Search

This article considers the quotation exception to copyright infringement under EU and UK law. It challenges the broad interpretation of the exception offered by academic commentators to date, as approximating a US-style fair use defence to copyright infringement, and presents an alternative understanding of the exception in its place. According to that understanding, established principles of EU and UK copyright law, including those adopted by the Court of Justice of the European Union in Deckmyn with respect to the parody exception, limit the acts permitted under the quotation exception to (1) reproductions of copyright material that are (2) identified as reproductions and (3) for a purpose of criticism, review, or an analogous purpose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the legal aspects of online music and creative collaborative sharing activities in relation to various copyright-related conflicts of laws in places such as the U.S. Great Britain, and France. Constitutional rights and freedom of expression are addressed, along with Internet-related copyright infringement and a right to privacy. Intranet laws are examined, as well as German copyright law and a fair use doctrine under the U.S. Copyright Act.

The article discusses the changes of the regulation on the copyright exceptions in British law. Topics mentioned include the amendment in the statute books on series of regulations, the reflections on the impact to the field of collections and art management, and the comparison with the fair use exception of the U.S. law. It also mentioned the fair dealing with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA).

The article focuses on the introduction of quotation exceptions to British copyright law. Topics include the fair use doctrine under U.S. copyright law, the British Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, and the proposed amendment of Australian copyright laws. Information is provided on freedom of expression under constitutional law.

The article focuses on the fair dealing exception to copyright infringement under British copyright law. Topics include copyright law reform proposals, civil legal procedure, and fair criticisms related to copyrighted works. Information is provided on the fairness test, the reporting of current events, and parodies.

The present comment considers an issue that has received little discussion in the common law world: namely whether fixation and authorship are parts of the same creative act in relation to literary, dramatic and musical works. The importance of the question is that, if authorship does not entail fixation, it should logically be possible for a person independent of the author to reduce the work to material form for copyright purposes. This would significantly expand the range of works protected by copyright and would extend protection to those works which have never been fixed by their authors. The focus of the comment is Australian law, but its discussion is comparative, with particular attention given to UK law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why is the use of copyrighted materials in the United Kingdom referred to as a process of 'fair dealing', while in the United States it is referred to as a process of 'fair use'? Because of the universality of communications and the ever expanding use of the Internet to facilitate the free flow of published expression between readers in the United Kingdom and the United States, works have comingled their respective copyright notices that are attached to them. At first glance 'fair dealing' and 'fair use' might appear to be synonymous terms having the same meaning in law, but they are not. But then, neither is there a simple explanation as to what either term means. To find an answer it is necessary to reference a supreme written law to understand both their parameters and penumbras defining national law on copyrights, as modified by international treaties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An overview of U.S. and UK Copyright legislation reveals that fair use/fair dealing guidelines do not directly address the use of copyrighted materials in course management systems. Although many colleges and universities develop and share their own guidelines, there is no consensus among those institutions or between those institutions and publishers. Research on the use of copyrighted materials with course management systems is lacking and, together with the absence of legal or professional association mandates, librarians and institutions are open to charges of copyright in fringement. This situation is problematic for universities and may be fueling the trend toward Open Access publication of university research. This paper reviews the existing codified guidelines for fair use of copyrighted materials from the 1970s through the present, some legal challenges that have occurred, and how some of the larger universities are currently handling the questions of fair use and licensing as they pertain to course management systems. In addition, a recommendation is made for research to bring the parties closer to an accepted set of guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the issue of copyright and fair use related to sound recordings in Great Britain. It says that the British government has recommended changes to British intellectual property law. Meanwhile, the British Library has put up to 4000 hours of materials from its sound archive on an extranet to be used by the British Higher Education and Further Education.

Fair dealing is a concept which provides certain exceptions to UK copyright law; it permits the use of copyright material in certain circumstances without permission from, or payment to, the copyright owner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the history of copyright law in England and the United States from the 16th to the 20th century. The development of copyright laws are based on a series of responses to the potential for disruption inherent in various new forms of technology. The development of copyright principles in England was spurred by the invention of the printing press during the fifteenth century, and started on the printing monopoly given to the Stationers' Company in 1557. The United States was influenced by the copyright principles developed in England. To promote the creation of intellectual property, the concept of fair use was developed by American courts. In the twentieth century, trademark laws were legislated to protect the commercial interests of businesses.