Global ETD Search

1	The legality of music sampling in Sweden : Complicated issues demand complicated measures Wiséen, Martin, Herbertsson, Johanna January 2015 (has links) The legality of music sampling is in Sweden unknown. The reason for this is mainly the lack of relevant case law and that the legislation and legislative history has not reach clarity within this subject. There are generally two different routes and perspectives on sample issues. The first main route is that samples should be judged according to the “common” copyright rules where originality, similarity and other factors need to be investigated. The second route is that sampling issues should be judged upon the neighbouring rights, and within these rules no other tests needs to be included. It is simply an infringement if it is proven that someone has in fact sampled a recording. American case law has inherent both views and most often are pending between these views. German case law however made it clear in the Kraftwerk case that the neighbouring rights are used within German law. Through this inconsistency the authors have not found any clear indications which rules a Swedish court would apply. Due to the relationship between Sweden and Germany, and that they are both members of the European Union the authors believe that Sweden will judge accordingly to the neighbouring rights. However, the authors believe that the neighbouring rights were created for the purpose to contradict piracy and not sampling disputes. Furthermore, neither the legislative history nor judicial literature gives any indications that the neighbouring rights should be used when a part of a work has been altered and used in a new work. The author’s personal beliefs are therefore that the neighbouring rights should not be applied on sampling cases. The “common” copyright rules should instead be applied which includes originality and similarity tests. Sampling Intellectual Property Law Copyright Music Kraftwerk American Case Law Musical Rights Neighbouring Rights Alteration Independent Alteration Originality Originality Threshold Double Creation Free Use Fair use Substantial similarity De minimis
2	時尚設計之著作權保護-以服裝設計為中心游皓婷, Yu, Haw Tyng Unknown Date (has links) 時尚設計師出面控訴快時尚品牌抄襲的新聞層出不窮，不乏設計師出面指稱現行法規對其保護不足，而時尚設計、服裝設計領域近期不斷以新穎之技術、手法融入設計當中，呈現出更多以往不可能呈現的造型，使得服裝設計越來越像藝術品，並不單單只是為了使人穿著，進而引發是否有必要將服裝設計與傳統藝術作品區別保護之爭辯。根據美國國會2016年的報告顯示，全球時尚產業每年產值約1.75兆美金，過去曾有紡織王國美稱的台灣，也開始從過去的委託製造（OEM）致力轉型於委託設計製造（ODM），至今努力發展自有品牌（OBM），如何成功打入國際為本土品牌未來應努力之方向。歐盟地區有歐盟共同體設計規定，予以服裝設計周全之設計權保護；美國則長期受制於實用性物品原則之可分離性判斷，而長期無法提供服裝設計之著作權保護；我國雖未明文不予服裝設計著作權保護，但也長期處於不明確之狀態。對設計師而言，不明確之保護即為一不確定風險，將阻礙具創意的新設計之出現，此為台灣推行文化創意產業、將本土品牌推向國際、培育新一代設計師所需解決之問題。本研究主要分為五章，除第一章為緒論外，第二章為時尚設計產業與國際保護現況之概述，第三章主要論述美國著作權法基本結構且以服裝設計為重心，並就前述基礎由實務案例加以歸納評析美國實務對於服裝設計著作權保護之態度，第四章主要論述我國著作權法基本結構且以服裝設計為重心，並就前述基礎藉由實務案例加以歸納評析我國實務對於服裝設計著作權保護之態度，第五章提出本研究之結論與建議。經研究發現著作權法並非全然對於服裝設計不予以保護，僅係因立法政策與解釋論上之不穩定見解，導致保護的不確定性，希望透過此篇論文能夠提供我國主管機關解釋上之建議。 / Nowadays, copycat, knock-off accusements appear frequently within fashion design industry. Some of the scholars, industrial representors comment that fashion design is not copyrightable and shall not be protected. However, it is indisputable that fashion is an innovative and orginal form of art. Furthermore, fahion design consists of artisic expression and other unique features. Thus fashion designers and other kind of artists shall not be treated unfairly. This study focuses on copyright protection both in Taiwan and United States. And discuss to what extent shall we protect garment design and how we can seafeguard talented fashion desingers’s creative works. The study is divided into five parts. The first part is the introduction part. The second part is talking about the featues of fashion design industry and international rules which are related to fashion design. The third part focuses on copright law, domestic theoretical legal analysis and cases on garment design infringement lawsuits in the United States. The fourth part focuses on copright law, domestic theoretical legal analysis and cases on garment design infringement lawsuits in Taiwan. In the end, this study provides several suggestions for the Taiwanese adminstrtion agencies and juditial authorities. 時尚產業時尚設計服裝設計著作權法設計專利網紅 DPPA IDPPPA IDPA 仿製原創性實質近似 TRIPS協定伯恩公約歐盟共同體設計指令歐盟共同體設計規則可分離性判斷美術工藝品應用美術著作 Fashion industry Fashion design Garment design Copyright Design patent Internet celebrity DPPA IDPPPA IDPA Knock-off Originality Substantial similarity TRIPS agreement Berne Convention Separability Artistic handicraft Applied art

Search results

The legality of music sampling in Sweden : Complicated issues demand complicated measures

時尚設計之著作權保護-以服裝設計為中心