Search results

One of the binding commitments under the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement is the extension of the copyright term to 70 years after the death of the author. This paper reports the preliminary findings of a research on the potential impact of the extension of copyright term on the music industry in Malaysia. As Malaysia is a user and net importer of intellectual property, it is feared that extending the copyright term will likely impede incentives for the creation of new contents, increase the cost of licensing/royalties, diminish the choice and creativity of film and music industry and increase royalty payments abroad. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the commercial lifespan of copyright works is long enough.

Using a qualitative research method, in-depth interviews were carried out with key industry players between June and September 2015 to collect relevant information from the industry. The information obtained was analysed to gauge the market standing of the local music industry and how the proposed extension would bolster their financial and market power. The paper does not intend to explore the legal implications from the retrospective extension of copyright term and data on illegal use and piracy. The findings of the research will be purely drawn from the non-structured interviews and information gathered from respondents.

The paper concludes that there is not enough evidence to support the notion that the copyright extension will be economically advantageous to the local music industry.

The feedback from the interviews, although cannot be generalised to be considered as representing the whole music industry in Malaysia, can nevertheless be taken as preliminary conclusions and an eye-opener to the quest for concrete support in the debate for the extension of the copyright term in Malaysia. The paper also does no explore the legal implications from the retrospective extension of copyright and data on illegal use and piracy.

In conclusion, more studies need to be conducted to understand the dynamics and needs of the music market in Malaysia for the extension of the copyright term to be really beneficial to them. As this study is only conducted using a qualitative research method, using open-ended and in-depth interview techniques on a small group of respondents, there may be a need to embark on empirical research with proper execution of survey instruments to a larger group of respondents.

The music industry is chosen as the case study because it may develop into a potential export interest. The music industry as a small component of the larger “creative industry” has been identified as one of the new economic drivers under the Tenth Malaysia Plan.

The paper was first presented at the ATRIP Congress 2015 at Cape Town on 27th September 2015. The paper has not been published. No studies have been done on the possible implications of copyright extension term on the music industry in Malaysia before.

This paper aims to investigate the potential impacts that differences between UK and US copyright laws for sound recordings have on musicians. It also highlights the needs for continued standardisation of international copyright laws (particularly those for sound recordings), copyright law education for creators, and a need for musicians to re‐think future artistic and managerial decisions.

In this critical analysis of current academic literature and legislation, significant differences between the domestic copyright laws of the UK and USA have been identified. The impacts of these differences on musicians are discussed and conclusions drawn.

Findings suggest that there are several significant differences between the UK and US copyright laws for sound recordings, which do impact on musicians in both countries. However, determining the degree of impact is dependent on several contributing factors: the nationality of the musician; the level of success of the musician; the creative roles adopted by the musician; and the ambition of the musician.

Research scope was limited to the domestic copyright laws of the UK and USA only; and, specifically, the copyright laws for sound recordings. Findings were generalised for all musicians, regardless of type or genre.

This paper is one of the first to investigate the impact of differences in domestic copyright laws on musicians, and identifies several strategy issues that must be considered by musicians when making future artistic and managerial decisions.

This paper focuses on two related questions at the intersection of antitrust and intellectual property law. First, under what circumstances must the holder of a patent or a copyright or the owner of a trade secret allow others to use that intellectual property? Second, under what circumstances can the holder of an intellectual property right use that right to make it difficult for another party to succeed in a related market? These questions have vexed antitrust and intellectual property scholars alike ever since the Federal Circuit ruled in 2000 that patent holders “may enforce the statutory right to exclude others from making, using, or selling the claimed invention free from liability under the antitrust laws,” a ruling that directly contradicted the Ninth Circuit ruling that antitrust liability could be imposed for almost identical conduct, depending on the motivations of the patent holder. The various proceedings in United States v. Microsoft only added fuel to the firestorm of controversy.After briefly retracing the jurisprudential path to see how this situation arose, we propose a solution that primarily involves a variation on the real property concept of adverse possession for the intellectual property space along with a slight extension of the Essential Facilities Doctrine for industries that exhibit network effects. We examine, both for firms with and without market power, how our proposal would resolve the situations presented by large fixed asset purchases, the introduction of entirely new products, and operating systems with network effects. We also demonstrate how our proposal could be applied in the European antitrust enforcement context.

This paper aims to explore the copyright laws of Saudi Arabia, illustrating the provisions governing the law. It seeks to outline Saudi Arabia copyright law within the framework of the international copyright protection, which include the Berne Convention and the TRIPS agreement.

The paper is a thorough scrutinizing of the legal provisions of the Saudi Copyright Laws in regard to protected works, author's exclusive rights, lawful use of copyrighted works and the exceptions, mandatory licenses, duration of protection, provisions of infringements and penalties. The highlighted issue is concerning the exceptions in regard to public interest, particularly relating to education purposes.

The paper finds that the Saudi Arabia Copyright Laws have met the requirement of the international copyright laws. The conditions for mandatory license and the 12 exceptions which permit lawful usage of copyrighted work under the copyright law without seeking the permission of the author are also in line with the international copyright laws, as public interest is the paramount consideration in exercising these exceptions.

There is lack of study on copyright law in the Saudi Arabia per se. Therefore, this study on the Saudi Arabia copyright laws seeks to fill in this gap and to provoke further discussion on this issue. It should be useful to the academic community, particularly in the Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Cooperation Council countries.

In a recent edition of the nation's favourite soap, Coronation Street, a small incident occurred which illustrated in a nutshell the problems facing the deviser of an industrial design in seeking to protect that design from being copied. Angie, a student of fashion design at the local polytechnic put on a successful show of her designs. Emboldened by the favourable reception she set out a couple of days later for an appointment with a local dress manufacturer to try and sell her designs. She returned a few hours later in tears and with hopes dashed. She had arrived at the firm only to discover that her designs were already being made up into dresses. The designs had been copied at the show and already sold to or copied by them. The incident was not without its silver lining in that in getting drunk to forget the whole sad affair this lead to a romantic interlude with fellow lodger, Curley Watts! It is the purpose of this article to examine the main strands of protection for industrial designs and to look at a proposed new European Community Design Law which has recently been published by the prestigious Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Patent, Copyright and Competition Law (Munich, 1991). This proposal is being put to the EC Commission as the basis for an EC Regulation.

This chapter provides an overview of five modes of intellectual property (IP) protection – patents, designs, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets – available in the United States, the European Union, and Japan. After describing the purposes of and principal differences among the five types of IP protection and outlining the advantages of each form, the chapter provides country- and region-specific information. The authors highlight the aspects of IP law in which international harmonization has, or has not yet, occurred, and offer insights into the relative advantages of various national and regional IP protection systems.

In this chapter I put forward a framework to help us understand the underlying sources of national policy failures regarding intellectual property rights (IPR) protection, the need for international coordination, and how the coordination should be done. I also analyze whether global harmonization of IPR standards is necessary or sufficient for achieving globally welfare-maximizing policies. Then I move on to analyze the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), which is a mighty effort to coordinate IPR policies across member countries of the World Trade Organization (WTO). I discuss what TRIPS was supposed to do and what it has actually achieved, with reference to my theoretical framework. I explain that it is desirable for IPR to be included in world trade talks and be negotiated along with other trade issues. I offer analyses on the extensions of the basic model by introducing political economy and trade barriers, as well as allowing countries to discriminate against foreign firms. Finally, I comment on further potential extensions such as introduction of foreign direct investment (FDI) or licensing, parallel imports, cumulative innovations, subject matter of protection and costs of implementation. The main thrust of the basic model is that, provided that there is free trade and non-discrimination of foreign firms, there exist positive cross-border externalities as a country strengthens its IPR protection, since it raises the profits of foreign firms and the welfare of foreign consumers without causing any deadweight loss on foreign soil. This implies that national governments tend to provide too little IPR protection compared with the global optimum. The model also implies that a country with higher innovative capability and larger domestic market would provide stronger IPR. Thus, it is natural for the South to protect IPR less than the North in the absence of international coordination. These basic results largely continue to hold under various extensions.

This chapter provides an overview of the five main modes of intellectual property (IP) protection – patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and designs – available in the United States, the European Union, and Japan. After describing the purposes of and principal differences among the five types of IP protection and outlining the advantages of each form, the chapter provides country- and region-specific information. The authors highlight the aspects of IP law in which international harmonization has, or has not yet, occurred, and offer insights into the relative advantages of various national and regional IP protection systems.

The purpose of this monograph is to examine the main elements of the Copyright Designs & Patents Act 1988 which received the Royal Assent on the 15th November 1988. The Act provided for a major overhaul of the law on copyright and on registered designs, as well as certain adjustments to patent and trademark law and two major new regimes on performers' rights and design rights. While this is a major domestic reform the law is unlikely to remain unaltered for long because of the move towards a single market within the E.E.C. by 1992. This will lead to the introduction of harmonised regimes on the various elements of intellectual property law such as copyright and industrial design which will no doubt require some readjustment to U.K. domestic law. Recently the E.E.C. Commission published a Green Paper on “Copyright and the Challenge of Technology” which suggests solutions to some questions such as the vexed problem of illegal home taping which are different to those adopted by the U.K. in the new Act. [On 21/12/88 a draft directive on Copyright & Computer Software which proposes a harmonised regime for the protection of computer programs and related matters was published]. It also has to be borne in mind that while Article 222 of the Treaty of Rome states that the treaty does not affect the existence of national intellectual property right regimes the “exercise” of these national rights may be found to infringe the provisions of the Treaty on free movement of goods (Arts. 30–36) or on competition law (Arts. 85–86).