Misplaced Pages

#798201

88-758: India is a member of most of the important international conventions governing the area of copyright law, including the Berne Convention of 1886 (as modified at Paris in 1971), the Universal Copyright Convention of 1951 , the Rome Convention of 1961 and the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) . Initially, India was not a member of the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) and

176-408: A copyright in countries adhering to the convention. It also enforces a requirement that countries recognize rights held by the citizens of all other parties to the convention. Foreign authors are given the same rights and privileges to copyrighted material as domestic authors in any country that ratified the convention. The countries to which the convention applies created a Union for the protection of

264-445: A derivative work is independent of, and does not affect the extent of any rights in any pre-existing works incorporated in the said derivative work. In the case of joint authorship, each author is the owner of not only the part he or she created but of the whole work. Every author can freely use the work and license it out for others to use it. A co-owner of a work of joint authorship does not require other authors' permission to use

352-533: A different Berne member country. This means Berne member countries can require works originating in their own country to be registered and/or deposited, but cannot require these formalities of works from other Berne member countries. Under Article 3, the protection of the Convention applies to nationals and residents of countries that are party to the convention, and to works first published or simultaneously published (under Article 3(4), "simultaneously"

440-557: A fine (up to 200,000 Rupees). Jurisdiction [Place of Suing] Under Copyright Act, 1957 - in 2015 the jurisdiction law regarding copyright violation underwent significant change through the judgement of the Supreme Court in the 2015 case Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. Vs. Sanjay Dalia Archived 2022-04-08 at the Wayback Machine – If cause of action has arisen wholly or in part in place where plaintiff resides or

528-403: A number of specific exceptions, scattered in several provisions due to the historical reason of Berne negotiations. For example, Article 10(2) permits Berne members to provide for a "teaching exception" within their copyright statutes. The exception is limited to a use for illustration of the subject matter taught and it must be related to teaching activities. In addition to specific exceptions,

616-490: A party to the convention, since that would have required major changes in its copyright law , particularly with regard to moral rights , removal of the general requirement for registration of copyright works and elimination of mandatory copyright notice. This led first to the U.S. ratifying the Buenos Aires Convention (BAC) in 1910, and later the Universal Copyright Convention (UCC) in 1952 to accommodate

704-426: A previously written work such as a play, novel or music is incorporated in a future work such as a motion picture, the authors of such previous works could claim to be the coauthors of the motion picture. It is usually true that a motion picture would be a joint work and not a collective work with respect to the authors actually working on the film, but the usual status of "employees for hire" given to them would not let

792-437: A situation where an author's contributions are minimal. The court held that in order to be characterized as a joint author, an individual must show two things: first, that he or she produced independent copyright material within the context of the creative process and second, that both individual authors exhibited mutual intent to create the joint work. However, the court argued that, despite Thomson's significant contribution to

880-475: A unitary whole ". Section 201(a) gives the status of co-ownership in the copyrighted work to such authors of a joint work. Under the US copyright law , individuals must prove the following two things for claiming joint authorship in a work: The individual contributions made by authors to a joint work need not necessarily be equal in quality or quantity. Nevertheless, the author has to show that his contribution to

968-409: A work is published in a party country and nowhere else, this is the country of origin. However, under Article 5(4), when a work is published "simultaneously" ("within 30 days") in several party countries, the country with the shortest term of protection is defined as the country of origin. For works simultaneously published in a party country and one or more non-parties, the party country

SECTION 10

#1732780882799

1056-475: A writer and actor in the film. As a result of his legal victory in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, LexisNexis ranked Ahanchian's copyright victory as both the #2 and #3 Copyright Laws of November 2010, when two new Case Laws were established in the American legal system: 1. Because the author clearly demonstrated the "good cause" required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, and because there was no reason to believe that

1144-510: Is a factually wrong usage. While the US and certain other countries follow the broad fair use exception, India follows a different approach towards copyright exceptions. India follows a hybrid approach that allows : While the fair use approach followed in the US can be applied for any kind of uses, the fair dealing approach followed in India is clearly limited towards the purposes of While

1232-434: Is calculated from the death of the last author, which is sixty years post the death of the last author. The leading case of joint authorship in India is Najma Heptulla v. Orient Longman Ltd. and Ors . In this case, the plaintiff is the legal heir of the author of the book India Wins Freedom . The defendant is the publisher of said book. The defendant entered into an agreement with one Prof. Humayun Kabir to make contents of

1320-407: Is defined as "within 30 days") in a country that is party to the convention. Under Article 4, it also applies to cinematic works by persons who have their headquarters or habitual residence in a party country, and to architectural works situated in a party country. The Convention relies on the concept of "country of origin". Often determining the country of origin is straightforward: when

1408-503: Is doing business suit has to be filed at such place – Plaintiff cannot drag defendant to far off place under guise that he carries business there also. --- Interpretation of statutes – Mischief Rule – Construction that suppresses even counter mischief has to be adopted. Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works , usually known as

1496-535: Is for the incidental cinematographic inclusion of works not located in public spaces. The case The Daily Calendar Supplying v. The United Concern (1958) concerned the Daily Calendar Supplying Bureau's commercial distributions of slightly modified reproductions of an oil painting of Lord Subramania by the firm United Concern. The firm acquired artistic property rights over the painting from its artist T. M. Subramaniam, soon after

1584-549: Is similar to tenancy in common in property law and not a joint tenancy. Indian copyright law defines 'work of joint authorship' in Section 2(z) of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 as "a work produced by the collaboration of two or more authors in which the contribution of one author is not distinct from the contribution of the other author or authors" . The term of copyright protection in case of joint authorship

1672-517: Is the country of origin. For unpublished works or works first published in a non-party country (without publication within 30 days in a party country), the author's nationality usually provides the country of origin, if a national of a party country. (There are exceptions for cinematic and architectural works.) In the Internet age, unrestricted publication online may be considered publication in every sufficiently internet-connected jurisdiction in

1760-407: Is thus 50 years, as for them the old Act is applicable. Copyright is a bundle of rights given by the law to the creators of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works and the producers of cinematograph films and sound recordings. The rights provided under Copyright law include the rights of reproduction of the work, communication of the work to the public, adaptation of the work and translation of

1848-552: The Berne Convention , was an international assembly held in 1886 in the Swiss city of Bern by ten European countries with the goal of agreeing on a set of legal principles for the protection of original work . They drafted and adopted a multi-party contract containing agreements for a uniform, border-crossing system that became known under the same name. Its rules have been updated many times since then. The treaty provides authors, musicians, poets, painters, and other creators with

SECTION 20

#1732780882799

1936-479: The Delhi High Court confirmed this position and held that in cases wherein the duration of assignment is not specified, the duration shall be deemed to be five years and the copyright shall revert to the author after five years. The Copyright Act 1957 exempts certain acts from the ambit of copyright infringement. While many people tend to use the term fair use to denote copyright exceptions in India, it

2024-631: The Marrakesh Copyright Exceptions Treaty for the Blind and Print-Disabled was the first international treaty centered around the rights of users. Treaties featuring exceptions for libraries and educational institutions are also being discussed. The Berne Convention was developed at the instigation of Victor Hugo of the Association Littéraire et Artistique Internationale . Thus it was influenced by

2112-678: The WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT) but subsequently entered the treaty in 2013. Prior to 21 January 1958, the Indian Copyright Act, 1914, was applicable in India and still applicable for works created prior to 21 January 1958, when the new Act came into force. The Indian Copyright Act, 1914 was based on the Imperial Copyright Act of 1911 passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom , but

2200-540: The Berne Convention establishes the " three-step test " in Article 9(2), which establishes a framework for member nations to develop their own national exceptions. The three-step test establishes three requirements: that the legislation be limited to certain (1) special cases; (2) that the exception does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work, and (3) that the exception does not unreasonably prejudice

2288-477: The Berne Convention sets a minimum term of 25 years from the year the photograph was created, and for cinematography the minimum is 50 years after first showing, or 50 years after creation if it has not been shown within 50 years after the creation. Countries under the older revisions of the treaty may choose to provide their own protection terms, and certain types of works (such as phonorecords and motion pictures) may be provided shorter terms. If

2376-661: The French " rights of the author " ( droits d'auteur ), which contrasts with the Anglo-Saxon concept of "copyright" which only dealt with economic concerns. Before the Berne Convention, copyright legislation remained uncoordinated at an international level. So for example a work published in the United Kingdom by a British national would be covered by copyright there but could be copied and sold by anyone in France. Dutch publisher Albertus Willem Sijthoff , who rose to prominence in

2464-552: The United Kingdom. They ratified it on 5 September 1887. Although Britain ratified the convention in 1887, it did not implement large parts of it until 100 years later with the passage of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 . The United States acceded to the convention on 16 November 1988, and the convention entered into force for the United States on 1 March 1989. The United States initially refused to become

2552-895: The United Nations and other international organizations in that city. In 1967 it became the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and in 1974 became an organization within the United Nations. The Berne Convention was completed in Paris in 1886, revised in Berlin in 1908, completed in Berne in 1914, revised in Rome in 1928, in Brussels in 1948, in Stockholm in 1967 and in Paris in 1971, and

2640-406: The United States joined the convention on 1 March 1989, it continued to make statutory damages and attorney's fees only available for registered works. However, Moberg v Leygues (a 2009 decision of a Delaware Federal District Court) held that the protections of the Berne Convention are supposed to essentially be "frictionless", meaning no registration requirements can be imposed on a work from

2728-863: The Universal Copyright Convention nearly obsolete. Except for extremely technical points not relevant, with the accession of Nicaragua in 2000, every nation that is a member of the Buenos Aires Convention is also a member of Berne, and so the BAC has also become nearly obsolete and is essentially deprecated as well. Since almost all nations are members of the World Trade Organization , the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) requires non-members to accept almost all of

Copyright law of India - Misplaced Pages Continue

2816-483: The artistic work was created in 1947. The user was ordered to pay 1,000 rupees worth of copyright damage to the firm. The Madras High Court rejected the argument of the Daily Calendar Supplying in their 1964 appeal, that their act falls under Section 52(t), since the original painting was still under the artist's private custody even if free copies were already being distributed to several temples in

2904-418: The author is unknown because for example the author was deliberately anonymous or worked under a pseudonym, the Convention provides for a term of 50 years after publication ("after the work has been lawfully made available to the public"). However, if the identity of the author becomes known, the copyright term for known authors (50 years after death) applies. Although the Berne Convention states that

2992-485: The author was acting in bad faith or was misrepresenting his reasons for asking for the extension, the district court abused its discretion in denying the author's timely motion for an extension. 2. As a collection of independent skits, a movie was a collective work under 17 U.S.C.S. § 101, with distinct copyrights for each skit under 17 U.S.C.S. § 201(c), and since an author testified producers stated only yes, no, or go back to it when he read them his skits, joint authorship

3080-623: The book known to the public. The plaintiff obtained an injunction restraining defendants from breaking seals of covers of the complete book India Wins Freedom and from making its contents known to the public. According to the preface to the said book written by Kabir, Maulana Azad used to describe his experiences in Urdu, on the basis of which a draft in English would be prepared by Kabir. The court held that active and close intellectual collaboration and cooperation between Maulana Azad implied that Kabir

3168-488: The collaboration of two or more authors in which the contribution of one author is not distinct from the contribution of the other author or authors" is a work of joint authorship. This concept has been elucidated in cases like Najma Heptulla v. Orient Longman Ltd. and Ors . Section 19 of the Copyright Act 1957 lays down the modes of assignment of copyright in India. Assignment can only be in writing and must specify

3256-483: The collection is different from that of the independent works. The collective work exists as a distinct entity, other than the individual works that form the collection. Therefore, the key characteristics are assemblage or collection of "separate and independent works into a collective whole". Unlike a work of joint authorship, a collective work such as periodicals lacks the elements of unity and merger. The definition of "joint works" has led to some concern that when

3344-668: The conditions of the Berne Convention. As of October 2022, there are 181 states that are parties to the Berne Convention. This includes 178 UN member states plus the Cook Islands , the Holy See and Niue . The Berne Convention was intended to be revised regularly in order to keep pace with social and technological developments. It was revised seven times between its first iteration (in 1886) and 1971, but has seen no substantive revision since then. That means its rules were decided before widespread adoption of digital technologies and

3432-418: The copyright law of India. Both (s) and (t) of section 52 applies to depictions of architecture, sculptures, and works of artistic craftsmanship through drawing, painting, engraving, and photography, while (u)(i) applies to inclusion of all types of artistic works in films. These provisions are applicable if the work is "permanently situate in a public place or any premises to which the public has access." (u)(ii)

3520-495: The country of origin for digital publication remains a topic of controversy among law academics as well. The Berne Convention states that all works except photographic and cinematographic shall be protected for at least 50 years after the author's death, but parties are free to provide longer terms , as the European Union did with the 1993 Directive on harmonising the term of copyright protection . For photography,

3608-558: The court held that there will be joint-authorship even though the author's contribution was not independently copyrightable. The reasoning given behind this was that if more than one person laboured to create a single copyrightable work, then it would be paradoxical if no one was able to claim copyright because the individual contributions were not themselves copyrightable. While in this case, recent decisions holding that individual contribution must be independently copyrightable were not explicitly overruled, they were distinguished on facts. It

Copyright law of India - Misplaced Pages Continue

3696-416: The court held that while producing a musical composition jointly, two men will be coauthors and owners of the copyright even if they labour at different times, without consulting each other, and remain strangers to each other. It is a work of joint authorship if a person creates lyrics or music with the intention that his work shall be combined with the work of another person who shall create the music or write

3784-487: The development of Rent, Thomson's claim was without a clear demonstration that Larson knowingly intended to share the playwright credit with her and hence Thomson would not qualify as a joint author. In the case of a collective work , defined in Section 101, separate and independent works are assembled into a collection, and while the independent works may have a copyright protection, the nature of copyright protection of

3872-420: The draft, Childress rejected that it was owned equally by her and Taylor and registered the same in her name. Later, Taylor took a copy of the play and produced it at another theatre without Childress' permission. As a response to a suit for infringement by Childress, Taylor claimed that she was a joint author of the script and hence had equal rights in it. The Court while determining this issue, looked at whether

3960-452: The first owner of the copyright under the Copyright Act 1957. However, for works made in the course of an author's employment under a "contract of service" or apprenticeship, the employer is considered as the first owner of copyright, in the absence of any agreement to the contrary. The concept of joint authorship is recognised in Section. 2(z) of the Act which provides that " a work produced by

4048-406: The general terms of protection provided under Article 7 to works of joint authorship, under the condition that the term of copyright protection must be measured from the death of the last surviving author. But the Berne Convention doesn’t define what works of joint authorship are, because various national legislations have a lot of variations while defining the same, and have a different approach to

4136-404: The intention of combining their respective works at the time of creating the work, and not at some later date. However, they are not required to have an express collaboration agreement creating a joint-author relationship. There have also been situations wherein the parties shared a pre-concerted intent that their works be merged into one, and yet the court did not grant joint authorship. This

4224-526: The internet. In large part, this lengthy drought between revisions comes about because the Treaty gives each member state the right to veto any substantive change. The vast number of signatory countries, plus their very different development levels, makes it exceptionally difficult to update the convention to better reflect the realities of the digital world. In 2018, Professor Sam Ricketson argued that anyone who thought that further revision would ever be realistic

4312-501: The joint work is copyrightable by itself. A contribution of mere ideas is not sufficient. In order to be a joint author, one must contribute expression. For the expression to be copyrightable it has to be original – that is independently created and possess at least a minimal degree of creativity . However, in Gaiman v. McFarlane , where the issue of joint authorship was on the creation of new characters for an existing comic series,

4400-406: The joint work. A joint author can sign a written statement in compliance with Section 204(a) to alter his ownership shares he is initially vested with. A joint author may also sue any third party for copyright infringement without asking other co-owners to join the litigation. Moreover, a joint author does not require other joint authors' consent to transfer his exclusive proportional interest in

4488-426: The legislation of the country where protective rights are claimed shall be applied, Article 7(8) states that "unless the legislation of that country otherwise provides, the term shall not exceed the term fixed in the country of origin of the work", i.e., an author is normally not entitled a longer protection abroad than at home, even if the laws abroad give a longer term. This is commonly known as "the rule of

SECTION 50

#1732780882799

4576-431: The legitimate interests of the author. The Berne Convention does not expressly reference doctrines such as fair use or fair dealing , leading some critics of fair use to argue that fair use violates the Berne Convention. However, the United States and other fair use nations argue that flexible standards such as fair use include the factors of the three-step test, and are therefore compliant. The WTO Panel has ruled that

4664-435: The lyrics, as the case may be, so as to make the composition complete. The touchstone here is the intention, at the time the writing is done, that the parts be absorbed or combined into an integrated unit, although the parts themselves may be either "inseparable" (as the case of a novel or painting) or "interdependent" (as in the case of a motion picture, opera, or the words and music of a song). Hence, joint authors must have

4752-442: The meaning of this Treaty or the Berne Convention." This language may mean that Internet service providers are not liable for the infringing communications of their users. Since companies are using internet to publish user generated content , critics have argued that the Berne Convention is weak in protecting users and consumers from overbroad or harsh infringement claims, with virtually no other exceptions or limitations. In fact,

4840-461: The means to control how their works are used, by whom, and on what terms. In some jurisdictions these type of rights are referred to as copyright ; on the European continent they are generally referred to as authors' rights (from French: droits d'auteur ) or makerright (German: Urheberrecht ). As of November 2022, the Berne Convention has been ratified by 181 states out of 195 countries in

4928-437: The net benefit would be to benefit authors. Joint authorship#Relevant Case Joint authorship of a copyrightable work is when two or more persons contribute enough to the work to be the author of that work. In the case of joint authorship, the authors share the copyright in the work with each other. Article 7bis of the Berne Convention states the term of protection for works of joint authorship and extends

5016-576: The other types of intellectual property: patents, trademarks and industrial designs . Like the Paris Convention, the Berne Convention set up a bureau to handle administrative tasks. In 1893 these two small bureaux merged and became the United International Bureaux for the Protection of Intellectual Property (best known by its French acronym BIRPI), situated in Berne. In 1960, BIRPI moved to Geneva , to be closer to

5104-479: The participants had contributed expression, the court denied joint authorship status due to lack of requisite intent. Thomson v. Larson revolved around the claims to co-authorship of the musical Rent made by a dramaturge. In this particular case, Jonathan Larson, the author, had written the original play and was having it produced by the New York Theatre Workshop ("NYTW"). Lynn Thomson, who

5192-399: The public. Copyright is intended to increase and not to impede the harvest of knowledge. It is intended to motivate the creative activity of authors and inventors in order to benefit the public." The Indian copyright law protects literary works, dramatic works, musical works, artistic works, cinematograph films and sound recordings. Freedom of panorama is dealt with in sections 52, s–u(i) of

5280-444: The question of co-ownership come up. Although an author such as a songwriter or novelist may write a work hoping and expecting that his work will be used in a motion picture, it will still be a work of independent authorship because the author did not write the work with the intention of it being used in the motion picture. In such a case, the motion picture will be a derivative work, and Section 103 makes it amply clear that copyright in

5368-485: The rights of authors in their literary and artistic works, known as the Berne Union . The Berne Convention requires its parties to recognize the protection of works of authors from other parties to the convention at least as well as those of its own nationals. For example, French authors' rights law applies to anything published, distributed, performed, or in any other way accessible in France, regardless of where it

SECTION 60

#1732780882799

5456-448: The shorter term ". Not all countries have accepted this rule. As to works, protection must include "every production in the literary, scientific and artistic domain, whatever the mode or form of its expression" (Article 2(1) of the convention). Subject to certain allowed reservations, limitations or exceptions, the following are among the rights that must be recognized as exclusive rights of authorization: The Berne Convention includes

5544-485: The south. This distribution is "not tantamount to his installing his original work in a public place." Copyrights of works of the countries mentioned in the International Copyright Order are protected in India, as if such works are Indian works. The term of copyright in a work shall not exceed that which is enjoyed by it in its country of origin. The author of a work is generally considered as

5632-433: The standards are not incompatible. The Berne Convention does not include the modern concept of Internet safe harbors , simply because Internet was not known as a technology at that time. The Agreed Statement of the parties to the WIPO Copyright Treaty of 1996 states that: "It is understood that the mere provision of physical facilities for enabling or making a communication does not in itself amount to communication within

5720-416: The statute include detention of the infringing goods by the customs authorities. The civil remedies are provided under Chapter XII of the Copyright Act 1957 and the remedies provided include injunctions , damages and account of profits . The criminal remedies are provided under Chapter XIII of the statute and the remedies provided against copyright infringement include imprisonment (up to 3 years) along with

5808-831: The term fair dealing has not been defined anywhere in the Copyright Act 1957, the concept of ' fair dealing ' has been discussed in different judgments, including the decision of the Supreme Court of India in Academy of General Education v. B. Malini Mallya (2009) and the decision of the High Court of Kerala in Civic Chandran v. Ammini Amma . In September 2016, the Delhi High Court ruled in Delhi University's Rameshwari Photocopy Service shop case , which sold photocopies of chapters from academic textbooks

5896-416: The time when such negative was made shall be deemed to be the author of the work, and, where such owner is a body corporate, the body corporate shall be deemed for the purposes of this Act to reside within the parts of His Majesty's dominions to which this Act extends if it has established a place of business within such parts.") For photographs published, before 21 January 1958 in India, the period of copyright

5984-449: The topic. This problem relating to joint authorship is not specifically dealt with by other international agreements as well, like the UCC , TRIPS , and the WIPO Copyright Treaty 1996. A joint work is defined in ection 101 of the U.S. Copyright Act as " a work prepared by two or more authors with the intention that their contributions be merged into inseparable or interdependent parts of

6072-590: The trade of translated books, wrote to Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands in 1899 in opposition to the convention over concerns that its international restrictions would stifle the Dutch print industry. The Berne Convention followed in the footsteps of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property of 1883, which in the same way had created a framework for international integration of

6160-449: The two participants intended to combine their works into a unitary whole. Additionally, the court checked whether the parties ' intended to be joint authors ' in the work. The court held that Taylor was not a joint author of the script due to lack of contribution of sufficient expression. It observed that no evidence was shown to establish Taylor's role as anything more than giving advice and ideas. In another case wherein both

6248-451: The wishes of other countries. With the WIPO's Berne revision on Paris 1971, many other countries joined the treaty, as expressed by Brazil federal law of 1975. On 1 March 1989, the U.S. Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988 was enacted, and the U.S. Senate advised and consented to ratification of the treaty, making the United States a party to the Berne Convention, and making

6336-431: The work himself, and the other authors can not object to such a use. If the license has been granted by one of the joint authors unilaterally, then the license fee collected, if any, must be shared appropriately with other joint authors. In the absence of an agreement determining how the license fee is to be shared, every joint author must receive an equal share irrespective of the amount of their individual contribution to

6424-415: The work, the period of assignment and the territory for which assignment is made. If the period of assignment is not specified in the agreement, it shall be deemed to be five years and if the territorial extent of assignment is not specified, it shall be presumed to be limited to the territories of India. In a recent judgement ( Pine Labs Private Limited vs Gemalto Terminals India Limited ), a division bench of

6512-439: The work. However, a joint author cannot transfer all interest in the work without obtaining authorization from other co-owners, since that would result in "an involuntary transfer of the other joint owners' undivided interest in the whole". The interest of a joint author in a work of joint authorship is passed on to his heirs after his death, and not the other joint authors. Hence, in this regard, joint authorship in copyright law

6600-416: The work. The scope and duration of protection provided under copyright law varies with the nature of the protected work. In a 2016 copyright lawsuit, the Delhi High Court states that copyright is "not an inevitable, divine, or natural right that confers on authors the absolute ownership of their creations. It is designed rather to stimulate activity and progress in the arts for the intellectual enrichment of

6688-512: The world, most of which are also parties to the Paris Act of 1971. The Berne Convention introduced the concept that protection exists the moment a work is "fixed", that is, written or recorded on some physical medium, and its author is automatically entitled to all copyrights in the work and to any derivative works , unless and until the author explicitly disclaims them or until the copyright expires. A creator need not register or "apply for"

6776-605: The world. It is not clear what this may mean for determining "country of origin". In Kernel v. Mosley (2011), a U.S. court "concluded that a work created outside of the United States, uploaded in Australia and owned by a company registered in Finland was nonetheless a U.S. work by virtue of its being published online". However other U.S. courts in similar situations have reached different conclusions, e.g. Håkan Moberg v. 33T LLC (2009). The matter of determining

6864-759: Was "dreaming". Berne members also cannot easily create new copyright treaties to address the digital world's realities, because the Berne Convention also prohibits treaties that are inconsistent with its precepts. Legal academic Rebecca Giblin has argued that one reform avenue left to Berne members is to "take the front door out". The Berne Convention only requires member states to obey its rules for works published in other member states – not works published within its own borders. Thus member nations may lawfully introduce domestic copyright laws that have elements prohibited by Berne (such as registration formalities), so long as they only apply to their own authors. Giblin also argues that these should only be considered where

6952-400: Was a lack of expression of an indication on behalf of Larson which would indicate that it was ever his intention for Thomson to be a joint author. Instead, his intention as expressed characterized her capacity as an editor of his original work. The court reiterated the precedent established by Childress , rejecting Thomson's argument that the requirement of intention needs to be met with only in

7040-430: Was a literature professor at New York University, was hired to help shape and form the plot. The NYTW and Thomson entered into an agreement the terms of which stated that Thomson was to be listed as 'dramaturge' for billing purposes as an independent contractor. However, not long after the dress rehearsal, Larson died and Thomson filled in his shoes and concluded the book to be used for the musical. At this stage, Thomson

7128-511: Was also observed that the lower standard for joint authorship only applies to mixed media works. The core of joint authorship is joint labouring by two or more persons in order to complete a pre-concerted common design. In the absence of a pre-concerted common design, the completed work will not be regarded as a joint work. However, it is not required of the several authors that they must necessarily work in physical propinquity or in concert. In Edward B. Marks Music Corp. v. Jerry Vogel Music Co ,

7216-399: Was amended in 1979. The World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty was adopted in 1996 to address the issues raised by information technology and the Internet, which were not addressed by the Berne Convention. The first version of the Berne Convention treaty was signed on 9 September 1886, by Belgium, France, Germany, Haiti, Italy, Liberia, Spain, Switzerland, Tunisia, and

7304-617: Was not infringing on their publisher's copyright, arguing that the use of copyright to "stimulate activity and progress in the arts for the intellectual enrichment of the public" outweighed its use by the publishers to maintain commercial control of their property. However, in December 2016, the ruling was reversed and taken back to court, citing that there were "triable issues" in the case. The Copyright Act 1957 provides three kinds of remedies - administrative remedies, civil remedies and criminal remedies. The administrative remedies provided under

7392-425: Was not shown; summary judgment to the producers was reversed. In Childress v. Taylor , actress Clarice Taylor asked playwright Alice Childress to write a play about legendary comedienne Jackie "Moms" Mabley. While writing, Childress accepted Taylor's assistance. Taylor mainly contributed ideas regarding the portrayal of characters in the play and also provided research on the life of "Moms" Mabley. On finalization of

7480-469: Was originally created, if the country of origin of that work is in the Berne Union. In addition to establishing a system of equal treatment that harmonised copyright amongst parties, the agreement also required member states to provide strong minimum standards for copyright law. Author's rights under the Berne Convention must be automatic; it is prohibited to require formal registration. However, when

7568-523: Was since all the participants in a work did not consider themselves or others to be joint authors. After working as a screenwriter on the feature film, National Lampoon's TV: The Movie , Amir Cyrus Ahanchian filed a case for breach of an implied contract, copyright infringement, and unfair competition in violation of the Lanham Act against distributor Xenon Pictures, Inc. , producer CKrush, Inc., director and writer Sam Maccarone , and Preston Lacy ,

7656-419: Was slightly modified in terms of its application to Indian law. According to this Act, the period of copyright for photographs was 50 years from the time it was created (Act language is: "the term for which copyright shall subsist in photographs shall be fifty years from the making of the original negative from which the photograph was directly or indirectly derived, and the person who was owner of such negative at

7744-405: Was yet to sign a waiver which would entail her handing over any copyright interest in the concluded work. Notwithstanding the fact that Thomson had a significant contribution in portions that could be copyrighted to the result, the court held that Rent was not the product of joint work and as such Thomson could not claim the status of co-author. The argument furthered in this regard was that there

#798201