In writing this dissertation, the aim is to investigate the patentability of computer software - whether it is possible and legally advisable to make way for software patents in South Africa. This is an uncertain and highly debated area in our law. Ultimately, this study is aimed at checking the validity of proposed arguments and suggestions emanating from within the computer software patent debate itself. The Patents Act 57 of 1978 only excludes the patenting of computer software ?as such?. As a result, it is left open for interpretation what it is that the legislature meant by the phrase ?as such? and whether indeed computer software can be patented, since we lack case-law to clarify this point of law. Presently, there are arguments that software patents may possibly fall in line with the required growth and development for our country?s economy. The debate also revolves around the issue whether patents are better suited as legal protection for computer software in contrast to the protection offered under the Copyright Act 98 of 1978. This study will therefore be carried out with an aim to determine and recommend the suitable direction which our law should follow in order to have a competitive stance and facilitate economic growth for our country, specifically in the computer software industry. / Mini Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2016. / Mercantile Law / LLM / Unrestricted

1 Law and Artificial Intelligence Abstract At present, the legal order of the Czech Republic is not directly concerned with artificial intelligence, even though the first technologies and systems based on it are already appearing. However, a number of soft law materials (strategies, plans and declarations) issued both by the Czech authorities and also within the European Union (especially by the European Commission) deal with artificial intelligence. Both Czech and EU materials are outlined in the thesis and are considered in further research. The aim of this thesis is to evaluate the actual needs to deal with artificial intelligence from a legal point of view and whether the current legislation is sufficient and applicable to artificial intelligence systems. After the introductory part, the thesis gives an overview of the history of artificial intelligence and its development, tries to define the term of artificial intelligence and related terms (algorithm, machine learning, deep learning) and then examines whether artificial intelligence can be included under some legal concepts (categories) already existing (artificial intelligence as a computer program, thing, product, computer virus and more). Furthermore, the thesis discusses the development and research of artificial intelligence, including ethical...

Contractual copyright law A theme of the diploma thesis is the contractual copyright law. The main purpose of this thesis is to provide an overview of the contractual copyright law, mainly focused on the copyright license agreement. The thesis consists of seven chapters. The first chapter describes sources of the contractual copyright law. It consists of four parts which introduce elemental international sources, European Union law, constitutional regulations and primary and secondary legislation. The second chapter explains basic terms of the copyright law, which are necessary for better comprehension of the contractual copyright law. The third and the fourth chapter are crucial parts of the thesis. The third chapter generally explains licenses and its division to contractual, legal and compulsory licenses. This part is also an introduction for the fourth chapter which is a core of the thesis and deals with the copyright license agreement. In the fourth chapter, license agreement is described from its conclusion to termination (e.g. withdrawal of the agreement or unilateral termination of the agreement). Besides conclusion and termination, this chapter describes parts, purpose, subject and content of the contract. The fourth chapter also analyses obligatory and facultative terms of the license...

Protection of Computer Games and Video Games Abstract The topic of this thesis is the legal protection of computer games and video games. Its main goal is to analyse the Czech law of video game protection and to figure out if the current state of legislation is sufficient enough considering the quick growth of the gaming industry by comparing it to the legislation in other countries and pondering de lege ferenda possibilities. The secondary goal of this study is to serve as a brief and practical guide for game creators who are having a hard time with regards to legal protection of their own creations. The thesis does not only revolve around the Czech national law, but it also deals with international law and Community law upon which the Czech law is based. The thesis is divided into six parts. The first part lays down the main goals of the study and possible ways of achieving them. The second part goes through the most important theoretical concepts, terminology and video game history, through which it introduces the reader to video games. The third part focuses on international treaties potentially applicable to video game protection, on the US law, and finally on the European Union law and the law in a few specific European countries. The fourth part introduces in detail all the possible legal forms of...

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights article 27 shows that copyright law has two functions. ‘everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits. Everyone has right to protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.’[1]  These functions are supporting cultural aspects on society and give a prior right to holder of the copyright to secure and use the work. On the other hand, copyright secures the personality and property rights of the copyright holder. When talking about copyright as an international concept we can state that copyright is not an absolute right, it is limited by the common wellbeing of society, meaning that quoting and getting the information or ideas from other’s work is accepted. Ideas, principles, thoughts, or themes are not included in the scope of copyright protection.[2] Copyright can be created only by a human, but it can be transferred to a legal person like a company. Not that long-ago computer programs were not seen as tangible property and that is why the damages done to the programs were hard to prove as a criminal action.[3] Copyright protects the artistic work during the whole lifetime of author and 70 years after his death. It can be said that copyright and related rights are less protective than industrial registered intellectual property, on contrary, copyright is not limiting the protection to the level of success or requirements, while for example, patent law is very restrictive about the quality of product.[4] Copyright law is a territorial limited law, led by international regulations like the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (hereafter Berne Convention)[5] and European Copyright Directive (hereafter DSM Directive).[6] Photoshop and image manipulation are present in everyday life, this kind of services can be offered even to children for their school portals. Use of computer-generated pictures and films is increasing in campaigns, news and movies. This kind of image technology can be used for making simulations of law cases or “waking up” movie stars from death. The scale of use is endless. The artificial intelligence (hereafter AI) technology behind computer-generated imageries is called deep learning. Deep learning is an advanced type of machine learning and it is used at, for example, computer programs, self-driving cars, and targeted online advertising.[7] The artificial intelligence software makes generating easy and possible for larger user groups and develops images, which brings more legal problems as well. Computer-generated imageries (hereafter CGI) are used for the entertainment industry for different targets and upgrade the film for a new level. In the same time, it can be used for an act of revenge, when the content is defamation the person at the picture, or it can be used for fake news. These kinds of computer-generated imageries are called deep fakes. Sometimes the imageries done by AI or other software are so real that it is almost impossible to recognize the difference with the bare eye, the content of the deep fake can lead the viewer to wrong. The problem of deep fakes has been identified by the governments as well as by the large corporations, for example, Facebook. Facebook, which is one the world’s biggest social media network, has decided to delete and ban deep fakes on its pages according to Monica Bickert vice-president of Facebook. The ban does not apply the parody or satire content, which is one argument that copyright holders are relying on deep fakes.[8] The aim of the thesis is to recognise all aspects of copyright law implications; including the rights of the owner of original work, rights of the owner of new work, rights of the persons that are at the copyright-protected work and rights of the trademark owner if the trademark is used on imagery. [1] The Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1948 [2] Article 2 of Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. September 9, 1886 regulates the scope of the works which are enjoying copyright protection. Guidelines to Berne Convention paragraph 2.2 and 2.3 state that the content itself is not important for copyright protection but the form of the work. Therefore, for example, idea is excluded from the scope of copyright protection. WIPO. Guide to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. 1978. Retrieved April 25, 2020, from https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/copyright/615/wipo_pub_615.pdf [3] Cox v Riley (1986) 83 Cr App R 54. The employee erased several programs from the magnetic cards and was charged with criminal damage. Employee argued that he was not guilty because the computer programs were not tangible property. Court held that even though the computer programs were not tangible property the damages done to the cards were enough to be charged in a criminal sentence. [4] Pila, J. Torremans, P. European Intellectual Property Law. 2nd edition. 2019. Oxford. [5] Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. September 9, 1886. The latest text of Berne Convention (from 1971 Paris Act plus Appendix) will be used at thesis. [6] Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directive 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC [7] Rouse, M. Definition ‘deep learning’. TechTarget. 2019. Retrieved May 25, 2020, from  https://searchenterpriseai.techtarget.com/definition/deep-learning-deep-neural-network [8] Bickert, M. Enforcing Against Manipulated Media. 2020. Retrieved May 9, 2020, from   https://about.fb.com/news/2020/01/enforcing-against-manipulated-media/

Arguably one of the most prevalent issues in the field of Intellectual Property law, both international and domestic, is that of the emerging orphan works problem. Orphan works are any original literary, pictorial or graphic illustrations, and photographs whereas the prospective user cannot readily identify and/or locate the owner(s) of the copyrighted material. This poses a legal risk of liability upon the prospective user for copyright infringement. This thesis focuses on the legal topic of copyright with an emphasis on orphan works legislation. This study compared and contrasted the experiences in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia which have all enacted legislation to mitigate the issue of liability to prospective users of orphaned works, to the United States which has been reluctant to do the same. Each country has used its own legislative model to mitigate the liability of orphan works. This study sought out to analyze each model as well as compare the legal, political, and economic similarities of each country to test the viability of a particular model being successful in the United States.

Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2012. / Includes bibliography / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This thesis analyses current South African copyright law to ascertain the proper interpretation and application of the fair dealing provisions contained in the Copyright Act 98 of 1978. Copyright law ensures that authors’ works are not used without their consent, which they can grant subject to compensation or conditions attached to the use. Fair dealing exceptions allow the general public to use copyright works for certain purposes without the copyright owner’s consent and without paying compensation. These provisions are intended to balance copyright owners’ interests with the interest that members of the public have in using copyright works for socially beneficial purposes. These provisions typically allow the use of a copyright work for the purposes of research or private study, personal or private use, criticism and review, and news reporting. Unfortunately there is no South African case law concerning the fair dealing provisions, and the application of these exceptions remains unclear. This study aims to clarify the extent of application of the fair dealing exceptions to copyright infringement so that courts may be more willing to consider foreign and international law and in doing so develop South African intellectual property law. The social and economic policy considerations underlying the fair dealing exceptions are considered to determine their function. International conventions relating to copyright and neighbouring rights are examined, specifically the provisions allowing exceptions to copyright. The legislation and case law of Australia and the United Kingdom are analysed to determine the proper interpretation and application of these statutory defences. This knowledge is then used to inform South African law. The Copyright Act 98 of 1978 does not contain a fair dealing exception for parody and satire. Australian legislation does contain such an exception, and it is analysed in that context. An exception for parody is proposed for South African law, and the need for and application of this provision is considered. The constitutionality of the proposed exception is evaluated in terms of its impact on the constitutional property rights of copyright owners. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie tesis ondersoek Suid-Afrikaanse outeursreg om die behoorlike uitleg en toepassing van die “billike gebruik”-bepalings in die Wet op Outeursreg 98 van 1978 te bepaal. Outeursreg beskerm die werk van ʼn outeur teen ongemagtigde gebruik van haar intellektuele eiendom. Gebruik kan deur die outeur gemagtig word, òf teen vergoeding òf onderhewig aan bepaalde voorwaardes. Artikels 12-19B (die billike gebruik-bepalings) van die Wet op Outeursreg laat ander toe om sekere werke te gebruik sonder die toestemming van die eienaar van die werk en sonder om vergoeding te betaal. Die bepalings streef om ʼn balans te tref tussen die belange van die outeur en die belange van die publiek. ʼn Werk mag volgens hierdie bepalings tipies gebruik word vir die doeleindes van navorsing of private studie, persoonlike of private gebruik, beoordeling of resensie, of om nuus te rapporteer. Daar is tans geen Suid-Afrikaanse regspraak rakende hierdie uitsonderings nie, en hul toepassing is dus onseker. Hierdie tesis beoog om die werking van die billike gebruik-bepalings duidelik uiteen te sit om hoër gewilligheid in howe te skep om internasionale en buitelandse reg toe te pas, en sodoende Suid-Afrikaanse immateriële goederereg te ontwikkel. Die sosiale en ekonomiese beleidsoorwegings wat die bepalings ondersteun word geanaliseer om die doel daarvan te bepaal. Internasionale outeursreg-verdragte word bespreek om ʼn raamwerk vir die uitsonderings te skep. Wetgewing en regspraak van Australië en die Verenigde Koninkryk word ondersoek, en die kennis wat daar opgedoen word, word toegepas op die Suid-Afrikaanse bepalings. Die Wet op Outeursreg 98 van 1978 bevat geen uitsondering vir die doeleindes van parodie en satire nie. Die Australiese Wet op Outeursreg 63 van 1968 bevat wel so ʼn uitsondering, en dit word in hierdie verband beoordeel. ʼn Uitsondering vir parodie en satire word voorgestel en oorweeg in die konteks van Suid-Afrikaanse outeursreg. Die grondwetlikheid van die voorgestelde uitsondering word bepaal na aanleiding van die impak wat dit sal hê op outeurs se eiendomsreg.

Jusqu'à l'arrêt CCH Canadienne Ltée c Barreau du Haut-Canada, rendu par la Cour suprême en 2004, la doctrine canadienne opposait deux exceptions générales au droit d’auteur : l'utilisation équitable (fair dealing), existant surtout dans les pays du Commonwealth (dont le Canada), et l’usage loyal (fair use), exception présente aux États-Unis. Alors que le premier modèle serait restrictif et conservateur, le second se voudrait plus libéral et soucieux des droits des utilisateurs. Il va sans dire que certains auteurs contestaient le statu quo juridique et souhaitaient plutôt l'adoption d'une approche libérale, voire étatsunienne, en matière d'utilisation équitable au Canada. Or, depuis l'arrêt CCH et la pentalogie du droit d’auteur de 2012, un important changement conceptuel de cette dichotomie s’est opéré. Certains auteurs décrivent une réduction significative des différences entre les deux approches, rendant les distinctions futiles. Ainsi, nous sommes amenés à nous poser la question suivante : suite à la jurisprudence canadienne contemporaine, existe-t-il toujours une différence significative entre l'utilisation équitable et l’usage loyal ? Ce mémoire se veut une analyse de l’état du droit en 2019 afin de répondre à cette question. Au terme de son raisonnement, l’auteur arrive à la conclusion que même si les deux régimes se ressemblent plus que jamais, les différences entre ceux-ci sont suffisamment importantes pour ne pas les assimiler à une unique approche avec des variations mineures. / Until the Supreme Court of Canada decision CCH Canadian Ltd v Law Society of Upper Canada in 2004, the legal literature in Canada acknowledged two competing general exceptions to copyright: fair dealing, which exists especially in Commonwealth countries (including Canada), and fair use, an exception in the United States. While the former was seen as restrictive and conservative, the second was viewed as intending to be liberal and more concerned with user rights. Needless to say, some writers contested the legal status quo and wanted a liberal, even American, approach to fair dealing in Canada. However, since the CCH decision and the copyright pentalogy of 2012, there has been a significant conceptual shift with regard to this dichotomy. Some authors describe a significant reduction in the differences between the two approaches, making the distinctions of little consequence. As such, we are led to ask the following question: given the contemporary Canadian jurisprudence, is there still a significant difference between fair dealing and fair use? This dissertation is an analysis of the state of the law in 2019 for the purpose of answering this question. At the end of his examination of the issue, the author comes to the conclusion that even if the two regimes are more similar than ever, the differences between them are sufficiently important to not assimilate them into a single approach with minor variations.

No description available.

Thesis (LLD) -- Stellenbosch University, 1988. / Article 1 Section 8 Clause 8 of the Constitution of the United States of America empowers Congress "to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries". This simple clause sums up in a few words the philosophy and underlying principles of modern copyright law. Copyright law, like other branches of intellectual property law (i.e. the laws of patents, trade marks and designs), seeks to create a system whereby the creator of original works or intellectual property is afforded a qualified monopoly in the use or exploitation of his work in order, first, to compensate and reward him for the effort, creativity and talent expended and utilized in the creation of his work, and secondly, to act as an incentive for him to use his talents and efforts to create more and better works or items of intellectual property. The qualified monopoly is limited in duration and after the expiry of the term the work falls into the public domain and can be freely used and reproduced by others. A balance is struck between the interests of the individual and the public interest. The rationale behind this philosophy is the establishment of a profit incentive for creators of intellectual property. The effectiveness of the profit motive is dependent upon the degree to which the creator of the intellectual property is able to maintain and enforce his qualified monopoly. If the law is not effective in enabling the creator of intellectual property to maintain and enforce his monopoly then the efficiency of the operation of the profit motive will be impaired. Consequently, the soundness and effectiveness of the law of copyright is a . significant factor in the promotion of the creation of intellectual property and ultimately• in enriching our culture and promoting our knowledge and well-being. Viewed from a different perspective, the purpose of copyright is to prevent one man from appropriating to himself what has been produced by the skill and labour of others1 . In broad terms, copyright may be described as the exclusive right in relation to a work embodying intellectual property (i.e. the product of the intellect) to do or to authorize others to do certain acts in relation to that work, which acts represent in the case of each type of work the manners in which that work can be exploited for personal gain or profit. Copyright is an immaterial property right. The subject of the right is a work of the intellect or spirit and thus an intangible. Copyright in a work is akin to ownership in a tangible article. The following analysis of the essential nature of copyright by Slomowitz AJ in Video Parktown North (Pty) Limited v Paramount Pictures Corporation is instructive: "It seems to me that when he who harbours an idea, by dint of his imagination, skill or labour, or some or all of them, brings it into being in tactile, visible or audible form, capable thereby of being communicated to others as a meaningful conception or apprehension of his mind, a right of property in that idea immediatelycomes into existence. The proprietary interest in that object of knowledge is the ownership of it and is called 'copyright'. It might just as well be called 'ownership', but we have chosen to call it by another name, reserving 'ownership' as the appellation for the proprietary interest in corporeal things, by way of semantic, but not, as I see it, legal, distinction. In this sense, copyright has sometimes been called 'intellectual property', as it indeed is. " Copyright subsists in the work of the intellect embodied in a material form which is a tangible article. The tangible or physical form of the work embodies two separate items of property, i.e. the copyright in the work of the intellect and the ownership of the tangible article. Ownership of the two items of property must be distinguished and can vest in different persons. Transfer of the ownership of one of the i terns of property does not necessarily affect transfer of the ownership of the other item of property.