著作权法中的作者身份与固定:比较评论

IF 0.8 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW Melbourne University Law Review Pub Date : 2011-01-01 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.2856111
E. Adeney
{"title":"著作权法中的作者身份与固定:比较评论","authors":"E. Adeney","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2856111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present comment considers an issue that has received little discussion in the common law world: namely whether fixation and authorship are parts of the same creative act in relation to literary, dramatic and musical works. The importance of the question is that, if authorship does not entail fixation, it should logically be possible for a person independent of the author to reduce the work to material form for copyright purposes. This would significantly expand the range of works protected by copyright and would extend protection to those works which have never been fixed by their authors. The focus of the comment is Australian law, but its discussion is comparative, with particular attention given to UK law.","PeriodicalId":46300,"journal":{"name":"Melbourne University Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Authorship and fixation in copyright law: A comparative comment\",\"authors\":\"E. Adeney\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2856111\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The present comment considers an issue that has received little discussion in the common law world: namely whether fixation and authorship are parts of the same creative act in relation to literary, dramatic and musical works. The importance of the question is that, if authorship does not entail fixation, it should logically be possible for a person independent of the author to reduce the work to material form for copyright purposes. This would significantly expand the range of works protected by copyright and would extend protection to those works which have never been fixed by their authors. The focus of the comment is Australian law, but its discussion is comparative, with particular attention given to UK law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Melbourne University Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"16\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Melbourne University Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2856111\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Melbourne University Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2856111","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

摘要

本评论考虑了一个在普通法界很少讨论的问题:即就文学、戏剧和音乐作品而言,固定和作者身份是否属于同一创作行为的一部分。这个问题的重要性在于,如果作者身份不需要固定,那么从逻辑上讲,独立于作者之外的人就有可能出于版权目的将作品简化为物质形式。这将大大扩大受版权保护的作品范围,并将保护范围扩大到那些从未被其作者修改过的作品。评论的焦点是澳大利亚法律,但其讨论是比较的,特别关注英国法律。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Authorship and fixation in copyright law: A comparative comment
The present comment considers an issue that has received little discussion in the common law world: namely whether fixation and authorship are parts of the same creative act in relation to literary, dramatic and musical works. The importance of the question is that, if authorship does not entail fixation, it should logically be possible for a person independent of the author to reduce the work to material form for copyright purposes. This would significantly expand the range of works protected by copyright and would extend protection to those works which have never been fixed by their authors. The focus of the comment is Australian law, but its discussion is comparative, with particular attention given to UK law.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
10
期刊最新文献
Assessing Refugee Protection Claims at Australian Airports: The Gap Between Law, Policy, and Practice Tricked into marriage Is a cause of action a castle? Statutory choses in action as property and s51(xxxi) of the Constitution The Protection of Stateless Persons in Australian Law: The Rationale for a Statelessness Determination Procedure Non-consensual porn and the responsibilities of online intermediaries
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1