An evolutionary step in intellectual property rights – Artificial intelligence and intellectual property

This article addresses and analyses the issues concerning the ownership of computer generated works within patents and copyright, and concludes that the current regime is woefully inadequate to deal with the growing use of more and more intuitive artificial intelligence systems in the production of such works. It considers the respective claims of interested parties to such rights before moving on to a consideration of the creation of a new legal personality to which such rights could be granted to resolve the difficulties inherent in the current system.     

著作权扩张及其缘由透视

对著作权法的历史考察表明,它代表了被保护权利的持续扩张,以及相应的在作品中作为公共领域部分的持续减少。著作权扩张表现在受保护的客体不断增加、著作权保护范围不断扩大、使用方式不断增多、著作权保护期限不断延长等方面。从技术发展方面看,技术因素对著作权扩张具有极大的影响。著作权的扩张不仅可以从著作权制度本身的角度加以考察,也可以从政治、文化视野和经济学的层面上分析。著作权扩张还可以从利益平衡原理得到解释。著作权扩张与限制的辩证关系也说明,利益平衡是著作权法永恒的主题。     

论著作权合理使用制度的适用范围

由于合理使用处在权利与限制的交界处,其适用范围的任何变化,都可能重塑著作权法。面对新技术的冲击,在确定合理使用的适用范围时,不能因技术的便利而干涉著作权市场对信息资源的配置,而应恪守合理使用最初的立法理由,将其定位为对市场失灵的弥补,在利用行为有助于公共利益的基础上,考察其是否符合交易不能或正外部性市场失灵,同时把对作品潜在市场的影响视为最关键的判断标准。这不但维护了著作权的私权属性,更是界定合理使用适用范围的最佳路径。     

An analysis of the fundamental tensions between copyright and social media: the legal implications of sharing images on Instagram

ABSTRACT

Copyright is inherently intertwined with the development of technology and none more so than the advent of the Internet and sharing technologies. More recently, social media platforms have become the latest challenge for copyright law and policy. This article builds on the literature that recognises the underlying conflict between copyright and social networking sites (SNSs); namely that the basic implication of copyright is the restriction of copying, whereas the ethos of social networking is the promotion of sharing. In particular, this article focuses on the disparity between the restricted acts of copying and communication to the public under copyright law and the encouragement of sharing on SNS Instagram. In doing so, it contextualises the debate surrounding copyright and social media and provides an understanding of the legal implications of using Instagram. As such this paper analyses (1) the infringement of copyright protected work on Instagram, and (2) the user-agreement and licensing of copyright material on Instagram. This study concludes that the disparity between the principles of copyright and social media lead to confusion and vulnerability of users. Therefore, it is suggested that Instagram should better inform its users of the implications of sharing third-party content as well as the terms of its user agreement. This could be done by implementing a copyright strategy, which includes a notice and takedown system as well as investing in producing educational content for users. Perhaps SNSs, such as Instagram might be more motivated to take steps to recognise intellectual property rights if they were considered Internet Services Provides such as YouTube.     

All talk and no bite: Copyright infringement and piracy trends in India

The Copyright Act 1957 presents the face of modern copyright protection afforded to different intellectual works and is a key statement of intellectual property rights (IPR) in the Indian legislation governing this domain, as well as being compliant to the TRIPS Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. This Act has been acceptably referred to on many occasions on global platforms, on account of its being one of the most elaborate and well-structured pieces of legislation in the field of intellectual property law. However, this well encompassing, highly creditable and widely acknowledged legislation seems to fall down in its practical implementation rendering its theoretical purpose partly futile. The situation so stands, that India continues to project major piracy rates with little regression in the trend despite the fact that this law is still very much in force. The reasons which deny effective copyright protection in India, for works of miscellaneous categories, have much to do with the lack of an equally strong enforcement mechanism. This paper provides an insight into the inadequacies of the Indian legal and administrative systems which have ultimately diminished the effectiveness of the copyright regime contrary to that envisioned by the law.     

"不计琐细原则"在侵犯著作权案件中的适用研究

在侵犯著作权案件中,如果被控侵权行为人虽未经著作权人的同意,使用甚至抄袭了受著作权保护的作品或作品的片段,但若情节轻微,未对该作品的正常使用产生任何实质不利的影响,亦未对权利人的权利造成实质性的损害,则应适用不计琐细原则,免除行为人的责任,以寻求在权利人利益与著作权法所体现的社会公共利益之间的平衡。     

版权法上公共领域的衰落与兴起

版权法上公共领域是人类自由文化创造的源泉,但20世纪晚近以降,一种将"版权财产"与"公共领域"对立起来加以看待的做法开始变得日益兴盛,致使版权法上公共领域日趋衰亡。该种衰落背后的近因还在于当今的版权受到两种错误思潮的影响:其一,是"浪漫主义的作者观"在版权法上的错误配置;其二,是"有价值便有权利"以及"版权保护必须和复制技术成反比例变化"的观念在版权人世界的广为流传。而为了使版权法公共领域重获兴起,除了需要展开理念上的转型而推行"义务公共领域"的理论学说外,我们还需要展开一系列的制度创新:如展开"创作共享"公有领域运动、迈向"自由演绎"公共领域的未来以及建立网络时代的"默示许可"公有空间等等,由此我们才能看到版权法上公共领域重获兴起的曙光。     

Kant, Copyright and Communicative Freedom

The rapid recent expansion of copyright law worldwide has sparked efforts to defend the ‘public domain’ of non-propertized information, often on the ground that an expansive public domain is a condition of a ‘free culture’. Yet questions remain about why the public domain is worth defending, what exactly a free culture is, and what role (if any) authors’ rights might play in relation to it. From the standard liberal perspective shared by many critics of copyright expansionism, the protection of individual expression by means of marketable property rights in authors’ works serves as an engine of progress towards a fully competitive ‘marketplace of ideas’ – though only if balanced by an extensive public domain from which users may draw in the exercise of their own expressivity. This article shows that a significantly different, and arguably richer, conception of what a free culture is and how authors’ rights underpin it emerges from a direct engagement with the philosophy of Immanuel Kant. For Kant, progress towards a fully emancipated (i.e. a ‘mature’ or ‘enlightened’) culture can only be achieved through the critical intellectual activity that public communication demands: individual expressive freedom is only a condition, not constitutive, of this ‘freedom to make public use of one’s reason in all matters’. The main thesis defended in this article is that when Kant’s writings on publicity (critical public debate) are read in relation to his writings on the legal organization of publishing, a necessary connection emerges between authors’ rights – as distinct from copyrights – and what Jürgen Habermas and others have named the public sphere. I conclude that it is the public sphere, and not the public domain as such, that should serve as the key reference point in any evaluation of copyright law’s role in relation to the possibility of a free culture.     

From music tracks to Google maps: Who owns computer-generated works?

Increasingly the digital content used in everyday life has little or no human intervention in its creation. Typically, when such content is delivered to consumers it comes with attached claims of copyright. However, depending on the jurisdiction, approaches to ownership of computer-generated works vary from legislated to uncertain. In this paper we look at the various approaches taken by the common law, such as in Canada, and the legislative approach taken in the United Kingdom. The options for how computer-generated works may be treated and suggestions for their best placement in copyright are discussed.     

Copyright in the blockchain era: Promises and challenges

The paper focuses on various legal-related aspects of the application of blockchain technologies in the copyright sphere. Specifically, it outlines the existing challenges for distribution of copyrighted works in the digital environment, how they can be solved with blockchain, and what associated issues need to be addressed in this regard. It is argued that blockchain can introduce long-awaited transparency in matters of copyright ownership chain; substantially mitigate risks of online piracy by enabling control over digital copy and creating a civilized market for “used” digital content. It also allows to combine the simplicity of application of creative commons/open source type of licenses with revenue streams, and thus facilitate fair compensation of authors by means of cryptocurrency payments and Smart contracts. However, these benefits do not come without a price: many new issues will need to be resolved to enable the potential of blockchain technologies. Among them are: where to store copyrighted content (on blockchain or “off-chain”) and the associated need to adjust the legal status of online intermediaries; how to find a right balance between immutable nature of blockchain records and the necessity to adjust them due to the very nature of copyright law, which assigns ownership based on a set of informal facts, not visible to the public. Blockchain as a kind of time stamping service cannot itself ensure the trustworthiness of facts, which originate “off-chain”. More work needs to be done on the legal side: special provisions aimed at facilitating user's trust in blockchain records and their good faith usage of copyrighted works based on them need to be introduced and transactions with cryptocurrencies have to be legalized as well as the status of Smart contracts and their legal consequences. Finally, the economics of blockchain copyright management systems need to be carefully considered in order to ensure that they will have necessary network effects. If those issues are resolved in a satisfactory way, blockchain has the potential to rewrite how the copyright industry functions and digital content is distributed.     

版权法上的公共领域研究

Public domain is a core rule of copyright law, under which various creative materials are available for an author to use without charge or liability for infringement, hence ensuring the effective implementation of copyright law. Public domain is characterized by openness, public ownership, irrevocability and formality. Based on the premise that the author’s work will not be interfered, public domain ultimately aims at the enlargement of its own universe and prosperity of the culture of human society. Its introduction into copyright law satisfies both historical and logical demands. Without its acknowledgement, copyright cannot be justified. In that sense, public domain and copyright can be deemed as twins. Public domain is not only an existing institution, but also an ideological tendency or a methodology. It has evaluative and inspective values towards copyright. It is an important precondition of copy-rights, and what is more, an important measure for controlling the expansion and realizing the purpose of copyright. Huang Hui, Ph.D, is a lecturer of civil law at Southwest University of Political Science and Law. Till now, he has released over 20 research articles in academic journals in China, such as Modern Law Science, Legal Forum, Academic Forum, etc. His magnum opus includes: Legal Philosophy Exposition of Unreasonable Outstretch in Intellectual Property Rights, Interpretation & Transfer: An exposition of de-intelligence of intellectual property rights, research on the protection of works in public domain, etc.     

Plays,Performances and Power Struggles – Examining Copyright's ‘Integrity’ in the Field of Theatre

This article explores the notion of ‘integrity’ under copyright law by analysing examples of 'integrity‐based objections' in the field of theatre. These objections typically involve playwrights objecting to changes being made to their copyright works by other parties, such as directors and actors. This analysis is deepened by the use of two concepts from the field of art theory – ‘aura’, as put forward by Walter Benjamin, and ‘trajectory’, as outlined by Bruno Latour and Adam Lowe. Finally, to shed further light on the issues raised, the work of Pierre Bourdieu is used to present new empirical research recently undertaken by the author in the field of UK theatre. This research demonstrates that ‘power struggles’ are a common feature of theatrical collaboration; that copyright is deeply implicated in the way such power struggles are conceived; and moreover, that resolving these power struggles successfully – including taking account of ‘integrity‐based objections’ – is crucial to theatrical practice.     

Hyperlinks citations, reproducing original works

A hyperlink (or simply a link) is a citation of an electronic address where further information can be found but, additionally, navigates the surfer almost instantaneously to material hosted anywhere on the Internet at a mere click of a mouse. Controversy arises because either the composition or functionality of the hyperlink can potentially infringe property rights of the claimant. Many have written about the hyperlink as a navigation tool authorising or contributing to infringement of copyright by a third party.¹This article concentrates on the composition of an external hyperlink, as a citation. Part 2 outlines the nature of Internet communication and explains why hyperlinks are often controversial. Part 3 asserts when copyright subsists in original literary works, but because a hyperlink may incorporate diverse formats, this part also addresses the protection of other works including the issue of composite works covered under section 1(1) of Copyright, Design and Patents Act, 1988. Applying copyright principles, it suggests that a hyperlink reproducing an identifiable part of a web page capable of standing apart from its context can infringe copyright in the web page containing the part. That said the claimant might face difficulty in demonstrating that the work is substantive or, where the hyperlink consists of diverse inputs, in categorising the subject matter. Part 4 acknowledges the significance (electronic) collections and therefore defines a database falling within the Databases Directive.² It then highlights challenges presented by copyright and sui generis right relating to databases concluding that reproducing an identifiable part of author compiled work can infringe copyright and/or sui generis right therein but the same is not true of search engine generated returns. Part 5 concedes that, in practice, subsistence of copyright and/or sui generis right is open to challenge because the part reproduced in a hyperlink may not be substantive, may not easily fit into the category of protected subject matter or lacks ‘substantial investment.’ Nevertheless, it argues that proving infringement in an identifiable part of a web page reproduced in a hyperlink remains the most viable option for indirectly controlling access to the target page, which may itself be unprotected by copyright.     

关于“中国古代因何无版权”研究的几点反思

中国古代因何无版权是一个伪问题,版权属于近代范畴。这个伪问题的提出,是因为把版权制度的功能误解为鼓励创造。理论上,鼓励创造可以属于任何历史范畴。事实上,版权制度的真正功能是维系作品与资本的结合,后者属于近代的产业结构。古代无版权不是中国问题,版权不属于古代的范畴。许多研究成果在解答这个伪问题时夸大了文化解释的作用,而且在文化解释的过程中以经典引述代替社会现实分析的现象比较突出,对中国传统文化的解读亦存在诸多误区。中国古代因何无版权之问与答均值得反思。     

论著作权法的重要修改与积极影响

经过十年的努力和打磨,《著作权法》第三次修订工作终于尘埃落定。新修订的《著作权法》于2020年11月11日获得通过,并将于2021年6月1日起实施,其内容有重大革新,可谓十年磨一剑。新修订的《著作权法》充实和扩张了著作权的权利客体,赋予了作品以法律定义,承认了视听作品的概念,规定了作品的开放兜底条款,完善了作品排除规则,扩张了广播权的内容与范围;革新和完善了著作权归属和利用规则,新增了演员职务表演权利归属规则,革新了合作作品权利授权和行使规则,作品登记制度正式入法;强化了著作权保护制度和侵权损害赔偿制度,将实际损失与侵权获利并列为第一位的损害赔偿确定方式,确立了基于著作权使用费标准的损害赔偿方式,大幅提高了法定损害赔偿标准,明定了著作权侵权惩罚性赔偿制度。以上多处重要修改和迭代革新,必将对我国经济社会产生积极而重大的影响。     

Fair use and copyright protection: a price theory explanation

Copyright scholars suggest that computer technology has reduced transaction costs associated with copyright transfer, allegedly eliminating the need for the fair-use doctrines that were developed to allow limited use of copyrighted material in situations where the transaction costs of securing authorized use would be prohibitive. According to this emerging view, in an ideal world with no contracting costs, third party use of copyrighted material could realistically only take place with the express consent of the copyright holder. This would give the author absolute power to dispose of his work, including the right to veto uses, without the possibility of a fair use “override” of any sort.This paper shows the limits of such transaction cost-based arguments. If transaction costs provide the dominant economic justification of “fair-use” doctrines, an exogenous reduction of such transaction costs would limit the scope and application of the defense of fair use. Nevertheless, in this paper we suggest that, when viewed in light of the anticommons theory, fair-use doctrines retain a valid efficiency justification even in a zero transaction-cost environment. Fair-use defenses are justifiable, and in fact instrumental, in minimizing the welfare losses prompted by the strategic behavior of the copyright holders. Even if copyright licenses can be transferred at no cost (for instance, in a “click and pay” frictionless computer world), the strategic behavior of the copyright holders would still create possible deadweight losses.In this context, we identify a number of critical variables that should guide and constrain the application of fair-use doctrines. These variables include (a) the number of copyright holders; (b) the degree of complementarity between the copyrighted inputs; (c) the degree of independence between the various copyright holders in the pricing of their licenses; and (d) ability to price discriminate.     

数字音乐版权区块链技术保护的相关法律问题研究

在当今数字版权时代,区块链技术因具有去中心化、防篡改、数据可靠等特点,在很大程度上能够解决数字音乐版权的确权难、收益难、维权难的问题。但是,它面临诸如无法鉴别数字音乐作品独创性、版权证明效力有限、有关监管体制不健全等法律适用难题。本文通过深入分析探讨这些现存问题,对比借鉴国外的相关先进做法,从技术工具和法律政策两方面提出了数字音乐版权区块链保护的具体措施,以期望促进我国数字音乐版权保护的发展,加快建设法治中国的新征程。     

深层链接法律规制理论的反思与重构

所有具有或者可能具有重大的经济或实际重要性的作品利用方式，原则上都应当保留给作者。中国著作权法“应当由著作权人享有的其他权利”为应对技术发展提供了充分的制度空间。深层链接对著作权人具有重要商业利益，应属于著作权人专有权的涵盖范围；相比于适用兜底条款，采取扩张解释“信息网络传播权”的方式更优。借鉴国际版权法学界早期应对固定服务卫星传播的规制方案，并结合《世界知识产权组织版权条约》的文本与外交会议文件，可提炼出“间接提供理论”，以合理平衡著作权人、网络服务提供者与公众之间的利益关系。     

Copyright and gene technology

The rapid growth of gene technology and its commercialisation raises concerns for scientific researchers and research institutions wishing to place information in the public domain. This article examines whether copyright laws in the United States, United Kingdom and Australia provide any protection for genetically modified DNA, proteins, and genetically modified organisms, in contrast with any copyright protection extending to a record of the lettering of a sequence representing a series of nucleotides of modified DNA or the amino acids comprising a protein. Whilst it is arguable that protection may be available in the United States and the United Kingdom, it is submitted that it would be difficult to persuade a court in Australia that genetically modified DNA and genetically modified organisms directly constitute "literary" or "artistic" works.