This thesis deals with the way in which copyright law is changing in the digital environment and the mechanisms which are facilitating this change. It deals with these issues by analysing the mechanisms of this change, specifically Digital Rights Management (DRM)Systems and anti-circumvention legislation, and the impact which this change is having on the rights of copyright users. The purpose of copyright is to provide an incentive to authors to continue creating while simultaneously providing a public good in allowing the public to use those creations in certain ways. Copyright achieves this purpose by granting both the author and user certain rights. The author is given a limited monopoly over their work in exchange for allowing this work to enter the public sphere and ensuring that users of that work can utilise that work in certain limited ways. The success of copyright thus rests on maintaining the balance between the rights of these parties. The rise of digital technology has created a situation in which copyright content can be easily copied by any party with a Personal Computer and disseminated around the globe instantly via the Internet. In response to these dangers, copyright owners are making use of DRM systems to protect content. DRM systems include various measures of control within its scope. Theses systems allow for copyright owners to control both access and use of content by copyright users. DRM Systems are not foolproof measures of protection however. Technologically sophisticated users are able to circumvent these protection measures. Thus, in order to protect DRM Systems from circumvention, anti-circumvention legislation has been proposed through international treaties and adopted in many countries. The combined effect of these protection measures are open to abuse by copyright owners and serve to curtail the limited rights of copyright users. The end result of this is that the balance which copyright law was created to maintain is disrupted and copyright law no longer fulfils its purpose. This thesis undertakes an analysis of these issues with reference to how these issues affect copyright users in developing countries. This is done with particular reference to possible approaches to this issue in South Africa as South Africa is a signatory to these anti-circumvention treaties.

Comme la propriété privée, la propriété publique a été confondue avec les biens qui n’en sont que les objets. En droit privé, comme en droit public, il est possible, pourtant, de considérer que la propriété n’est pas un bien. Droit subjectif, la propriété est la puissance que le sujet exerce sur les biens. Formellement, elle est le droit de jouir et de disposer des choses conformément au droit objectif. Matériellement, elle variera en fonction du statut de droit objectif qui habilite le sujet de la propriété, le propriétaire. Les personnes publiques, sujets de l’action publique, sont propriétaires sur le fondement d’une compétence que leur assigne immédiatement l’obligation d’agir dans l’intérêt public. La compétence attribue aux personnes publiques un droit de propriété public, affecté au service du seul intérêt public. Envisager les personnes publiques propriétaires au lieu de la propriété des personnes publiques, aura permis de contribuer à la théorie des ordres juridiques partiels comme représentation de la distinction du droit public et du droit privé. Cela conduit à proposer une définition juridique de l’action publique : l’ensemble d’activités mises en œuvre à partir de l’exercice, par les personnes publiques, de leurs droits subjectifs publics, de puissance et de propriété. / As it is the case for private property, the public property was long time confused with the goods that are its objects. However, in public law as in private law, we should consider that property right is not a good. Being an individual right, the property stands for the power exerted by a subject over goods. Formally, it is the right to enjoy and dispose of goods according to law. Materially, it will vary depending on the applicable law which empowers the owner, subject of the property. Public entities, subjects of public action, are owners based on a competency immediately assigned to them by their duty to act in the public interest. This competency grants to public entities a right to public property only affected to the public interest. Focusing on the public persons as owners instead of considering only their property helps contributing to the theory of partial legal orders (“théorie des ordres juridiques partiels”) as a representation of the distinction between public and private law. This finally leads to suggest a legal definition of the public action as a set of activities implemented by the public persons in the exercise of their subjective rights of property.

O objetivo deste trabalho é discutir a questão da cultura livre a partir dos aspectos relativos ao domínio público. O método utilizado se baseia na observação, na análise e na síntese de dados relacionados aos temas propostos, viabilizando uma discussão baseada no estudo bibliográfico exploratório e explicativo das várias questões abordadas na pesquisa que culminam na problemática desta cultura livre e da noção e dos espaços de domínio público.Por sua vez, recorre-se ao estudo e análise de objetos que compõema pesquisa como, por exemplo, o papel da internet, da \"pirataria\", do direito autoral, da evolução dos meios de comunicação e disseminação do conhecimento, das atividades de cooperação e produção independente pelos usuários da grande rede e das políticas culturais no ambiente digital. Desse modo, são descritas e discutidas experiências de bibliotecas (Digital Public Library of America - DPLA), arquivos históricos (Europeana 1914-1918), música (Jamendo), quadrinhos e games.A partir da análise e estudo do conceito e das práticas de cultura livre estabelecidas principalmente sob o domínio público e da pirataria social, chega-se a conclusão que tais questões são fundamentais no incremento de atividades e relações estabelecidas no ambiente cooperativo da internet, que identificam os usuários como produtores e disseminadores de um ciclo cultural vivo entrelaçado pelas vias da grande rede. Com isso, reforça-se o potencial de políticas culturais a partir do ambiente digital que fortaleçam o ideal de cultura livre a partir de questões tais como a revisão das leis de direito autoral, do incentivo ao domínio público e até mesmo sobre novos entendimentos acerca do universo social-cooperativo da pirataria social em rede. / The mains objective of this paper is to discuss the issue of free culture relating it to the public domain questions. The method used is based on observation, analysis and synthesis of data related to the proposed themes, enabling a discussion based on exploratory and explanatory bibliographical study of the various issues addressed in the research culminating in the issue of this free culture and the notion of public domain.In turn, it is through the study and analysis of objects that make up the research as, for example, the role of the internet, \"piracy\", copyright law, the evolution of media and dissemination of knowledge, cooperative and independent cultural activitiesmade by the users and the large network of cultural policies in the digital environment. Some interesting activities in many cultural fields are discussed and described such as in libraries (Digital Public Library of America - DPLA), historic archives (Europeana 1914-1918), music devices and communities (Jamendo), comics and video gamesFrom the analysis and study of the concept and practice of free culture established primarily in the public domain and social piracy, we conclude that such questions are fundamental in development of activities and relationships established in the collaborative environment of the internet, which identify users as producers and disseminators of a living cultural cycle paths intertwined by the large network.Thus, it reinforces the potential of cultural policies from the digital environment that strengthen the ideal of free culture from issues such as the revision of copyright law, encouraging the public domain and even on new understandings of cooperative and social universe of social piracy.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:26:04Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Mariana Uyeda Ogawa.pdf: 401628 bytes, checksum: fcd1d9018861e84fe62a022e70833ac1 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2007-10-26 / Copyright field of Intellectual Property - protects literary and artistic works. The copyright law has the purpose to protect intellectual creation expressed by any means or medium of expression. The protection includes only the form of expression of ideas, not the ideas themselves. Authorship has certain specific rights moral and economic rights. Moral rights - right of paternity and right of integrity, for example - allow the author to preserve the personal link between himself and his work. They remain with the author even after he has transferred his economic rights or the work has fallen into the public domain. Economic rights permit the author gain financial reward from the use of his works by others. Authorship has many forms of exploitation of his work like to authorize reproduction, distribution and public performance. Economic rights are not to be perpetual as moral rights. They are temporary considering the social function of the copyright and of the public interest in to develop the cultural heritage. In this work we intend to analyze the situations in whic after a certain perior of time and accomplishment of the legal conditions the intellectual work is transferred from the author to the public domain and consequently may be freely used by any interested party / O direito de autor - ramo da Propriedade Intelectual protege a obra artística ou literária. Visa proteger a criação intelectual exteriorizada por qualquer meio ou suporte. A proteção é concedida somente para a forma de expressão da idéia e não propriamente as idéias em si. O autor possui específicos direitos: direitos morais e patrimoniais. Os direitos morais direito à paternidade e o direito de integridade, por exemplo permite ao autor preservar a sua ligação pessoal com a sua obra. Esses direitos permanecem com o autor até mesmo após a transferência dos direitos patrimoniais ou da obra ter caído em domínio público. Os direitos patrimoniais permitem ao autor obter uma retribuição financeira pelo uso da sua obra. O autor tem várias formas de explorar a sua obra como autorizar a sua reprodução, distribuição e representação pública. Esses direitos são temporários em decorrência da função social do direito de autor e do interesse publico em promover o patrimônio cultural. No presente trabalho procuramos analisar as situações em que após o transcurso do prazo e das condições legais a obra intelectual passa do âmbito exclusivo do autor para o domínio público, podendo ser livremente utilizada por qualquer interessado

Tout d'abord, en ce qui concerne le premier chapitre, cette thèse vise à vérifier l'impact des normes des Traités, comme, par exemple, la liberté d'établissement et la libre prestation de services, par rapport aux activités économiques qui sont offerts sur les espaces domaniales. Ensuite, après avoir examiné la jurisprudence de la Cour de justice en matière de services, en ce qui concerne le deuxième chapitre, nous avons examiné aussi l'impact des principes généraux du droit européen et de l'art. 16 de la Charte des Droits Fondamentaux sur les services offerts sur le domaine public. En ce qui concerne le troisième chapitre, nous avons adressé un examen approfondi de la Directive « Services » : après avoir analysé sa genèse, plutôt problématique et difficile, nous en avons décrit les objectifs et la ratio. Le résultat qui a émergé est une fragmentation du marché commun de services, en particulier pour ce qui concerne les services qu’on prend en examen dans cette recherche. L'une des phases les plus critiques par rapport à la Directive « Services », c'est sa transposition. Ce qui semble clair, c'est une fragmentation générale qui entrave l’achèvement et le bon fonctionnement du marché commun. Une fois qu'on a examiné le rôle de la directive « Bolkestein », on a montré la nécessité d'évaluer l'impact de cette norme sur les services offerts sur le domaine public. Dans le quatrième chapitre, on a décidé d'examiner le rôle des directives sur les contrats publics. D'un point de vue juridique, les contrats publics et les concessions sont deux choses distinctes, même si la logique sous-jacente à l’article 12 de la Directive « Services » et le principe de concurrence établissent que les espaces (et, indirectement, par conséquence, les services qui sont intéressés) concernés doivent être attribués dans le cadre d'une procédure de sélection publique. Il convient de rappeler que, avant la présentation d'une proposition de directive de la Commission Européenne pour réglementer les concessions, les principes applicables à ces dernières ont été (et sont encore aujourd’hui) empruntés à la discipline des contrats publics. Nous avons décidé de mettre en évidence comment l'état actuel des contrats publics et les concessions sont interconnectés. On montre aussi que les directives sur les marchés publics jouent un rôle important dans la régulation des types de concessions examinées dans le présent document. On a décidé d'examiner l'impact potentiel de la Directive « concessions ». Dans le cinquième et le sixième chapitre, nous avons examiné et comparé les différents systèmes des États membres de l’Union Européenne. En particulier, nous avons vu comment les concessions des plages sont réglementées en Italie, où, par exemple, il y a un problème juridique qui est loin d’être adressé, en France, en Croatie, en Portugal, et, finalement, en Espagne. Dans le septième et le huitième chapitre, nous avons choisi de parler du risque éventuel de violation des normes en matière d'aides d’État. / With regard to the first chapter, this thesis aims at analysing the impact of the Freedom of Establishment and of the Free Movement of Services on those economic activities which are offered in areas belonging to the public domain. Thus, after examining the relevant case-law of the ECJ in the field of services, in the second chapter what has been analysed is the impact of the general principles and of Art. 16 of the Charter on the services provided in areas belonging to the public domain. In the third chapter, a deep analysis of the Services Directive has been conducted: after addressing its genesis, which was quite problematic, both its objectives and its rationale have been analysed. What has emerged is a fragmentation of the internal market of services, especially with regard to the activities that are examined in this research. One of the most problematic issues related to that Directive is its implementation. Again, what has emerged is a fragmentation of the market of services. Thus, what has been addressed is the impact of the Directive on the services provided in areas belonging to the public domain. In the fourth chapter, the impact of the Public Contracts Directives has been examined. Legally speaking, public procurement contracts and concessions are different, even if the rationale beyond Art. 12 of the Services Directive together with the general principle of competition require the services at issue to be awarded through a selection procedure. Indeed, even before the adoption of what is now the Concessions Directive, the principles applicable to concessions have always been the same as those applicable to public procurement contracts. What emerges is that the public procurement contracts and concessions are strongly interconnected. The potential impact of the Concessions Directive has been addressed as well. In the fifth and in the sixth chapter a comparison between the Italian status quo with regard to those services provided in areas belonging to the public domain and the situation in Portugal, Croatia, France and Spain has been drawn. In the seventh and in the eighth chapter all the implications regarding potential violations of the State Aid rules have been addressed.

Between 1818 and 1824, radical printer and publisher Richard Carlile made a determined effort to disseminate copies of Thomas Paine's banned text The Age of Reason in England. Despite strict censorship laws and harsh legal penalties used to curtail previous publishers of this title, Carlile employed a number of creative techniques that kept Paine's deistic writings in print and in circulation during the Regency period. These included republishing public domain court documents when he was charged with seditious libel and reading The Age of Reason in its entirety into testimony during his trial, making it part of the public record. Copied from trial transcripts and reprinted in cheap pamphlet form, Carlile's editions of The Age of Reason would sell an impressive 20,000 copies in these formats. He managed to provide wide-scale access to a work that had been suppressed by the British government since its original publication in 1794. My paper argues that Carlile's approach to subverting Regency-era censorship of The Age of Reason provided an early test for the recognition of the public domain in British law. Instead of continuing to suppress this text, the British government acknowledged the public's right to read the text in this format, allowing Carlile to use his own court documents to continue its publication. This event paved the way for recognition of the public ownership of texts and access to public records in nineteenth-century British print culture.

Les Services départementaux d’incendie et de secours (SDIS) modernes sont nés de la volonté du législateur français qui, par une loi du 3 mai 1996, a créé des établissements publics autonomes dotés de missions propres et partagées afin de gérer l’un des plus anciens services public au monde : celui des secours et de la lutte contre l’incendie.La qualification ainsi retenue, conforme à l’histoire et à la tradition administrative française, n’en suscite pas moins certaines interrogations car si le critère de spécialité inhérent aux établissements publics est bien présent, celui non moins important de l’autonomie est sujet à caution et pose la question de la véritable nature des SDIS.Ainsi pour mener à bien leurs missions de service public, les SDIS ont besoin d’immeubles, afin de loger les hommes et les véhicules départementalisés, mais aussi de locaux afin de dispenser la formation et d’héberger l’administration nécessaire au fonctionnement de l’établissement public.Ce patrimoine immobilier, hérité principalement des communes et des Etablissements publics de coopérations intercommunales (EPCI) anciennement titulaires de la compétence incendie, a pris majoritairement la forme de mises à disposition à titre gratuit, comme le permettait les textes en vigueur. Cependant, peu de collectivités ont fait le choix de transférer les biens en pleine propriété aux SDIS, mettant ces derniers dans une situation délicate d’un point de vue juridique et comptable puisque les investissements futurs ont été effectués sur des biens ne leur appartenant pas.De même, si en principe, les SDIS construisent, acquièrent ou louent les biens nécessaires à leur fonctionnement (article L 1424-12 du CGCT), certains l’ont fait sur des terrains dont ils n’étaient pas propriétaires, puisque ces derniers ont eux aussi été mis à disposition par des communes ou des EPCI à compétence incendie. Les collectivités historiquement en charge de des SIS ont ainsi marqué une certaine réticence à se départir aussi des terrains d’assiette.Quelle est donc la consistance réelle de ce patrimoine immobilier ? Existe-t-il des moyens de le valoriser ? Si oui, dans quel but ? Et enfin, les SDIS doivent-ils se doter d’une véritable stratégie en matière de gestion de ses actifs immobiliers ? / The modern day local Fire Rescue Services have arisen through the will of the French administration who by an Act of May 3 1996 created autonomous public institutions with specified shared missions in order to manage one of the oldest public services in the world that being the rescue and the fight against fire.The adopted measures, consistent with past history and the traditional French administration nevertheless raise certain questions concerning the true nature of the Fire Rescue Services because even if the specific criteria inherent to public service establishments is respected the no less important autonomy of these establishments should be carefully considered.In order to carry out their public service missions the Fire and Rescue Services not only require buildings to house personnel and departmental vehicules but also to provide training and house to the required administration.This real estate is primarily inherited from the local community and public establishments formerly holding fire authority (EPCI), the majority have been made available free of charge as permitted by law, however few communities have chosen to legally transfer the freehold property to the Local Fire and Rescue Service, which therefore puts them in a delicate position both from a legal and financial point of view as investments for the future have been made on property, legally not belonging to them.Similarly, if in principle the Local Fire Rescue Services construct, acquire or lease property required to operate, some have done so on land they did not own as this has also been made available by the local community or the EPCI. The local communities historically in charge of the Fire Rescue Services have been reluctant to dispose of their land base.So what is the actual substance of this inherited real estate? Are there ways in which it could be enhanced ? If so with what objective? And finally should the local Fire Rescue Services develop a strategy to enable them to manage their real estate assets ?

<p>This research work addresses the problem being faced by developing countries in the commercial exploitation of their traditional cultural expressions (TCEs) by third parties without giving due attribution to nor sharing benefits with the communities from which these TCEs originate. This problem stems from the inability of customary law systems which regulates life in such communities to adequately cater for the protection of these TCEs. The legal systems of the developing countries have also proven to be ineffective in the protection of TCEs from such misappropriation and unauthorized commercial exploitation. This mini-thesis examines how TCEs have been protected domestically through national legislation and internationally through treaties and proposes means by which they can be protected in a manner that would preserve them, while promoting the dissemination of those which can be shared without destroying their inherent nature. This mini-thesis thus explores avenues through which the protection of TCEs would contribute to economic and human development in developing countries.</p>

<p>This research work addresses the problem being faced by developing countries in the commercial exploitation of their traditional cultural expressions (TCEs) by third parties without giving due attribution to nor sharing benefits with the communities from which these TCEs originate. This problem stems from the inability of customary law systems which regulates life in such communities to adequately cater for the protection of these TCEs. The legal systems of the developing countries have also proven to be ineffective in the protection of TCEs from such misappropriation and unauthorized commercial exploitation. This mini-thesis examines how TCEs have been protected domestically through national legislation and internationally through treaties and proposes means by which they can be protected in a manner that would preserve them, while promoting the dissemination of those which can be shared without destroying their inherent nature. This mini-thesis thus explores avenues through which the protection of TCEs would contribute to economic and human development in developing countries.</p>

Le pouvoir de gestion du domaine public est un objet juridique atypique. Au cœur de la dialectique opposant puissance publique et propriété, et confronté aux nouveaux enjeux, patrimoniaux, économiques et concurrentiels, qui traversent la domanialité publique, ses contours et son fondement doivent être redéfinis, sur le socle de sa généalogie. Pouvoir sur une chose, la puissance publique gestionnaire doit aussi être définie dans le cadre des ses interactions avec les administrés, dans une perspective subjectiviste. Le pouvoir de gestion est une puissance publique propriétaire en interaction avec les droits des usagers. / The power to manage state administered property is an atypical legal object. At the core of the dialectic between public authority and property, and facing new property, economic and competitive issues related to state owned public domains, its outline and its foundation must be redefined based on its genealogy. A power upon a thing, the managing public authority must also be defined from a subjectivist approach, within the framework of its interactions with citizens. Management power is a public owner power interacting with the users’ rights.