Module 5 Flashcards
Authorship
What is the meaning of authorship in copyright law?
The fact of being an author- the creator of the work.
On what vary legal consequences of the authorship?
They vary depending on whether the model is the civil law system of authors rights or common law.
What do exclusive rights allow the author to do?
To control and benefit from the reproduction and communication to the public of their works.
What does the tradition of common law copyright do?
It places the emphasis on the economic exploitation of a work and is therefore sometimes seen as favouring entrepreneurs. It also often extends copyright protection to phonogram producers and broadcasters.
What does the civil law tradition prioritize?
Rewarding the intellectual effort of the author.
How does the civil law regard copyright?
As a personality right, a human rights based right.
What does the civil law provide regarding copyright?
It provides a more broader scope of moral rights for authors.
Does the Berne Convention provide a specific explanation of the notion of authorship?
No.
What is the meta juridical and natural notion of an author?
The author is a person who invests the necessary element of creativity in the creation of the work at issue. The author of it literary, artistic or scientific work is the natural person who created it.
Who can be an author according to the Berne Convention?
Only a natural person.
Can corporate bodies hold copyright?
Yes.
On what basis can corporate bodies hold copyright?
More on the basis of ownership than authorship.
What is assumed under the British copyright designs and patents act?
It is assumed that corporate bodies can be offers within the meaning of UK law.
Who can create work under copyright law?
Human.
Against whom did PETA file a lawsuit acting on the monkeys behalf (next friend)?
David Slater.
What does the term next friend in common law mean?
It refers to a person representing another person that is unable to act in a lawsuit because of disability or other reasons.
What did the court held in the case PETA vs. David Slater?
The court found that the monkey could not only be the subject of copyright but was not even capable of bringing an action in a court of law.