEKIJÄNOIKEUS
*653  $aJULKINEN ESITTÄMINEN
*653  $aJULKISUUS
*653  $aBERNIN YLEISSOPIMUS
*653  $aLINKITYS
*7001 $avan Velze, Sam C.
*8102 $aIIC International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law,$x0018-9855 ;$v7
*852  $hSA-II10$cHUGENHOLTZ
*979  $a0000023852
*999  $aMikroMarc$b[Article]$x7
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.
Vis
Lähetä
Niteen tunnusTilaEräpäiväKuuluuSijaintiHylly
23761Saatavana (ei lainattavissa) KirjastoVarasto SA-IIC