Comment la crainte de sous-protection engendrera la catastrophe de la surprotection:examen constitutionnel du Digital Millenium Copyright Act

Chaque apparition d’une nouvelle technologie remet inévitablement en cause le cadre législatif établi pour protéger les droits de propriété. Cependant, avec la numérisation de l’information et l’avènement d’Internet, il est de plus en plus facile de reproduire et de distribuer librement des œuvres protégées. Toutefois, depuis le 20 décembre 1996, l’Organisation Mondiale de la Propriété Intellectuelle (OMPI) a adopté deux traités ayant pour objectif principal d’adapter le cadre juridique du droit d’auteur aux nouvelles technologies. C’est pour se conformer à ces traités que l’administration Clinton a adopté le Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) en 1998. Cet article examine d’abord les dimensions constitutionnelle du Copyright américain, et plus spécifiquement certaines limites qui viennent tempérer les prérogatives exclusives des titulaires de droits, notamment le domaine public et les usages équitables possibles d’ une œuvre. Sont ensuite examinés le DMCA et sa conformité aux principes énoncés à la clause constitutionnelle, source du pouvoir législatif du Congrès américain en matière de Copyright. De plus, comme le DMCA interdit non seulement le contournement de technologies protégeant une œuvre en format numérique, mais également la fabrication et la diffusion de technologies permettant d’arriver à cette fin, cet article analyse les répercussions de cette loi sur la liberté d’expression.

The copyright act, chapter 32, R.S.C. 1927 as amended by Chapter 8, 1931, Chapter 18, 1935, Chapter 28, 1936, Chapter 27, 1938.

At head of title: Office consolidation.

Miller's modern acting drama, consisting of the most popular pieces produced at the London theatres, subject to the provisions of the Dramatic copyright act ...

Half-title: Modern acting drama.

The Life of an Author: Samuel Egerton Brydges and the Copyright Act 1814

The history of literary copyright in nineteenth century Britain is dominated - understandably perhaps - by a preoccupation with the passing and impact of the Copyright Amendment Act 1842, so ably lobbied for by Sir Thomas Noon Talfourd. This article, however, draws attention away from the 1842 Act towards the Copyright Act 1814, the first legislative provision within British copyright law to introduce a lifetime term of protection for the author. Why and on what basis did the legislature do so?
In bringing a renewed attention to this often overlooked legislative measure, we consider the context and logic that underpinned to grant of a copyright term that was tethered to the life of the author. In doing so, we might also find a useful prism through which to look afresh at current copyright debates concerning the appropriate nature and scope of copyright protection in the 21st century.

Commentary on Copyright Act 1801

Legislation extending the effect of the Statute of Anne 1710 (uk_1710) to Ireland (following the Act of Union 1800 and the unification of Great Britain and Ireland), as well as the first statutory provision to make use of the term ‘copyright'. The commentary assesses the substance of the legislation, its relationship with the King's Bench decision of Beckford v. Hood (uk_1798a), and its impact upon the Irish book trade.

Commentary on Copyright Act 1814

Legislation replacing the Statute of Anne 1710 (uk_1710) and providing that copyright in a literary work would last for twenty-eight years from the time of publication, but that ‘if the author shall be living' at the end of that period then the work was to be protected ‘for the residue of his natural life'.
The commentary explores the background to the legislation, and in particular the controversy over the library deposit provision in the wake of the decision in Beckford v. Hood (1798) (uk_1798a). The commentary suggests that the introduction of the reversionary lifetime copyright term had more to do with the opportunistic and timely intervention of one Member of Parliament (Samuel Egerton Brydges) than with any principled or considered position adopted on the part of the legislature.

Commentary on International Copyright Act 1838

Legislation providing that the British monarch could, by Order in Council, grant copyright protection, within Britain and its Dominions, to the authors of literary works first published abroad for a period specified within the Order but not exceeding the domestic copyright term. The Act provided the first occasion on which the British legislature offered the possibility of copyright protection for the work of foreign authors. Its timing is indicative of the widespread attention which the issue of international copyright had begun to attract in Britain, on the continent, and in the United States. The commentary describes the background to the legislation in relation to British attitudes to the importation of foreign works throughout the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and in the context of early nineteenth century debates before the courts as to whether the work of foreign authors was in any event protected under existing legislative measures (see also: uk_1854). The commentary also explores the reasons for the failure of the British government to successfully negotiate any bilateral agreements under the legislation, but nevertheless suggests that the 1838 Act provided an important platform upon which to build a subsequent and more successful regime of international copyright protection (see also: uk_1844; uk_1852; uk_1886).

Commentary on International Copyright Act 1844

Legislation replacing the International Copyright Act 1838 (uk_1838) and providing that the British monarch could, by Order in Council, grant to foreign authors both copyright protection for works of literature, drama, music and art, as well as performance rights for dramatic pieces and musical compositions. The document contains the following associated material: Bill to amend Law relating to International Copyright 1844 (uk_1844a).
This Act addressed perceived inadequacies of the International Copyright Act 1838 (uk_1838) by expanding upon both the subject-matter and the nature of the rights that might be included in a reciprocal copyright arrangement with a foreign state. It also specifically linked the protections that foreign authors would enjoy within Britain to existing domestic copyright legislation. Following this legislation Britain successfully negotiated a series of bilateral international copyright treaties the first of which was concluded with Prussia in May 1846.
The commentary locates the Act within existing legislative provisions designed to address the problem of the market for cheap foreign imports of British books. It suggests that, regardless of the existence of stringent measures targeting unlawful foreign imports, the British government regarded a system of international copyright protection as integral in both addressing the import issue and in fostering a more secure overseas market in the interests of the British book trade.

Commentary on International Copyright Act 1852

Legislation introducing the concept of translation rights within British copyright law. The document contains the following associated material: Hansard: 119 (1852): 498-502 (uk_1852a); 121 (1852): 4 (uk_1852b); Anglo-French Copyright Treaty (uk_1851).
Introduced to implement the obligations of the Anglo-French Copyright Convention, agreed in November 1851, this Act provided that the British monarch could, by Order in Council, provide foreign authors with the right to prevent the reproduction and performance of their literary and dramatic works in translation. The Act also introduces the first statutorily defined permitted acts within the UK, and is indicative of the increasing influence that international standards and obligations began to exert upon the content and substance of domestic copyright law.
The commentary locates the Act within the context of the two previous International Copyright Acts (see: uk_1838; uk_1844) and the Anglo-French Convention, highlighting the selective manner in which the British legislature implemented its obligations under the 1851 Convention, in particular in drawing a distinction between the reproduction of political and non-political material, as well as the difficulty that foreign authors experienced in complying with the provisions of the legislation.

Commentary on Fine Arts Copyright Act 1862

Legislation conferring copyright protection on paintings, drawings, and photographs for the life of the author plus a seven year post mortem term. The Act was also innovative in de-coupling the copyright term from the event of publication, in providing artists with a new form of ‘moral rights' protection, and in introducing the concept of "originality" as the standard threshold for copyright protection.
The commentary explores the background to the legislation, and in particular, the international copyright regime, the nature of the art market in eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the role of the Society of Artists in lobbying for legislative protection, and the impetus which the International Exhibition provided for securing the same. The commentary also considers how the 1862 Bill, in its earliest incarnation, incorporated elements that would have signalled a radical departure from established copyright norms. In particular, the Bill proposed: that copyright protection should not be contingent upon registration; and that protection should be offered on a universal basis, regardless of an artists' nationality, and regardless of where the work in question was created.

Commentary on International Copyright Act 1886

The Act enabling the British government to become a signatory to the Berne Convention, which Convention came into force on 5 December 1887. The commentary describes the nature and extent of British participation in the three conferences which led to the signing of the Berne Convention, against a backdrop of several unsuccessful attempts to reform and consolidate the British copyright regime, the importance of pursuing meaningful Anglo-American copyright negotiations, and the significance of imperial-colonial copyright relations. The commentary also explores the extent to which the cause of Irish Nationalism, and the case for Home Rule, dominated the political landscape in early 1886, so explaining why the opportunity of adhering to the Berne Convention did not also lead to substantive reform of the domestic copyright regime at this time.

Database Rights in Safe European Home: The Path to More Rigorous Protection of Information

1. Introduction "The one that has compiled ... a database, the collection, securing the validity or presentation of which has required an essential investment, has the sole right to control the content over the whole work or over either a qualitatively or quantitatively substantial part of the work both by means of reproduction and by making them available to the public", Finnish Copyright Act, section 49.1 These are the laconic words that implemented the much-awaited and hotly debated European Community Directive on the legal protection of databases,2 the EDD, into Finnish Copyright legislation in 1998. Now in the year 2005, after more than half a decade of the domestic implementation it is yet uncertain as to the proper meaning and construction of the convoluted qualitative criteria the current legislation employs as a prerequisite for the database protection both in Finland and within the European Union. Further, this opaque Pan-European instrument has the potential of bringing about a number of far-reaching economic and cultural ramifications, which have remained largely uncharted or unobserved. Thus the task of understanding this particular and currently peculiarly European new intellectual property regime is twofold: first, to understand the mechanics and functioning of the EDD and second, to realise the potential and risks inherent in the new legislation in economic, cultural and societal dimensions. 2. Subject-matter of the study: basic issues The first part of the task mentioned above is straightforward: questions such as what is meant by the key concepts triggering the functioning of the EDD such as presentation of independent information, what constitutes an essential investment in acquiring data and when the reproduction of a given database reaches either qualitatively or quantitatively the threshold of substantiality before the right-holder of a database can avail himself of the remedies provided by the statutory framework remain unclear and call for a careful analysis. As for second task, it is already obvious that the practical importance of the legal protection providedby the database right is in the rapid increase. The accelerating transformationof information into digital form is an existing fact, not merely a reflection of a shape of things to come in the future. To take a simple example, the digitisation of a map, traditionally in paper format and protected by copyright, can provide the consumer a markedly easier and faster access to the wanted material and the price can be, depending on the current state of the marketplace, cheaper than that of the traditional form or even free by means of public lending libraries providing access to the information online. This also renders it possible for authors and publishers to make available and sell their products to markedly larger, international markets while the production and distribution costs can be kept at minimum due to the new electronic production, marketing and distributionmechanisms to mention a few. The troublesome side is for authors and publishers the vastly enhanced potential for illegal copying by electronic means, producing numerous virtually identical copies at speed. The fear of illegal copying canlead to stark technical protection that in turn can dampen down the demand for information goods and services and furthermore, efficiently hamper the right of access to the materials available lawfully in electronic form and thus weaken the possibility of access to information, education and the cultural heritage of anation or nations, a condition precedent for a functioning democracy. 3. Particular issues in Digital Economy and Information Networks All what is said above applies a fortiori to the databases. As a result of the ubiquity of the Internet and the pending breakthrough of Mobile Internet, peer-to-peer Networks, Localand Wide Local Area Networks, a rapidly increasing amount of information not protected by traditional copyright, such as various lists, catalogues and tables,3previously protected partially by the old section 49 of the Finnish Copyright act are available free or for consideration in the Internet, and by the same token importantly, numerous databases are collected in order to enable the marketing, tendering and selling products and services in above mentioned networks. Databases and the information embedded therein constitutes a pivotal element in virtually any commercial operation including product and service development, scientific research and education. A poignant but not instantaneously an obvious example of this is a database consisting of physical coordinates of a certain selected group of customers for marketing purposes through cellular phones, laptops and several handheld or vehicle-based devices connected online. These practical needs call for answer to a plethora of questions already outlined above: Has thecollection and securing the validity of this information required an essential input? What qualifies as a quantitatively or qualitatively significant investment? According to the Directive, the database comprises works, information and other independent materials, which are arranged in systematic or methodical way andare individually accessible by electronic or other means. Under what circumstances then, are the materials regarded as arranged in systematic or methodical way? Only when the protected elements of a database are established, the question concerning the scope of protection becomes acute. In digital context, the traditional notions of reproduction and making available to the public of digital materials seem to fit ill or lead into interpretations that are at variance with analogous domain as regards the lawful and illegal uses of information. This may well interfere with or rework the way in which the commercial and other operators have to establish themselves and function in the existing value networks of information products and services. 4. International sphere After the expiry of the implementation period for the European Community Directive on legal protection of databases, the goals of the Directive must have been consolidated into the domestic legislations of the current twenty-five Member States within the European Union. On one hand, these fundamental questions readily imply that the problemsrelated to correct construction of the Directive underlying the domestic legislation transpire the national boundaries. On the other hand, the disputes arisingon account of the implementation and interpretation of the Directive on the European level attract significance domestically. Consequently, the guidelines on correct interpretation of the Directive importing the practical, business-oriented solutions may well have application on European level. This underlines the exigency for a thorough analysis on the implications of the meaning and potential scope of Database protection in Finland and the European Union. This position hasto be contrasted with the larger, international sphere, which in early 2005 does differ markedly from European Union stance, directly having a negative effect on international trade particularly in digital content. A particular case in point is the USA, a database producer primus inter pares, not at least yet having aSui Generis database regime or its kin, while both the political and academic discourse on the matter abounds. 5. The objectives of the study The above mentioned background with its several open issues calls for the detailed study of thefollowing questions: -What is a database-at-law and when is a database protected by intellectual property rights, particularly by the European database regime?What is the international situation? -How is a database protected and what is its relation with other intellectual property regimes, particularly in the Digital context? -The opportunities and threats provided by current protection to creators, users and the society as a whole, including the commercial and cultural implications? -The difficult question on relation of the Database protection and protection of factual information as such. 6. Dsiposition The Study, in purporting to analyse and cast light on the questions above, is divided into three mainparts. The first part has the purpose of introducing the political and rationalbackground and subsequent legislative evolution path of the European database protection, reflected against the international backdrop on the issue. An introduction to databases, originally a vehicle of modern computing and information andcommunication technology, is also incorporated. The second part sets out the chosen and existing two-tier model of the database protection, reviewing both itscopyright and Sui Generis right facets in detail together with the emergent application of the machinery in real-life societal and particularly commercial context. Furthermore, a general outline of copyright, relevant in context of copyright databases is provided. For purposes of further comparison, a chapter on the precursor of Sui Generi, database right, the Nordic catalogue rule also ensues. The third and final part analyses the positive and negative impact of the database protection system and attempts to scrutinize the implications further in the future with some caveats and tentative recommendations, in particular as regards the convoluted issue concerning the IPR protection of information per se, a new tenet in the domain of copyright and related rights.

Unsticking the centre-piece – the liberation of European copyright law?

Following European legislative initiatives in the field of copyright limitations and exceptions, policy flexibilities formerly available to mem- ber states has been greatly diminished. The law in this area is increasingly incapable of accommodating any expansion in the scope of freely permitted acts, even where such expansion may be an appropriate response to changes in social and technological conditions. In this article, the causes of this problem are briefly canvassed and a number of potential solutions are noted. It is suggested that one such solution – the adoption of an open, factor-based model similar to s 107 of the United States’ Copyright Act – has not received the serious attention it deserves. The fair use paradigm has generally been dismissed as excessively unpredictable, contrary to international law and/or culturally alien. Drawing on recent fair use scholarship, it is argued here that these disadvantages are over-stated and that the potential for the development of a European fair use model merits investigation.

Spanish Supreme Court Rules in Favour of Google Search Engine... and a Flexible Reading of Copyright Statutes?

On 3 April 2012, the Spanish Supreme Court issued a major ruling in favour of the Google search engine, including its ‘cache copy’ service: Sentencia n.172/2012, of 3 April 2012, Supreme Court, Civil Chamber.* The importance of this ruling lies not so much in the circumstances of the case (the Supreme Court was clearly disgusted by the claimant’s ‘maximalist’ petitum to shut down the whole operation of the search engine), but rather on the court going beyond the text of the Copyright Act into the general principles of the law and case law, and especially on the reading of the three-step test (in Art. 40bis TRLPI) in a positive sense so as to include all these principles. After accepting that none of the limitations listed in the Spanish Copyright statute (TRLPI) exempted the unauthorized use of fragments of the contents of a personal website through the Google search engine and cache copy service, the Supreme Court concluded against infringement, based on the grounds that the three-step test (in Art. 40bis TRLPI) is to be read not only in a negative manner but also in a positive sense so as to take into account that intellectual property – as any other kind of property – is limited in nature and must endure any ius usus inocui (harmless uses by third parties) and must abide to the general principles of the law, such as good faith and prohibition of an abusive exercise of rights (Art. 7 Spanish Civil Code).The ruling is a major success in favour of a flexible interpretation and application of the copyright statutes, especially in the scenarios raised by new technologies and market agents, and in favour of using the three-step test as a key tool to allow for it.

Exemption procedures under federal pension law.

Shipping list no.: 96-0046-P.