Hylly
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö "Fondazione Mario Schifano" : Decision of the Supreme Court of Cassation of Italy, Civil Divison Section I (Corte Suprema di Cassazione, Sez. Civile I) 8 February 2022 – Case No. 4038/2022
Julkaistu Springer, Heidelberg : 2022.
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa IIC : International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, ISSN 0018-9855 ; 53(8)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. The reproduction of works of art, where complete and not limited to details of those works, does not fall under one of the free-use scenarios. Moreover, to benefit from the free-use regime, such reproduction must be instrumental for the purposes of criticism or discussion, or be for a merely illustrative purpose related to the user’s teaching or scientific research activities. Furthermore, it must not contend with the right to economic use of the work that is vested in the rightholder. That includes the right not only to reproduce copies physically identical to the original, but also to use any other method of replicating the work likely to appear on the reproduction market, thus including scaled photographic reproduction.
Asiasana
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Sarjalisäkirjaus - yhtenäistetty nimeke IIC : International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 0018-9855 ; 53(8)
*000 ab a ar
*00117187
*008 s2022||||gw |||||||||||||||||eng||
*040 $aFI-CUTE$bfin$erda
*0410 $aeng
*24500$a"Fondazione Mario Schifano" :$bDecision of the Supreme Court of Cassation of Italy, Civil Divison Section I (Corte Suprema di Cassazione, Sez. Civile I) 8 February 2022 – Case No. 4038/2022 /$cD.B.S.M., Archivio M.S., S.M.G., [omissis] v. Fondazione M.S. Multistudio, [omissis], C.R., Galli Thierry Stampa S.r.l., G.M., SIAE, and University of [omissis] Copyright Law, Art. 70.
*264 1$aHeidelberg :$bSpringer,$c2022.
*300 $as. 1252–1256
*336 $ateksti$btxt$2rdacontent
*337 $akäytettävissä ilman laitetta$bn$2rdamedia
*338 $anide$bnc$2rdacarrier
*4901 $aIIC : International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law,$x0018-9855 ;$v53(8)
*520 $aThe reproduction of works of art, where complete and not limited to details of those works, does not fall under one of the free-use scenarios. Moreover, to benefit from the free-use regime, such reproduction must be instrumental for the purposes of criticism or discussion, or be for a merely illustrative purpose related to the user’s teaching or scientific research activities. Furthermore, it must not contend with the right to economic use of the work that is vested in the rightholder. That includes the right not only to reproduce copies physically identical to the original, but also to use any other method of replicating the work likely to appear on the reproduction market, thus including scaled photographic reproduction.
*650 7$atekijänoikeus laki$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p9817
*650 7$aoikeustapaukset$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p7219
*650 7$apäätökset$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p2868$2yso/fin
*650 7$akopiointi$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p2175
*650 7$ataideteokset$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p778$2yso/fin
*650 7$ajäljennökset$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p14834
*653 $aItalia
*830 0$aIIC : International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law,$x0018-9855 ;$v53(8)
*852 $hSA-IIC
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.