Tekijänoikeuden erikoiskirjasto

 
Breathing Space for Cloud-Based Business Models : Exploring the Matrix of Copyright Limitations, Safe Harbours and Injunctions
Muistilista on tyhjä
Vis
Hylly
  • SENFTLEBEN SA-JIPI
Henkilönnimi
  • Senftleben, Martin. kirjoittaja.
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö
  • Breathing Space for Cloud-Based Business Models : Exploring the Matrix of Copyright Limitations, Safe Harbours and Injunctions
Julkaistu
  • 2013.
Ulkoasutiedot
  • 87-103.
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa
  • Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and Electronic Commerce Law, ISSN 2190-3387 ; 4(2)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms.
  • Cloud-based services keep forming, changing and evaporating like clouds in the sky. They range from personal storage space for films and music to social media and user-generated content platforms. The copyright issues raised by these platforms seem as numerous as the liquid droplets and frozen crystals constituting clouds in the atmosphere of our planet. As providers of cloud-based services may seek to avoid dependence on creative industries and collecting societies, one of these questions concerns the breathing space that copyright law offers outside the realm of exclusive rights. Which limitations of protection can serve as a basis for the development of new business models? Which safe harbours may be invoked to avoid secondary liability for copyright infringement? Which obligations may result from injunctions sought by copyright owners? After outlining relevant cloud services (section 1) and identifying the competing interests involved (section 2), the inquiry will address these influence factors – limitations, safe harbours and injunctions (section 3). The analysis will yield the insight that the most effective protection of copyright in the cloud is likely to result from acceptance of a compromise solution that, instead of insisting on the power to prohibit unauthorised use, leaves room for the interests of users and the business models of platform providers (concluding section 4).
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Elektronisen aineiston sijainti ja käyttö (URI)
  • https://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-4-2-2013/3743/senftleben.pdf Linkki verkkoaineistoon 
*00002542nab a22003134ar4500
*00111187
*00520201106111829.0
*008170118s2013||||xx\|||||||||||||||||eng||            
*035  $a23876
*035  $a(PLib-conv)0000023876
*040  $aFI-CUTE$bfin$erda
*0410 $aeng
*1001 $aSenftleben, Martin.$ekirjoittaja.
*24510$aBreathing Space for Cloud-Based Business Models    :$bExploring the Matrix of Copyright Limitations, Safe Harbours and Injunctions /$cMartin Senftleben.
*260  $c2013.
*300  $a87-103.
*336  $ateksti$btxt$2rdacontent
*337  $atietokonekäyttöinen$bc$2rdamedia
*338  $averkkoaineisto$bcr$2rdacarrier
*4901 $aJournal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and Electronic Commerce Law,$x2190-3387 ;$v4(2)
*520  $aCloud-based services keep forming, changing and evaporating like clouds in the sky. They range from personal storage space for films and music to social media and user-generated content platforms. The copyright issues raised by these platforms seem as numerous as the liquid droplets and frozen crystals constituting clouds in the atmosphere of our planet. As providers of cloud-based services may seek to avoid dependence on creative industries and collecting societies, one of these questions concerns the breathing space that copyright law offers outside the realm of exclusive rights. Which limitations of protection can serve as a basis for the development of new business models? Which safe harbours may be invoked to avoid secondary liability for copyright infringement? Which obligations may result from injunctions sought by copyright owners? After outlining relevant cloud services (section 1) and identifying the competing interests involved (section 2), the inquiry will address these influence factors – limitations, safe harbours and injunctions (section 3). The analysis will yield the insight that the most effective protection of copyright in the cloud is likely to result from acceptance of a compromise solution that, instead of insisting on the power to prohibit unauthorised use, leaves room for the interests of users and the business models of platform providers (concluding section 4).
*653  $aPILVIPALVELUT
*653  $aKILPAILUOIKEUS
*653  $aEU
*653  $aLAINSÄÄDÄNTÖ
*653  $aTALOUSPOLITIIKKA
*8102 $aJournal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and Electronic Commerce Law,$x2190-3387 ;$v4(2)
*852  $hSA-JIPI$cSENFTLEBEN
*85640$uhttps://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-4-2-2013/3743/senftleben.pdf$yLinkki verkkoaineistoon
*979  $a0000023876
*999  $aMikroMarc$b[Article]$x7
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.
Vis
Lähetä