The Trouble with Moral Rights

Masiyakurima, Patrick

doi:10.1111/j.1468-2230.2005.00544.x

Cited by 4 publications

References 15 publications

(6 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Copyright Law in the European Union, the United States and China

Hutukka

2023

IIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study juxtaposes copyright law in the European Union (EU), the United States (US) and the People’s Republic of China (China). After mapping major differences and similarities in copyright law between the three jurisdictions, possible reasons will be explored for the divergence and convergence detected. Findings indicate that many of the similarities as well as differences in copyright law can be attributed to international harmonization and, more specifically, to the Berne Convention. Convergence, both through congruence and pressure, and economic concerns explain why China’s copyright law has become strikingly similar in recent decades to copyright law in the EU and the US, despite vast historical and cultural differences. The differences are due, inter alia, to the underlying theoretical differences in copyright doctrine and different underlying aims of copyright protection, resulting in differing stances on the role and existence of moral rights. The divide between common law and civil law with regard to the role of statutory law and case law, respectively, is also relevant. Surprisingly, although China leans more towards the civil-law end of the continuum between civil law and common law, the underlying rationale for copyright and the role of precedent show some traits central to a common-law country, bringing China in those respects closer to the US than to the EU. However, like most EU Member States, but unlike the US, China recognizes the existence of moral rights, as required by the Berne Convention.

show abstract

Copyright Law in the European Union, the United States and China

Hutukka

2023

IIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The author as agent of information policy: The relationship between economic and moral rights in copyright

Wilkinson

Gerolami

2009

Government Information Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Scrolls and the Legal Definition of Authorship

MacQueen

2011

The Oxford Handbook of the Dead Sea Scrolls

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents the facts and decision in Elisha Qimron v. Hershel Shanks; some general remarks on copyright law; and the Issues re-ventilated in Dr. Lionel Sawkins v. Hyperion Records Ltd. The fundamental copyright issue in the Dead Sea Scrolls case was what constituted authorship. The discussion agrees with Jane Gisburg's claim that reconstructive editorial work is that of an author. It also notes that the existence of copyright in an edited text does not enable the right-holder to ‘lock up scholarship’ or prevent access to the material. The very act of publication precludes this, since copyright law does not bar anyone from reading, and the work may be used for private study and research, or quoted from for purposes of criticism and review, so long as that amounts to fair dealing.

show abstract

The Trouble with Moral Rights

Cited by 4 publications

References 15 publications

Copyright Law in the European Union, the United States and China

Copyright Law in the European Union, the United States and China

The author as agent of information policy: The relationship between economic and moral rights in copyright

The Scrolls and the Legal Definition of Authorship

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About