Copyright is essentially the right of the rightsholder of an original work to prohibit others from making or distributing unauthorised copies of his or her work. More specifically for this dissertation, when an end user deals with digital content, one of the aims of copyright becomes the balancing of the conflicting interests in ‘exclusivity’ on the one hand, and in ‘access to information’ on the other. Exclusivity is achieved by the rightsholders through technological protection measures to protect their commercial interests. Access to information is achieved where works are available to the general public without payment and technological protection measures and where the digital content is not directly marketed for commercial gain. Exclusivity and access to information are two conflicting cultures surrounding copyright in the digital era. It is submitted that unless we find a socio-economic-legal way for the dynamic coexistence of these two conflicting cultures by means of fair dealing, the culture of exclusivity will eventually dominate fair access to information. The transient nature of digital content means that rightsholders have little or no control over their works once the end user has obtained a legal digital copy of the work. The right ‘to prohibit’ end users from copying and distributing unauthorised copies is, therefore, largely meaningless unless a legal or other solution can be found to discourage end users from the unauthorised reproduction and distribution of unauthorised copies of the work. Currently, technological protection measures are used to manage such digital rights because legal permissions within the doctrine of fair dealing for works in printed (analogue) format are inadequate. It is, however, submitted that a legal solution to discourage end users from copying and distributing unauthorised copies rests on two pillars. Firstly, the solution must be embedded in state-of-the-art digital rights management systems and secondly the business model used by publishers, and academic publishers in particular, should change fundamentally from a business-to-consumer model to a business-to-business model. Empirical evidence shows that the printing of e-content will continue to be relevant far into the future. Therefore, the management of fair dealing to allow for the printing of digital content will become increasingly important at educational institutions that use e-books as prescribed course material. It is submitted that although the origination cost of print editions and e-books correspond, the relatively high retail price of e-books appears to be based on the fact that academic publishers of digital content do not have the legal or digital rights management tools to manage the challenges arising from the fair dealing doctrine. The observation that academic publishers are reluctant to grant collecting societies mandates to manage the distribution of digital content, and/or the right to manage the authorised reproduction (printing) of the digital content, supports this hypothesis. Ultimately, with technologies at our disposal, the fair use of content in digital and print format can be achieved because it should simply be cheaper to comply with copyright laws than to make unauthorised digital or printed copies of content that our society desperately needs to make South Africa a winning nation. / Mercantile Law / LL. M.

Digitisation had a profound impact on the creation, reproduction, and dissemination of works protected by copyright. Works in digital format are vulnerable to infringement, and technological protection measures are accordingly applied as protection. Technological protection measures can, however, easily be circumvented, and additional legal protection against circumvention was needed. Article 11 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty (the WCT) obliges Member States to provide adequate legal protection against the circumvention of technological measures applied to works protected by copyright. Contracting parties must refine the provisions of Article 11 and provide for exceptions on the prohibition. Article 11 does not specify whether it pertains to only certain types of technological measures, nor does it prohibit the trafficking in circumvention devices. The United States implemented the provisions of Article 11 of the WCT through the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (the DMCA). Section 1201 of the DMCA prohibits the circumvention of technological measures. It is detailed and relates to two categories of technological measures - access control and copy control. It prohibits not only the act of circumvention, but also the trafficking in circumvention devices. Article 6 of the EC Directive on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society of 2001 implements Article 11 of the WCT. Article 6 seeks to protect Aeffective technological measures@. It prohibits both the act of circumvention and circumvention devices. Although Article 11 of the WCT is silent on the issue of access control, it seems as if the international trend is to provide legal protection to access controls, thus indirectly creating a right to control access. South Africa has not yet implemented Article 11 of the WCT. The South African Copyright Act of 1979 does not protect technological protection measures. The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act of 2002 (the ECT Act) provides protection against the circumvention of technological protection measures applied to digital data. The definition of Adata@ is such that it could include protected works. If applied to protected works, the anti-circumvention provisions of the ECT Act would be detrimental to user privileges. As developing country, it seems to be in South Africa's best interest to the implement the provisions of Article 11 in such a manner that it still allows users access to and legitimate use of works protected by copyright. / Jurisprudence / LL.D.

Digitisation had a profound impact on the creation, reproduction, and dissemination of works protected by copyright. Works in digital format are vulnerable to infringement, and technological protection measures are accordingly applied as protection. Technological protection measures can, however, easily be circumvented, and additional legal protection against circumvention was needed. Article 11 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty (the WCT) obliges Member States to provide adequate legal protection against the circumvention of technological measures applied to works protected by copyright. Contracting parties must refine the provisions of Article 11 and provide for exceptions on the prohibition. Article 11 does not specify whether it pertains to only certain types of technological measures, nor does it prohibit the trafficking in circumvention devices. The United States implemented the provisions of Article 11 of the WCT through the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (the DMCA). Section 1201 of the DMCA prohibits the circumvention of technological measures. It is detailed and relates to two categories of technological measures - access control and copy control. It prohibits not only the act of circumvention, but also the trafficking in circumvention devices. Article 6 of the EC Directive on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society of 2001 implements Article 11 of the WCT. Article 6 seeks to protect Aeffective technological measures@. It prohibits both the act of circumvention and circumvention devices. Although Article 11 of the WCT is silent on the issue of access control, it seems as if the international trend is to provide legal protection to access controls, thus indirectly creating a right to control access. South Africa has not yet implemented Article 11 of the WCT. The South African Copyright Act of 1979 does not protect technological protection measures. The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act of 2002 (the ECT Act) provides protection against the circumvention of technological protection measures applied to digital data. The definition of Adata@ is such that it could include protected works. If applied to protected works, the anti-circumvention provisions of the ECT Act would be detrimental to user privileges. As developing country, it seems to be in South Africa's best interest to the implement the provisions of Article 11 in such a manner that it still allows users access to and legitimate use of works protected by copyright. / Jurisprudence / LL.D.

Law / LL.M.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:21:30Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Virginia Luna Smith.pdf: 1052710 bytes, checksum: ce8b674b93927135478af1483976d7a3 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-12-04 / The aim of this doctoral thesis is to instigate the debate on the criminalization of the most usual forms of copyright violation, considering the standoff between the defenders of a stricter legislation to fight piracy and plagiarism and the liberals who believe in the legitimate use of intellectual creations. The impacts of technological improvements on the market, society, communication and on the body of laws will be examined using the Tridimensional Theory of Law, developed by Miguel Reale, to assess to which extent the current facts that would consist in violation of intellectual property are mutually entangled with the penal norms that impose sanctions against violating behaviors and the values present in a society that is becoming more global, connected and computerized every day / Este trabalho tem por objetivo instigar o debate acerca da criminalização das mais usuais formas de violação ao direito autoral, considerando o impasse que se verifica entre os defensores de uma legislação de combate mais rígida ao plágio e à pirataria, e os liberais que sustentam o uso justo das criações intelectuais. Os impactos promovidos pelos avanços tecnológicos no mercado, na sociedade, na comunicação e no ordenamento jurídico serão examinados utilizando como matriz teórica a Teoria Tridimensional do Direito, desenvolvida por Miguel Reale, para avaliar em que medida se implicam mutuamente os fatos atuais que consistiriam em violação aos direitos de autor, as normas penais que impõem sanções para as condutas violadoras, e os valores presentes em uma sociedade a cada dia mais globalizada, conectada e informatizada

網路的發達使得數位內容的流通更加的便利，數位內容擁有者為了避免資料被任意散播，而採用DRM(Digital Rights Management)系統來保護自身的權利。然而DRM系統是採用限制的方式來控管資料的使用，並沒有考量到合理使用的設計，其中主要的原因在於合理使用的規範難以設計且用電腦落實，時常會有一些情況需視個案而定。 本研究希望透過結合本體論推論與案例式比對的來解決合理使用規範難以制定的問題，利用本體論與規則語言進行推論做合理使用判斷，當本體論與規則語言無法判斷時再進行案例式比對，經由案例庫中的合理使用案例，我們可以明確的給予使用者在對數位內容操作上是否為合理使用的依歸，若沒有相符的案例，依舊可以給予使用者一個迫近預期的合理使用建議。 / Thanks to the development of network, it is much more convenient to spread digital contents; nevertheless, digital content owners can only use DRM (Digital Rights Management) system to protect their personal data from unapproved spreading. However, the fair use design is barely taken into consideration in the DRM system since it only uses limit principles to control data-spreading. The main reason is that fair use policy is not only hard to design but also hard to be universally practiced on computers. Furthermore, there are always rooms for fair use cases beyond a general model description. This research aims to combine the advantages of ontology reasoning and case-based reasoning (CBR) to solve the problem of defining and enforcing fair use policy. Applying ontology and the rule language is the first approach to infer fair use decision; following is the CBR. This means that if ontology is not able to infer a fair use through its enforceable policy, then we apply CBR technique by compared with previous fair use cases established in our case base. Therefore, we can always derive a fair use or not fair use decision. Otherwise, we propose a recommendation for how to achieve a fair use or avoid not a fair use.

L’environnement digital constitue certes une menace pour la protection du droit d'auteur mais il y apporte aussi son lot de réponses et d’outils nouveaux. Ont ainsi été développés de nombreux dispositifs techniques visant à protéger les œuvres numériques, en ligne ou non : films, musique, programmes d'ordinateur, peuvent désormais être dotés de mécanismes techniques gérant les droits de l’auteur ou contrôlant la copie, l’accès ou l’utilisation non autorisés de l’œuvre. Le droit vient au secours de ces mesures techniques de protection : les Traités OMPI de 1996, la directive européenne de 2001 sur le droit d'auteur dans la société de l'information, récemment suivis par le législateur belge, prévoient de sanctionner la neutralisation de tels dispositifs, ainsi que la fabrication et le commerce de moyens permettant ou facilitant un tel contournement. L’œuvre est donc désormais susceptible de bénéficier d’une triple couche de protection : elle est protégée par le droit d’auteur, protégée par la technique, elle-même protégée par la loi. Cet ouvrage analyse l’articulation entre ces trois couches de réservation de l’œuvre et examine dans quelle mesure cette multiplication de la protection modifie le droit d'auteur et l’étendue des prérogatives qu’il accorde à son titulaire. L’auteur répond ainsi aux principales critiques qui ont été adressées à ces mesures techniques et aux dispositions anti-contournement, critiques relatives à l’impossibilité de bénéficier des exceptions au droit d'auteur et notamment de la copie privée, ainsi qu’au contrôle de l’accès à l’œuvre permis par ces dispositifs. Première analyse approfondie de l’introduction des mesures techniques en droit d'auteur, l’ouvrage est également une réflexion d’ensemble sur l’étendue du droit d’auteur, des droits exclusifs d’exploitation aux exceptions et limitations de ces droits, réflexion qui se nourrit aux fondements philosophiques, sociologiques ou économiques de la propriété littéraire et artistique. Ces développements, qui donnent lieu à une analyse minutieuse et argumentée, permettent à l’auteur de plaider d’une part pour une limitation naturelle du pouvoir de l’auteur aux actes d’exploitation de l’œuvre, soit aux actes permettant une diffusion publique de l’œuvre, excluant ainsi les seuls actes d’accès ou d’utilisation finale de l’œuvre ; d’autre part, pour une préservation nécessaire des exceptions au droit d'auteur à l’encontre des mesures techniques ou de la protection légale de celles-ci.

Begreppet ”fan edits” betecknar filmer som klipps om av fans, vilka är missnöjda med hur en adaption för vita duken som gjorts. I min uppsats vill jag påvisa dels hur samspelet mellan fans och filmmakare/filmbolag sett och ser ut, dels försöka klargöra varför copyright/fair use är så knepigt att applicera på området.

網際網路在許多方面皆改變了大眾的讀報方式：不僅僅是因為Google News一類的新聞搜尋引擎，提供讀者多樣化且一次性的即時整合型閱覽，現今多數的網路使用者，也已養成從數個不同網頁中選擇所需資訊來瀏覽或進行研究、調查的習慣。然而，隨著報紙印刷發行量的銳減、新聞網站的流量不如預期，新聞媒體出版商對於搜尋引擎憑藉他人著作獲取暴利的手法感到越來越挫敗。Google自西元2009年起在Google News美國版刊登廣告，會不會成為壓垮傳統新聞媒體的最後一根稻草?而Google的這項舉措是否動搖其利用他人著作內容賺錢的正當性?可符合美國著作權法的合理使用原則? 本文將就Google News刊登廣告所引發的爭議，從網路新聞的發展、Google的經營模式以及合理使用原則的規範目的等面向，鎖定美國著作權法，來探討網路搜尋引擎截取他人著作內容的合法性，以及數位時代下合理使用原則的未來命運。 / The Internet has changed the way people reading the newspaper: not only because news search engines such as Google News providing readers with a diverse and one-time real-time integration of reading, but also because nowadays, most Web users have become accustomed to selecting the information they need from several different Web pages for browsing or carrying out research, and investigation. However, as the newspapers’ circulation drops, and the flow of news Web sites does not reach the expectation, the fact that search engines use others’ works to obtain profits disappoints news media publishers a lot. Will the advertisements placed alongside search results on the American version of Google News be the last straw? Will this undermine the validity of Google’s initiative of using others’ work for money, and fit in with the fair use doctrine? This article will try to analyze the Google News advertising disputes from the perspectives of development of network newsm, Google's business model and the fair use doctrine , and to discuss the legality of the Web search engine as well as the fate of fair use under digital era in the future.

Law / LL.M.