This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
This is a review of Performer's Rights by the Rt Hon Sir Richard Arnold, Judge of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales. The book covers the rights of performers, particularly the rights conferred under Part II of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended). The book is presented in 11 chapters.
Dr VRR Ayyar’s book, “Present at Creation: The Making of Internet Treaties (1996)”, published in 2021. And it’s published under a creative commons license, with the text available on his website here. Incidentally, Prashant will also be coming out with a review of the book in the coming weeks.
Unless these rights are contractually assigned or licensed, it is for the authors, and the institutions that employ them, to determine the conditions under which their works are to be published, reproduced, and otherwise used (including by way of OA) – not for the publishers.
With the adoption of both the Directive on Copyright and RelatedRights in the Digital Single Market (CDSM) and the Digital Services Act (DSA), the European Union has moved away from the notice-and-takedown model for copyright enforcement and content moderation. Click here and here to know more. Click here to know more.
Aimed at ensuring remuneration for publishers when their publications are reused online by news aggregators, Article 15 grants press publishers the right of reproduction and the right of making available for online uses of their press publications by information society service providers.
While the Irish Copyright and RelatedRights Act includes a similar provision concerning the authorship of computer-generated works, Irish academics have noted this provision may be inconsistent with the EU acquis. This litigation has arisen amongst a flurry of recent interest in AI generated works.
Aimed at ensuring remuneration for publishers when their publications are reused online by news aggregators, Article 15 grants press publishers the right of reproduction and the right of making available for online uses of their press publications by information society service providers.
Exceptionally, copyright accommodates other forms of licensing that restrict the author’s individual exercise of rights. For instance, in the 2019 copyright reform, the European legislator used the mechanism of mandatory collective management of the retransmission right (art. 12 DSM Directive). 12 DSM Directive).
Some consider that the Government was influenced by the French union of book publishers Syndicat National de l’Edition – SNE when it decided to leave out the term ‘appropriate’ when transposing the principle of ‘ appropriate and proportionate remuneration ’ of articles 18 and 20 of the CDSM.
The provision only applies to literary works, audiovisual work, phonograms, and visual works embedded into these works e.g. books (article 1(2) OWD). The OWD and the CDSM Directive’s OOCW provisions now coexist as two distinct options that cultural heritage institutions can rely on for clearing rights.
In most countries, the right is limited to scientific articles published in periodicals, but criteria establishing what constitutes a ‘periodical’ vary widely. Monographs, scholarly books, and other one-off publications are often excluded. Citation : For citation purposes, please use the following: ALLEA.
The final and forthcoming Part 3 will cover the legal implications of training AI models on works protected by copyright, including licensing and potential liability. The IPKat Book of the Year Awards 2024. The deadline for submissions to the IPKat Book of the Year awards has been extended to 10 February 2025.
First, an opt-out mechanism is proposed as a way to license (or gain consent for) the use of protected works for AI training (see interesting comments by J.P. 21) indicates that “a pair of Member States” identified the ECL model as optimal, with one country even proposing a mandatory copyright licensing model. Geiger and V.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content