On the Origin of the Right to Copy: Charting the Movement of Copyright Law in Eighteenth Century Britain (1695-1775)

Taking as its point of departure the lapse of the 1662 Licensing Act in 1695, this book examines the lead up to the passage of the Statute of Anne 1710 and charts the movement of copyright law throughout the eighteenth century, culminating in the House of Lords decision in Donaldson v Becket (1774). The established reading of copyright's development throughout this period, from the 1710 Act to the pronouncement in Donaldson, is that it was transformed from a publisher's right to an author's right; that is, legislation initially designed to regulate the marketplace of the bookseller and publisher evolved into an instrument that functioned to recognise the proprietary inevitability of an author's intellectual labour. The historical narrative which unfolds within this book presents a challenge to that accepted orthodoxy. The traditional analysis of the development of copyright in eighteenth-century Britain is revealed to exhibit the character of long-standing myth, and the centrality of the modern proprietary author as the raison d'etre of the modern copyright regime is displaced.

Preventive detention and the right to personal liberty and security under Article 5 ECHR

'Preventive detention' refers to detention by executive order as a  precautionary measure based on predicted criminal conduct. Detention is without criminal charge or trial as detention is based on the prediction of a future offence. This paper examines Article 5 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ('ECHR'), in particular Article 5(1)(c) and Article 5(3). To explore this issue, this paper conducts a textual analysis of Article 5 and examines both the travaux preacuteparatoires of the ECHR, as well as jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. This article argues that preventive detention is specifically provided for under the second ground of detention in Article 5(1)(c). A person in preventive detention, however, must be brought promptly before judicial authority under Article 5(3).

Human rights, the law, cyber-security and democracy : after the European Convention

Many commentators have treated the internet as a site of democratic freedom and as a new kind of public sphere. While there are good reasons for optimism, like any social space digital space also has its dark side. Citizens and governments alike have expressed anxiety about cybercrime and cyber-security. In August 2011, the Australian government introduced legislation to give effect to Australia becoming a signatory to the European Convention on Cybercrime (2001). At the time of writing, that legislation is still before the Parliament. In this article, attention is given to how the legal and policy-making process enabling Australia to be compliant with the European Convention on Cybercrime came about. Among the motivations that informed both the development of the Convention in Europe and then the Australian exercise of legislating for compliance with it was a range of legitimate concerns about the impact that cybercrime can have on individuals and communities. This article makes the case that equal attention also needs to be given to ensuring that legislators and policy makers differentiate between legitimate security imperatives and any over-reach evident in the implementation of this legislation that affects rule of law principles, our capacity to engage in democratic practices, and our civic and human rights.

Crime, Punishment and Article 3 ECHR: Puzzles and Prospects of Applying an Absolute Right in a Penal Context

Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which provides that ‘No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’, is considered to enshrine an absolute right. Yet it contains an under-explored element: inhuman and degrading punishment. While torture has been the subject of extensive academic commentary, and inhuman and degrading treatment has been examined to some extent, the prohibition of inhuman and degrading punishment has not been explored in significant depth, in spite of its considerable potential to alter the penal landscape.

This paper elucidates the key doctrinal elements of inhuman and degrading punishment ‘and treatment associated with it’, in the words of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). It addresses a number of ‘puzzles’ or problems which arise in applying the absolute right enshrined in Article 3 of the ECHR to sentencing and imprisonment, clarifies ECtHR doctrine and highlights some of its key implications. Bringing a theoretically informed understanding to bear on the application of Article 3 of the ECHR in a penal context, the paper provides clarity and coherence to a complex and crucial intersection between human rights and penology.

Human rights and mortgage repossession: beyond property law using Article 8

Following the Supreme Court decisions in Manchester CC v Pinnock and Hounslow CC v Powell, this article examines the possible impact of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms upon protection of the home in creditor repossession proceedings. The central argument advanced is that, although occupiers may not all be protected through property law, they may enjoy an independent right to respect for their home under Article 8, which should be acknowledged in the legal frameworks governing creditor's enforcement rights against the home. The article suggests that the most common creditor enforcement route, through mortgage repossession proceedings, falls short in this regard. It takes as its primary focus the treatment of children in such proceedings to provide an example of the potential for a human rights-based property protection heralded by these two Supreme Court decisions.

Strategy proposal, from the perspective of Latin America and the Caribbean, for advancing towards an international convention on the human rights of older persons

The Brasilia Declaration, adopted in 2007 at the second Regional Intergovernmental Conference on Ageing in Latin America and the Caribbean: towards a society for all ages and rights-based social protection and ratified in ECLAC resolution 644(XXXII) of 2008, called on participating governments to work towards adopting a international convention regarding the rights of older persons (Article 24). It also established a mandate for a Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur who would be responsible for promoting and protecting the rights of older persons (Article 25).Three meetings were held during the past biennium pursuant to that commitment. The first and second meetings took place, respectively, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (2008) and in Buenos Aires, Argentina (2009). At the third meeting, held in Santiago (Chile), on 5-6 October 2009, participating countries requested the Secretariat of the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLAC) to prepare "a proposal for a strategy on how to follow up article 24 and 25 of the Brasilia Declaration." This proposal should include the "minimum content necessary in an international convention on the rights of older persons from the Latin American and Caribbean perspective."In response to this request, this document first presents a general overview of existing human rights standards, both at the international and at the regional levels, that are relevant to the promotion and the protection of the rights of older persons. It then provides the arguments that, from a Latin American and Caribbean perspective, justify the adoption of an international convention regarding the rights of older persons, as well as the minimum contents that this convention should include. The document finally presents a proposed strategy to move towards the adoption of an international convention in this realm from a Latin American and Caribbean perspective.

Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark: possession - mortgagee's right or discretionary remedy?

Comments on the Chancery Division decision in Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark on whether a mortgagee's exercise of its contractual right, on the mortgagor falling into arrears, to appoint receivers such that the property could be sold and possession obtained without triggering the court's discretionary powers pursuant to the Administration of Justice Act 1970 s.36 infringed the mortgagor's rights under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 Protocol 1 art.1. Considers the implications of proposed reforms recasting the mortgagee's right to possession as a discretionary remedy. [From Legal Journals Index]

A “very limited” effect or a “seismic” impact? A study of the impact of the Human Rights Act 1998 on the Courts of Northern Ireland

This article focuses on the question of what impact the Human Rights Act 1998 has had in practice on the courts of Northern Ireland. How frequently are human rights arguments made in the course of cases in this jurisdiction, and to what extent do such arguments affect outcomes of cases? In order to assess the impact of the Act, the use of the European Convention on Human Rights in the Northern Irish courts during four periods of time is examined. These are, firstly, prior to the passing of the Act in November 1998; secondly, between the Act’s passing and its coming into force in October 2000; thirdly, the first three years after the coming into force of the Act (October 2000 until October 2003); and fourthly, the three years between October 2006 and October 2009.