Contractual and technological approaches for protecting digital works: Their relationship with copyright limitations

Online Information Review

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 148-157

  Fernández Molina, J Carlos ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Contract law; Copyright law; Intellectual property; Licensing

Indexed keywords

CONTRACTS; COPYRIGHTS; DIGITAL WATERMARKING; LAWS AND LEGISLATION; PRIVATIZATION; PUBLISHING; WORLD WIDE WEB;

CONTRACT LAW; COPYRIGHT LAW; LICENSING;

ONLINE SYSTEMS;

EID: 2442428414     PISSN: 14684527     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/14684520410531646     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Australian Government (2000), Copyright Amendment (Digital Agenda) Act 2000, available at: scaletext.law.gov.au/html/comact/10/6223/top.htm.
2. Benkler, Y (2001), "The battle over the institutional ecosystem in the digital environment", Communications of the ACM, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 84-90.
3. Boyle, J. (1996), Shamans, Software, and Spleens: Law and the Construction of the Information Society, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
4. Cohen, J.E. (1998), "Lochner in Cyberspace: the new economic orthodoxy of rights management", Michigan Law Review, Vol. 97 No. 2, pp. 462-563.
5. Copyright Law Review Committee (Australia) (2002), Copyright and Contract, available at: www.law.gov.au/clrc.
6. Crews, K.D. (2001), "Looking ahead and shaping the future: provoking change in copyright law", Journal of the Copyright Society of the USA, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 549-84.
7. Denicola, R.C. (1999), "Freedom to copy", Yale Law Journal, Vol. 108 No. 7, pp. 1661-86.
8. DeWerra, J. (2001), "The legal system of technological protection measures under the WIPO Treaties, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the European Union directives and other national laws (Japan, Australia)", ALAI 2001 Congress: Adjuncts and Alternatives to Copyright, New York, NY, June 13-17, available at: www.alai2001.org/2001_conference/Reports/dewerra.doc
9. Dinwoodie, G.B. (2000), "A new copyright order: why national courts should create global norms", University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 149 No. 2, pp. 469-580.
10. Dreyfuss, R.C. (2000), "UCITA in the international marketplace: are we about to export bad innovation policy?", Brooklyn Journal of International Law, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 49-55, available at: papers.ssrn.com/ paper.taf?abstract_id = 217389.
11. EBLIDA (2000), EBLIDA Response to the Proposal for a Directive on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society. Comments on the Text of the Amended Proposal of 14 September 2000 approved by COREPER, available at: www.eblida.org/topics/ position/response_october_en.htm.
12. Elkin-Koren, N. (2000), "The privatisation of information policy", Ethics and Information Technology, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 201-9.
13. European Union (1991), Council Directive 91/250/CEE of 14 May 1991 on the Legal Protection of the Computer Programs, Official Journal L 122, May 17, 1991.
14. European Union (1996), Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the Legal Protection of Databases, Official Journal L 77, March 27, 1996.
15. European Union (2001), Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society, Official Journal L 167, June 22, 2001.
16. Fernández-Molina, J.C. (2003), "Laws against the circumvention of copyright technological protection", Journal of Documentation, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 41-68.
17. Fernández-Molina, J.C. and Peis, E. (2001), "The moral rights of authors in the age of digital information", Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol.52 No. 2, pp. 109-17.
18. Fitzpatrick, S. (2000), "Copyright imbalance: US and Australian responses to the WIPO Digital Copyright Treaty", European Intellectual Property Review, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 214-26.
19. Foroughi, A., Albin, M. and Gillard, S. (2002), "Digital rights management: a delicate balance between protection and accessibility", Journal of Information Science, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 389-95.
20. Gatten, J.N. (2002), "The politics of the Uniform Computer Information Transaction Act (UCITA) in digital information policy development", Online Information Review, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 385-91.
21. Ginsburg, J.C. (2000), "International copyright: from a "bundle" of national copyright laws to a supranational code?", Journal of the Copyright Society of the USA, Vol. 47, pp. 265-89.
22. Guibault, LM.C.R. (2000), "Contracts and copyright exemptions", in Hugenholtz, P.B. (Ed.), Copyright and Electronic Commerce: Legal Aspects of Electronic Copyright Management, Kluwer Law International, The Hague, pp. 125-63.
23. Guibault, L.M.C.R. (2003), "Le tir manqué de la Directive Européenne sur le droit d'auteur dans la société de l'information", Cahiers de Propriété Intellectuelle, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 537-74, available at: www.ivir.nl/publications/guibauit/ directive_europeenne.html
24. Hardy, I.T. (1995), "Contracts, copyright and preemption in a digital world", Richmond Journal of Law and Technology, Vol. 1 No. 1, available at: law.richmond.edu/jolt//v1i1/hardy.html.
25. Heller, J.S. (2001), "UCITA: still crazy after all these years, and still not ready for prime time", The Richmond Journal of Law and Technology, Vol. 8 No. 1, available at: law.richmond.edu/jolt/noflash_site/ lthome.htm.
26. Hugenholtz, P.B. (2000), "Why the copyright directive is unimportant, and possibly invalid", European Intellectual Property Review, Vol. 22 No. 11, pp. 499-505.
27. Information Infrastructure Task Force (USA) (1995), Intellectual Property and the National Information Infrastructure: the Report of the Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights, available at: www.uspto.gov/Web/offices/com/doc/ ipnii.
28. Koelman, K.J. and Helberger, N. (2000), "Protection of technological measures", in Hugenholtz, P.B. (Ed.), Copyright and Electronic Commerce: Legal Aspects of Electronic Copyright Management, Kluwer Law International, The Hague, pp. 165-227.
29. Lemley, M.A. (1999), "Beyond preemption: the law and policy of intellectual property licensing", California Law Review, Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 111-72.
30. Lessig, L. (1999), Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace, Basic Books, New York, NY.
31. Litman, J. (1998), "The tales that Article 2B tells",Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Vol. 13 No. 3, available at: www.law.berkeley.edu/ journals/btlj/articles/vol13/Litman/html/reader.html
32. Long, D.E. (2001), ""Globalisation": a future trend or a satisfying mirage?", Journal of the Copyright Society of the USA, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 313-56.
33. McManis, C.R. (1999), "The privatisation (or "shrink- wrapping") of American copyright law", California Law Review, Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 173-90.
34. Neal, J.G. (2000), "The fight against UCITA", Library Journal, Vol.125 No. 15, pp. 36-8.
35. NCCUSL (2003), UCITA Standby Committee is Discharged, available at: www.nccusl.org/nccusl/DesktopModules/NewsDisplay.aspx?ItemID = 56.
36. Newby, T.G. (1999), "What's fair here is not fair everywhere: does the American fair use doctrine violate international copyright law?", Stanford Law Review, Vol. 51 No. 6, pp. 1633-63.
37. Okediji, R. (2000), "Toward an international fair use doctrine", Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 75-175.
38. O'Rourke, M.A. (1998), "Fencing Cyberspace: drawing borders in a virtual world", Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 82 No. 3, pp. 609-704.
39. Phan, D.T.T. (1998), "Will fair use function on the Internet?", Columbia Law Review, Vol. 98 No. 1, pp. 169-216.
40. Ragueneau, A.D. (2002), "UCITA and the impact on European copyright law: a choice of law analysis", Journal of the Copyright Society of the USA, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 1057-116.
41. Reidenberg, J.R. (1998), "Lex Informatica: the formulation information policy rules through technology", Texas Law Review, Vol. 76 No. 3, pp. 553-93.
42. Samuelson, P. (1998), "Does information really have to be licensed?", Communications of the ACM, Vol. 41 No. 9, pp. 15-20.
43. Therien, J.R. (2001), "Exorcising the spectre of a "pay-per-use" society: toward preserving fair use and the public domain in the digital age", Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Vol. 16, Supplement, available at: www.law.berkeley.edu/journals/btlj/articles/vol16/ therien/therien.pdf
44. US Government (1998), Digital Millennium Copyright Act 1998, available at: www.loc.gov/copyright/legislation/hr2281.pdf.
45. US Library of Congress (2000), Exemption to Prohibition on Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems for Access Control Technologies, Final Rule, available at: www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2000/65fr64555.pdf.
46. US Register of Copyrights (2001), Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Section 104 Report, available at: www.loc.gov/copyright/reports/studies/dmca/ dmca_study.html.
47. WIPO (1971), Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, Paris Act of July 24, 1971, as amended on September 28, 1979, available at: www.wipo.int/clea/docs/en/wo/wo001en.htm.
48. WIPO (1996a), WIPO Copyright Treaty, adopted by the Diplomatic Conference on December 20, 1996, available at: www.wipo.int/clea/docs/en/wo/wo033en.htm.
49. WIPO (1996b), WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty, adopted by the Diplomatic Conference on 20 December, 1996, available at: www.wipo.int/clea/ docs/en/wo/wo034en.htm.
50. WTO (1994), Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, available at: www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/t_agm0_e.htm.