Hello

EU Copyright Directive Part 2

Re-defining the Rights and Responsibilities of Database Owners Under Competition Law
Daryl Lim
Singapore Academy of Law Journal
Volume 18, Number 2, 2006 p.418

Singapore protects databases under copyright law. While copyright may be conceptually malleable enough to protect databases, stretching copyright over these factual compilations may be a rough and incomplete solution to regulating access. The EU Database Directive makes a clearer delineation between banal and expressive works, but suffers similar shortcomings while adding new ones with its sui generis right. This article reviews key developments affecting databases in the EU, US and Singapore, and suggests that competition law, with an inbuilt economic framework for determining compulsory access, offers an alternative that may better reflect the commercial expectations of database owners. However, for competition law to properly regulate databases, it is important that stakeholders are aware of analytical pitfalls in order to avoid penalising legitimate exercise of IPRs in databases.

The EU Copyright Directive as Compared to US Copyright Law and its Implication for Libraries
Marandola, M.
International Journal of Legal Information
Volume 34, Number 2, 2006 p.246-266

DRM Interoperability and Intellectual Property Policy in Europe
MIKKO VALIMAKI AND VILLE OKSANEN
European Intellectual Property Review
Volume 28, Issue 11, November 2006 p.562

This article analyses DRM interoperability in the light of EU copyright, competition and consumer laws. First, it is asked why the copyright directive lacks an explicit interoperability provision and to what extent the directive, however, may allow interoperability. Secondly, the article considers EC competition law as a means to enforce interoperability in DRM systems. Thirdly, the role of consumer protection regulation is discussed.

THE U.S. DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT AND THE E.U. COPYRIGHT DIRECTIVE: COMPARATIVE IMPACT ON Fair Use RIGHTS
Stephen E. Blythe
Tulane Journal of Technology & Intellectual Property
Volume 8, Spring 2006 p.111

EU — ECJ July 14, 2005 – Copyright and neighbouring rights — Broadcasting of phonograms — Directive 93/83 — Law of Member State governing fee for phonogram use — Equitable remuneration — Directive 92/100, Art. 8(2) — C-192/04 — Lagardère Active Broadcast v. Société pour la perception de la rémunération équitable (SPRE) et al. — “Lagardère Active Broadcast”
International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law
Volume 36, Number 7, 2005 p.869

Restrictions on Copyright and their Abuse
HERMAN COHEN JEHORAM
European Intellectual Property Review
Volume 27, Issue 10, October 2005 p.359

Restrictions on copyright are as old as the rights themselves. In precise wordings they figure in the Berne Convention . A breakthrough came at the SLaw Journal / Law Reviewkholm Revision Conference, where the general three-step test was introduced in the Convention. This has since found wider application in the TRIPs Agreement and the WIPO Treaties of 1996. In the EU Copyright Directive of 2001 the formula of the text has been repeated, but its scope has radically changed. Here it does not address the national legislators, but the courts, which now have to apply the text in proceedings between private parties and thereby protect copyright owners against eventual abuses of copyright restrictions by greedy users.

UK’s Implementation of the Anti-Circumvention Provisions of the Eu Copyright Directive: An Analysis
Aashit Shah
Duke Law & Technology Review
Volume 2004, Articles 1-16 p.Article 3

Author: international

Mentioned in these Entries

Berne Convention, EU Copyright Directive, Fair Use, Treaties.