Academic Opinion Flashcards
Ian Jeffrey ‘CR - Dramatic Work’
Decision in Norowzian may leave film makers feeling nervous and uncertain as no protection remains
E Derclaye ‘Debunking of UK CR Law’
Pleas for more precision and clarity
dramatic works = complext
should state that movies with special effects do not fit category
W v L reports are sound recording = protected
should be recorded in material form not permanent form
D Liu ‘Forget the monkey CR nonesense’
Originality of photographer should be measured by his own creativity
law does not recognise an animal as an author
monkey not controlled by photographer no angle or timing
J Davis + A Durant
Protection of short texts have been problematic
difficulty arises from ability of multiple readings - need to be available to others
hard to achieve balance - courts are being sufficiently sensitive
T Lauterback ‘Joint Authorship’
Brighton v Jones is a good decision
Trying to hop in band-wagon
P Masiyakurima ‘CR in works of AC’
Common denominator is that all tests about AC harbour significant drawbacks
problem with AC is its borderline nature
Argues britain to use intellectual creation test to resolve differences
any vague conception could lead to excessive rights
short comings in current test merit a change
D Tan ‘Intellectual Creation in compilations’
Feist rejected ‘sweat of the brow doctrine’
Dr Deming Lui ‘Of Sculpture’
what determines sculpture is endowment of his creation with a visual appeal as a purpose
tension between law and art because no aesthetic merit for CR purpose
Sculpture should be given ordinary meaning as understoof by public
Brian Bandey ‘Over Categorisation’
modern judges struggle w the issue of categorisation due to level of creativity
J Griffiths
Argues Eu approach will have to be developed
notes artistic works will be udges by their content not mere expression
N Gravells ‘Authorship + Originality : W v L’
originality is connected to authorship
w v l decided against a background where was no remedy for misapprop of investment of labour + capital
situ in W v L less likely to occur as modern equipment
does not provide for modern times - too low
E Derclaye ‘Infopaq: Wonderful or worrisome’
Infopaq seems to have gone unnoticed among UK - altho is a bomb
Infopaq effects are even more wide-ranging than we first thought
is great news for small authors
highlights need for balance
T Hopner ‘Reproduction After Infopaq’
Normally headlines are too trivial
Doubtful that such expansive conclusion can be taken
did not address q of what merits CR
Case shows own intellectual creation is no more than min threshold
B Sherman
Inspite of central role that the work plays in CR doctrine - law not well equipped when new work introduced
E Rosati ‘Originality in a work
argues infopaq has dictated a harmonized test for originality
Bezpecnostni further dictates that all works with intellectual creation protected
