Originality in UK Copyright Law: The Old “Skill and Labour” Doctrine Under Pressure

被引:2
作者
Andreas Rahmatian
机构
[1] Stair Building,School of Law
[2] University of Glasgow,undefined
关键词
Copyright; Neighbouring rights; Originality; Author’s rights systems;
D O I
10.1007/s40319-012-0003-4
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Certainly until 2009, when Infopaq was decided, and possibly until 2012, when the CJEU handed down its decision in Football Dataco, the unanimous opinion was that in the UK a work is “original” for copyright purposes if it is the result of its author’s own skill, labour, judgment and effort. The CJEU decisions in Infopaq and Football Dataco, together with Bezpecnosti and Painer in particular, are now said to have changed the general principles of copyright originality in the UK and supposedly have imported an understanding of originality from author’s rights systems. This article wants to show that this view is too extreme. The CJEU rulings may lead to a slight adjustment of the UK originality definition but not to a fundamental change, and even this adjustment will not be practically relevant in most cases. Furthermore, the understanding of “originality” by the CJEU is not tantamount to the idea of originality in author’s rights countries on the European continent.
引用
收藏
页码:4 / 34
页数:30
相关论文
共 11 条
  • [1] Collins H(1991)Methods and aims of comparative contract law OJLS 11 396ff-251
  • [2] Derclaye E(2010)Case comment: Infopaq International A/S v Danske Dagblades Forening (C-5/08): wonderful or worrisome? The impact of the ECJ ruling in Infopaq on UK copyright law EIPR 32 247-undefined
  • [3] Ginsburg JC(2002)The concept of authorship in comparative copyright law DePaul Law Review 52 1063-undefined
  • [4] Kahn-Freund O(1974)On uses and misuses of comparative law MLR 37 7ff-undefined
  • [5] Kenny M(2007)Standing surety in Europe: Common core or tower of Babel MLR 70 175ff-undefined
  • [6] Kristeller PO(1983)“Creativity” and “tradition” J History Ideas 44 105ff-undefined
  • [7] Lee YH(2012)Case comment: Painer v. Standard Verlags GmbH, Axel Springer AG EIPR 34 290ff-undefined
  • [8] Legrand P(1997b)The impossibility of legal transplants Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 4 111-undefined
  • [9] Pila J(2008)An intentional view of the copyright work MLR 71 535ff-undefined
  • [10] Rahmatian A(2009)The concepts of ‘Musical Work’ and ‘Originality’ in UK copyright law—Sawkins v. Hyperion as a test case IIC 40 560ff-undefined