Alternatives to the Lex Protectionis as the Choice-of-Law Rule for Initial Ownership of Copyright

Alternatives to the Lex Protectionis as the Choice-of-Law Rule for Initial Ownership of Copyright external link

Drexl, J., Kur, A. & van Eechoud, M.

pp: 289-307, 2005

Abstract

Conventional wisdom in international copyright doctrine has it that the law of the country for whose territory protection is claimed governs copyright issues - whether it concerns existence, scope, duration, ownership, transfer or infringement. The Berne Convention of 1886 and other international copyright treaties do not lay down the lex protectionis as conflict rule, contrary to what is often assumed. This paper addresses the drawbacks of the lex protectionis for the initial ownership issue. It assesses alternative conflict rules that can increase legal certainty, while giving due respect to the diversity in national allocation regimes. There is a case to be made for the development of creator-oriented conflict rules for initial ownership issues, particularly if they also serve legal certainty by identifying a single governing law. Such rules may be construed using the main allocation principles of modern European private international law theory.

Links

http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/OwnershipPILKurBook2005web.pdf

Auteursrecht, Intellectuele eigendom

RIS

TY  - GEN
AU  - Drexl, J.
AU  - Kur, A.
AU  - van Eechoud, M.
PY  - 0504
DA  - 2005-05-04
T1  - Alternatives to the Lex Protectionis as the Choice-of-Law Rule for Initial Ownership of Copyright
SP  - 289-307
UR  - http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/OwnershipPILKurBook2005web.pdf
AB  - Conventional wisdom in international copyright doctrine has it that the law of the country for whose territory protection is claimed governs copyright issues - whether it concerns existence, scope, duration, ownership, transfer or infringement. The Berne Convention of 1886 and other international copyright treaties do not lay down the lex protectionis as conflict rule, contrary to what is often assumed. This paper addresses the drawbacks of the lex protectionis for the initial ownership issue. It assesses alternative conflict rules that can increase legal certainty, while giving due respect to the diversity in national allocation regimes. There is a case to be made for the development of creator-oriented conflict rules for initial ownership issues, particularly if they also serve legal certainty by identifying a single governing law. Such rules may be construed using the main allocation principles of modern European private international law theory.
K1  - Auteursrecht
K1  - Intellectuele eigendom
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Other{nokey,
	title = {Alternatives to the Lex Protectionis as the Choice-of-Law Rule for Initial Ownership of Copyright},
	author = {Drexl, J. and Kur, A. and van Eechoud, M.},
	year = {0504},
	date = {2005-05-04},
	pages = {289-307},
	abstract = {Conventional wisdom in international copyright doctrine has it that the law of the country for whose territory protection is claimed governs copyright issues - whether it concerns existence, scope, duration, ownership, transfer or infringement. The Berne Convention of 1886 and other international copyright treaties do not lay down the lex protectionis as conflict rule, contrary to what is often assumed. This paper addresses the drawbacks of the lex protectionis for the initial ownership issue. It assesses alternative conflict rules that can increase legal certainty, while giving due respect to the diversity in national allocation regimes. There is a case to be made for the development of creator-oriented conflict rules for initial ownership issues, particularly if they also serve legal certainty by identifying a single governing law. Such rules may be construed using the main allocation principles of modern European private international law theory.},
	keywords = {Auteursrecht, Intellectuele eigendom},
}

Save .bib

Vreemde bedgenoten: de Wob en de Richtlijn hergebruik overheidsinformatie external link

van Eechoud, M.

Mediaforum, num: 9, pp: 291, 2005

Links

http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/mf_2005_9.pdf

Overheidsinformatie

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

The position of broadcasters and other media under “Rome II”: Proposed regulation on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations external link

van Eechoud, M.

IRIS Plus, num: 10, pp: 1-8, 2006

Abstract

The EU are in the advanced stages of legislating conflict of laws rules for torts, with the adoption by the Council of a common position on the proposed Rome II regulation on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations. In this contribution, a critical look is taken at this private international law instrument and its impact on the broadcasting and media industries. The legislative background and objectives of Rome II are set out, followed by an introduction to its general rules. Special attention is paid to questions of intellectual property, unfair competition and violations of interests in personality (including defamation).

Links

http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/607.pdf

Mediarecht

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Study on the Implementation and Effect in Member States’ Laws of Directive 2001/29/EC on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society external link

Westkamp, G., Rieber-Mohn, T., van Eechoud, M., Guibault, L., Helberger, N. & Hugenholtz, P.B.

2007

Abstract

This study, commissioned by the European Commission, examines the application of Directive 2001/29/EC in the light of the development of the digital market. Its purpose is to consider how Member States have implemented the Directive into national law and to assist the Commission in evaluating whether the Directive, as currently formulated, remains the appropriate response to the continuing challenges faced by the stakeholders concerned, such as rights holders, commercial users, consumers, educational and scientific users. As set out in specifications of the study set out by the Commission, its aim is "to assess the role that the Directive has played in fostering the digital market for goods and services in the four years since its adoption". The impact of the Directive on the development of digital (chiefly online) business models, therefore, will be the focal point of our enquiry throughout this study.

Links

http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Infosoc_report_2007.pdf

Auteursrecht, Intellectuele eigendom

RIS

TY  - RPRT
AU  - Westkamp, G.
AU  - Rieber-Mohn, T.
AU  - van Eechoud, M.
AU  - Guibault, L.
AU  - Helberger, N.
AU  - Hugenholtz, P.B.
PY  - 0322
DA  - 2007-03-22
T1  - Study on the Implementation and Effect in Member States’ Laws of Directive 2001/29/EC on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society
UR  - http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Infosoc_report_2007.pdf
AB  - This study, commissioned by the European Commission, examines the application of Directive 2001/29/EC in the light of the development of the digital market. Its purpose is to consider how Member States have implemented the Directive into national law and to assist the Commission in evaluating whether the Directive, as currently formulated, remains the appropriate response to the continuing challenges faced by the stakeholders concerned, such as rights holders, commercial users, consumers, educational and scientific users. As set out in specifications of the study set out by the Commission, its aim is "to assess the role that the Directive has played in fostering the digital market for goods and services in the four years since its adoption". The impact of the Directive on the development of digital (chiefly online) business models, therefore, will be the focal point of our enquiry throughout this study.
K1  - Auteursrecht
K1  - Intellectuele eigendom
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Report{nokey,
	title = {Study on the Implementation and Effect in Member States’ Laws of Directive 2001/29/EC on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society},
	author = {Westkamp, G. and Rieber-Mohn, T. and van Eechoud, M. and Guibault, L. and Helberger, N. and Hugenholtz, P.B.},
	year = {0322},
	date = {2007-03-22},
	abstract = {This study, commissioned by the European Commission, examines the application of Directive 2001/29/EC in the light of the development of the digital market. Its purpose is to consider how Member States have implemented the Directive into national law and to assist the Commission in evaluating whether the Directive, as currently formulated, remains the appropriate response to the continuing challenges faced by the stakeholders concerned, such as rights holders, commercial users, consumers, educational and scientific users. As set out in specifications of the study set out by the Commission, its aim is "to assess the role that the Directive has played in fostering the digital market for goods and services in the four years since its adoption". The impact of the Directive on the development of digital (chiefly online) business models, therefore, will be the focal point of our enquiry throughout this study.},
	keywords = {Auteursrecht, Intellectuele eigendom},
}

Save .bib

CLIP Suggestions for amendment of the Brussels I regulation with respect to Exclusive jurisdiction and cross border intellectual property (patent) infringement external link

van Eechoud, M.

2007

Abstract

In consequence of ECJ judgments C-4/03 - GAT v. LuK and C-539/03 - Roche Nederland v. Primus, handed down on 13 July 2005, it appears no longer feasible for a national court to allow for consolidation of claims against a person infringing parallel intellectual property rights registered in different Member States, and/or to accept a joinder of claims against multiple defendants engaged in concerted actions. It is feared that this will entail considerable impediments for an efficient enforcement of intellectual property rights, in particular of patents. In these comments, the European Max-Planck Group for Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP) suggests the adverse affects of the ECJ's rulings should be cured. This can be done by revising the drafting of article 22(4) and article 6 of the Brussels Regulation on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (44/2001).

Links

http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/CLIP_Brussels_%20I.pdf

Intellectuele eigendom

RIS

TY  - RPRT
AU  - van Eechoud, M.
PY  - 0419
DA  - 2007-04-19
T1  - CLIP Suggestions for amendment of the Brussels I regulation with respect to Exclusive jurisdiction and cross border intellectual property (patent) infringement
UR  - http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/CLIP_Brussels_%20I.pdf
AB  - In consequence of ECJ judgments C-4/03 - GAT v. LuK and C-539/03 - Roche Nederland v. Primus, handed down on 13 July 2005, it appears no longer feasible for a national court to allow for consolidation of claims against a person infringing parallel intellectual property rights registered in different Member States, and/or to accept a joinder of claims against multiple defendants engaged in concerted actions. It is feared that this will entail considerable impediments for an efficient enforcement of intellectual property rights, in particular of patents. In these comments, the European Max-Planck Group for Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP) suggests the adverse affects of the ECJ's rulings should be cured. This can be done by revising the drafting of article 22(4) and article 6 of the Brussels Regulation on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (44/2001).
K1  - Intellectuele eigendom
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Report{nokey,
	title = {CLIP Suggestions for amendment of the Brussels I regulation with respect to Exclusive jurisdiction and cross border intellectual property (patent) infringement},
	author = {van Eechoud, M.},
	year = {0419},
	date = {2007-04-19},
	abstract = {In consequence of ECJ judgments C-4/03 - GAT v. LuK and C-539/03 - Roche Nederland v. Primus, handed down on 13 July 2005, it appears no longer feasible for a national court to allow for consolidation of claims against a person infringing parallel intellectual property rights registered in different Member States, and/or to accept a joinder of claims against multiple defendants engaged in concerted actions. It is feared that this will entail considerable impediments for an efficient enforcement of intellectual property rights, in particular of patents. In these comments, the European Max-Planck Group for Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP) suggests the adverse affects of the ECJ's rulings should be cured. This can be done by revising the drafting of article 22(4) and article 6 of the Brussels Regulation on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (44/2001).},
	keywords = {Intellectuele eigendom},
}

Save .bib