In modern governance, state administrative decisions (KTUN) play an important role as an administrative tool to support the implementation of government functions that have been regulated in the State Administrative Justice Law. The authority of the State Administrative Court to examine, hear and decide on positive fictitious applications is eliminated or replaced, the authority will be further regulated in a presidential regulation but until now the presidential regulation has not been issued and causes legal uncertainty or legal vacuum. As a normative legal research with statutory, case, and conceptual approaches, this article aims to examine how the transformation of the concept of positive fictitious, analyze its impact on legal certainty, and offer alternative policies to overcome the legal vacuum in the application of positive fictitious mechanisms in Indonesia by comparing it with France and the Netherlands. Conclusively, the research results in this article show that after the enactment of the Job Creation Law, the concept of positive fictitious decision application has undergone a major change, namely the elimination of the authority of the State Administrative Court (PTUN). In addition, this paper also compares the implementation of similar mechanisms in several other countries to find perspectives that can be adopted. In the context of the rule of law and welfare state, the government must optimize its role to ensure public access to fair and transparent administrative decisions.

Since its introduction in 1912, the Auteurswet (Authors’ Act .copyright act) has protected works that have an ‘individual, original character’ and ‘bear the personal stamp of the maker’. The act grants that maker exclusive rights, including the right to exploitation. This means that the maker can decide for themselves how, where and when the work is made public or copied. In addition, the act confers personality rights, which protect the maker against changes or other impairments of the work that might damage their honour and reputation. Although the Auteurswet did not have its origins in the building industry, the act has certainly demonstrated its relevance to that sector, given that architects’ designs also fall under the protection of the act. Since 1912 several authors’ rights lawsuits have been filed in the context of the construction industry. These have focused in particular on the question of whether alterations to buildings encroach on the rights of the architect. Nowadays the debate often revolves around the tension between the creative vision of the architect on the one hand and functional or social interests on the other, such as a change of purpose. This leads to a weighing of interests in which the key consideration is how these interests relate to the personality rights of the architect. This article focuses on conflicts arising from changes to existing buildings during their architects’ lifetime. Four case histories are considered: the De Maerle villa (1917‑1918) in Huizen, the Metropool multi‑tenancy building (1991‑1992) in Amsterdam, the Ministry of Agriculture, Trade and Industry (2015) in The Hague, and the Naturalis Natural History Museum (2017) in Leiden. The key question is whether the arguments used in the evaluation and outcome of these cases have changed over time. The analysis of the four cases reveals that legislation, including the Auteurswet, is constantly subject to interpretation. In summary, the cases demonstrate that the act continues to evolve, partly in response to social change. There remains the important question of whether the application of the act (in other words, the interpretation of the weighing of interests) to architects’ designs is still consistent with current practice. The societal importance of preserving existing buildings and retrofitting them for sustainability is increasing. Demolition has become less acceptable from the viewpoint of sustainability, which only serves to heighten the tension between architectural authors’ rights and societal interests. Yet the jurisprudence shows that there is still scope for these societal interests. In the weighing of interests, arguments in favour of preserving a design are set against reasons for change, such as changing uses, modern functional requirements and sustainability. The cases discussed here illustrate how the interpretation of the Auteurswet has evolved and adapted to social change. This includes a greater focus on the personality rights of the maker. Although that does not result in a complete interdiction on changes to buildings, it does help to clarify the scope of these rights. It ensures that the Auteurswet remains balanced between creative freedom on the one hand and societal interests on the other, with room for continued development in the future.

“Creative India and innovative India “is the slogan of Indian policy of Intellectual Property Right. Copy right is a provision to author given by the law of authority of his or her work such as literature , music, software programming , artistic works, sound recording and etc. Implementation of Information and communication technology into traditional libraries, many changes may occur in library services .such as housekeeping services, charging-discharging systems, circulation systems are automated in the libraries. 1994 amendment is responsible for communication broadcasting new technology computer applications into the communication. 1999 amendment responsible made the Copyright Act fully compatible with the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement .This paper supposed to give an importance Copyright All the librarians have to know the copyright laws which are enacted in national and international acts to proper maintenance of the library. To educate, the users is importance of Indian copyright act. To promote , copyright laws in Indian library system.

Copyright exceptions for teaching and research purposes have turned into a significant issue for achieving a balance between the copyright owner and copyright users. The regulation of this issue is reflected in the Copyright Acts 1911 and 1987 for Palestine and Malaysia, respectively. The Palestine Copyright Act 1911 dismisses teaching and research copyright exceptions in detail and has not been amended since 1911; signifying a huge setback in regulating this issue and the pressing need to improvise the Act in order to achieve a balance between the copyright owner and copyright users. The present study has looked into the teaching and research exceptions detailed in the Palestine Copyright Act 1911 with the aim of suggesting improvements in the Act. The comparative research approach was used, along with a functional method. The findings revealed that the Malaysia Copyright Act 1987 offers several provisions in regulating the teaching and research exceptions based on a fair dealing rule, while the Palestine Copyright Act 1911 lacked provisions in regulating these exceptions despite its fair dealing principle. This points to the need for improvements in the Palestine Copyright Act 1911.

Abstract This study offers a reappraisal of Everyman’s Library, the mass-market series of world 'classics' launched by the British publisher J. M. Dent & Sons in 1906. The collection’s reliance on the 1842 and 1911 Copyright Acts has fostered a misconception within literary studies: namely, that reprint series were ‘impervious to novelty’. Conversely, I argue that ‘liveliness’ and ‘timeliness’—being in line with current trends and (re)printed at the right moment—became fundamental ‘classic’ attributes during the interwar years. Everyman advanced a rhetoric of the ‘new’ besides a rhetoric of the ‘old’, based on the idea that what consecrated both terms was only the passage of time, a gaze from the future. When Dent’s series started featuring more contemporaneous authors, the American Modern Library (1917), formally considered its modern(ist) alter ego, began including more ‘classic’ literature instead. Both series exploited the tension between ancients and moderns as profitable: Confucius and Horace were advertised as ‘the classics which are still modern: the modern works which have become classics’. Exploring the blurry boundaries between ‘classic’ and ‘modern’ as marketing categories, this paper draws on the J. M. Dent & Sons Records, Chapel Hill to bridge the gap between modernism and mass production.

The present study attempts to examine an Information Literacy Skills of faculty members and research scholars of Central Sanskrit University, Vedavyas Campus, Balahar, Kangra.The questionnaire survey of study was utilized to obtain data for the study. A structured questionnaire was constructed in Google Form and distributed to 28 academic staff and 27 academic researchers at Central Sanskrit University's Vedavyas campus in order to get the information required to assess their information literacy skills. Out of which 44 (80.0 percent) questionnaire was received for data analysis. This study examines several aspects of library use, including method of document searching, orientation and information literacy programme, various e-resources and ICT literacy skills. Copyright act, search engines etc.The data indicated that faculty and research scholars possessed sufficient information handling skills to meet their basic needs.

We met only a few cases that assessed fair use over ten years since fair use clause were introduced to our copyright act. Therefore, a pile of U.S. fair use cases that have accumulated in the fields of art and technology can be good reference to interpreting our fair use clause. The concept of transformative use bears a significant role in fair use analysis of U.S. case law. The U.S. Supreme Court defines the transformative use as adding new purpose or character to the original works by changing its “expression, meaning or messages”, and accepted the fair use defense in Campbell and Google mainly based on its assessment that the the use was transformative in each case. The role of transformativeness is essential in realization of the purpose of fair use doctrine, i.e., flexibly responding to technological changes in order to provide “breathing room” for freedom of expression. There also exist concerns regarding this concept as increasing vagueness of fair use standards leading to declined predictability, as well as harming carefully designed balance between copyright protection and fair use. Conflicting interests were expressed in a recent case related to a portrait photograph work employed in appropriation art works, Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith. As the district court and the appellate court arrived at opposite conclusions showing different views on transformativeness of Andy Warhol’s works, the U.S. Supreme Court is to resolve issues regarding limits of transformative use. As reviewed in this article, it was timely and meaningful attempt that the appellate court sought for the balance of conflicting interests of copyright owners and users while paying attention to the relationship between derivative works and transformative use. However, the appellate court decision exposed some limitations in terms of compatibility with the Supreme Court’s standards and its logic of interpretation. The Supreme Court’s decision to be made would have great meaning in modern application of fair use clause, and bring about great impact in the creation of modern art and licensing business. Also, the issues being dealt with in this case bear significance in our own situation where Korean Supreme Court provides no specific standards on the application of our fair use clause which was imported from U.S. copyright law.

The development of the concept of ‘Communication to the Public’ has been hand in hand with the development of communication technology. In the Berne Convention, the first international copyright treaty, the concept appeared in the Roman Revision Conference in 1920 and was established through various discussions, and it was also expanded in the WIPO Internet Treaty to regulate the use of works in the Internet environment. Since Korea joined the Berne Convention in 1996, Korean Copyright Act has been revised three times, establishing the concept of ‘Public Transmission’ and implementing provisions related to ‘Communication to the Public’. However, there are some differences between the concept of ‘public transmission’ and sub-concepts in Korean Copyright ACT and the concepts related to ‘Communication to the Public’ in international treaties. According to international treaties, provision of ‘Making Available to the Public’ is limited to the act of making users to access the work at a individual time and place regardless of whether the work is transmitted or not. However, in the case of Korea’s ‘interactive transmission’, the range is relatively wider as it also includes transmissions made together with the user’s request for initiation. Broadcasting refers to wireless transmission according to international treaty, but the concept of broadcasting in Korea does include both wired and wireless one. Accordingly, the scope of ‘Broadcasting Organization’ is different. In the case of ‘digital audio transmission’, the concept is not found in international treaties. Accordingly, there was also an issue of whether ‘digital image transmission’, which is interpreted in the scope of use, provision or public transmission under international treaties, belongs to ‘broadcasting’ and whether it falls under ‘other public transmissions’. In this paper, the concept of communication to the public delivery in international treaties is was first analyzed. For the comparison of the concept in international treaties, this paper analyzes the concept in the Berne Convention, WCT, and WPPT. Next, Korea’s ‘Public Transmission’ is was analyzed in the same way and compared with international treaties. Although Korean copyright law fully implements international treaties, it has been confirmed that there are some differences between concepts. And finally, an improvement plan was presented to overcome the problems caused by the differences.

The bestseller clause of the Copyright Act is an older legal institution of Hungarian copyright law. The rule was taken over by Hungarian law from the German Copyright Act. The bestseller clause provides protection for a creator in a weaker contractual position than the user. It provides effective assistance for the subsequent consideration of unforeseen circumstances at the time of the conclusion of the contract. Its primary purpose is to remedy the post-contractual shift in value using the special means of judicial amendment of the contract.The legal institution of the bestseller clause is a special regulatory solution compared to the provisions of the Civil Code on invalidity. It is a special provision compared to invalidity in the event of a significant difference in value, however, it provides a strong limitation on the legal consequences of invalidity.It only provides an opportunity for the court to amend the contract and eliminate the striking difference in value.The rule has very poor judicial practice, both in Hungary and abroad. The primary reason for this is that the parties apply contractual arrangements that avoid future uncertainties regarding the amount of the royalty.One of the aims of the DSM Directive is to extend the legal opportunities for weaker contracting parties, including the EU-level harmonization of the bestseller clause. According to Article 20 DSM, Member States shall ensure that in the absence of an applicable collective bargaining agreement providing for a mechanism comparable to that set out in this Article, authors and performers or their representatives are entitled to claim additional, appropriateand fair remuneration from the party with whom they entered into a contract for the exploitation of their rights, or from the successors in title of such party, when the remuneration originally agreed on turns out to be disproportionately low compared to all the subsequent relevant revenues derived from the exploitation of the works or performances. The essay examines the possible effects of the extension of the bestseller clause to new areas in the national copyright law and the relationship between the new provisions and civil law invalidity rules.

Abstract While copyright libraries now routinely present themselves as exemplars of assiduous preservation, in line with the long duration of their legal deposit privileges, the history of these libraries is also a history of discrimination, sifting, and rejection—especially up until the early nineteenth century. This article uses the 1818 Select Committee on the Copyright Acts to examine how the theory and practice of legal deposit entail a (shifting) calibration of the catholic and the selective. I focus on two sets of documents. The first is the minutes of the select committee, where I trace the different modes of literary value put forward by library representatives. In particular, I consider the difficulty librarians face when asked to comment on individual texts (rather than the principle of deposit). The second group of documents comprises parliamentary returns from the Bodleian Library and the Cambridge University Library listing deposit items that these libraries rejected between 1814 and 1817. I have traced many of the roughly 500 texts listed and present strategies drawn from the computational humanities for exploring the different authors, genres, and forms represented. In conclusion, I propose that legal deposit can generate negative bibliographies—lists of the works not to be preserved in certain libraries—that allow book historians to investigate canon formation in terms of rejection, relegation, and indifference, rather than elevation and appreciation.

Research ethics are quite familiar and are followed by the researchers in all research institutes all over the world. Information and communication technologies (ICTs) are the major source of collecting, saving, analyzing and disseminating the results of these researches in all over world as well. Therefore, the major question is that whether ICT-Ethics/IT Ethics are also being followed by these researchers during their research work or not? To answer this question, a self-developed questionnaire was administered amongst the contemporary researchers of one of the main public sector University of Southern Punjab. Four factors related to ICT ethics were mainly asked in this questionnaire: Basic Understanding with ICT ethics; Grabbing Data Online; Copyright Acts and Plagiarism. Total 200 (97 male and 103 female) researchers of session 2016-18 participated in this research on the basis of their willingness. With the help of graphs, frequencies, average scores and percentages it was concluded that overall all sampled researchers’ knowledge falls under the category of ‘Average to Above Average’ in all factors of ICT based research ethics which were specifically observed in this study. By comparing results gender-wise; it was found that both categories fall under the category of ‘Below Average to Average’ knowledge; but values disclosed that female researchers’ knowledge was better than to male researchers.

Globalization has offered a multitude of opportunities and challenges, mainly when it deals with copyright. The scope of copyright has been broad, encompassing various aspects of life, especially in literature and education. This study aims to analyze Indonesia's copyright issues, particularly regarding the reproduction of books deemed to have lesser protection for authors, dealing with the fair use doctrine. This doctrine considers that work is allowed to a limited extent for use by other parties without the creator or copyright holder's permission to keep it fair. This fair use doctrine permits limited and fair use of literary works for specific purposes without royalty payments and the author's consent. Given the author's more protection, this study then displays a comparative analysis of the U.S. framework on the Copyright Act portrayed into two main discussions. First, this study will discuss photocopying for educational purposes from the lens of Indonesia's Copyright Act. Second, this study considers the possible adjustment to adopt the so-called future concept of restrictions for educational purposes from the U.S. States Copyright Act 1976.
 KEYWORDS: Fair Use Doctrine, Copyright Act, Copyright for Educational Purposes.

The internet has increasingly been conceptualized as a space of economic activity. This contemporary imaginary has been particularly influenced by insights from the school of Autonomist Marxism in the foundational work of Tiziana Terranova and through the dominance of Christian Fuchs’ application of Marxist economic concepts. While this has generated great insight into the political economy of the internet, and in particular allowed for the conceptualization of user activity as labor, this approach is only one paradigm for considering the economic activities and implications of the internet. For internet research, there is also the need to move beyond the long schism between political economy and cultural studies as we try to understand user activity that is socially and affectively rich, but emerges from commercial contexts. This series of panels proposes to expand the exploration of the internet as an economic construct in a number of directions. It pluralizes the definition of “economy”, expanding it from the strictly fiscal to include other economies such as the moral, (sub-) cultural, affective, queer, or libidinal (to name merely a few). Various papers propose different economic models for understanding the interactions within and between these various economies. They also expand the range of actors and economic contexts associated with the internet, drawing attention to the intersections of race and gender in particular. The goal of these papers across the various sessions is to expand our imaginary of the internet economy. This panel is focused on expanding critical frameworks that can be brought to bear on economies within digital media. While Marxian frameworks are insightful and valuable, they may not adequately reflect the contemporary social context, nor engage effectively with politics outside of class. What other economic models need to be used, or how do we inflect Marx, for these contexts? What other critical perspectives do we need to incorporate to understand the broad implications of a socially pervasive, but commercial internet? The papers on this panel work at the intersection of economic concepts and theoretical paradigms drawn from a variety of disciplines, demonstrating an expanded toolkit for interrogating internet economies. The first speaker offers a Marxist feminist and queer critique of theories about user exploitation that follow from the Autonomous Marxists, calling upon us to recognize the gendered and racialized history of unpaid labor and the absence of this insight in neoclassical economic modeling. Through a case study in the political economy of anonymity in queer dating/hook-up sites, the speaker de-centers the normatively white, hetereosexual, cis-male in economic models, highlighting different and too-frequently ignored ways of understanding privacy and the exploitation of data. The second speakers return to and revitalize classic work on gift economies, exploring the ways in which the fiscal and moral economies are articulated together in commons-based production. Through a multi-sited ethnographic study of open source animation film-making communities tracing the movement between actors and objects across different regimes of value, the speakers describe negotiated transitions from commons to commodity and back again. They argue that when engaging with producers’ own accounts of their community-based processes and the agonistic ethics holding sway there, we are better able to see the fluid dynamics of decommodification and recommodification taking place within commons production integrated into the commodity-based capitalist economic environment. The third speaker looks at the intersection of state policy and economics, providing a history of how the internet, which was focused on non-profit and public concerns in the first half of its life (1965–1995), was refigured by U.S. law and policy to support corporate for-profit use. Starting with the Telecommunications Act of 1996, through the Digital Millennium Copyright act of 1998, the FCC Policy Statement of 2010, and the National Broadband Plan of 2010, the speaker argues that U.S. law and policy have attempted to increase competition where market-based solutions are not clearly in the public interest, placing increasingly more informational functions within the purview of market forces. The speaker then addresses policies at access and content levels that would instead nurture and grow non-profit spaces. The fourth speaker continues the broad political engagement of this panel, examining crowdfunding campaigns set up to support U.S. police officers involved in the 2014 killings of Michael Brown and Eric Garner. The speaker argues that these examples of gift economies, by simply claiming to e.g. “help [Officer Darren Wilson] and his family during this trying time in their lives,” collapse the roles Fuchs has described as socio-cultural, social-political, and socio-economic, and allow racist donors to “launder” their politico-economic activity through the gift economy. This case study demonstrates the importance of integrating economic analysis with critical social theory—the central project at the heart of this panel.

저작권제도는 교육의 중요성을 고려하여 교육목적을 위하여 저작물을 원활히 이용할 수 있도록 저작권을 제한하여 교육의 질을 높이려고 노력해왔다. 미디어 환경의 변화와 함께 학교교육도 온라인으로 그 범위가 확대되면서 학교 교육에서의 저작물 사용 범위도 확대되었고, 이것이 저작권 제한의 범위에도 영향을 미쳐왔다. 일본과 한국은 2018년과 2020년에 각각 온라인 교육을 위한 저작물 이용을 사전허락 없이 가능할 수 있도록 개정하였고 양국의 개정법이 2020년에 함께 시행되었다. 디지털환경에 부합하는 교육을 원활히 할 수 있도록 하는 양국의 저작권법 개정이 비슷한 시기에 이루어진 것이라는 점에서, 양국의 법제도를 비교 검토하였다. 검토 결과, 양국의 법제도는 교육목적을 위한 저작물 이용에 대한 보상금의 징수범위와 보상금의 분배 방법에서 특히 차이를 보였다. 한국저작권법은 교육목적을 위한 저작물의 이용에 대한 보상금 지급과 관련해 지정관리단체가 교과용도서 및 수업과정에서의 저작물의 이용에 대한 보상금을 모두 징수하도록 하고 있으나, 일본 저작권법은 교과용도서의 경우에는 이용자가 저작권자에게 보상금을 지급하고. 수업과정에서의 저작물 이용의 경우에는 이시적 공중송신에 대해서만 지정관리단체에 보상금을 지급하도록 하고 있다. 우리나라에서의 보상금 제도는 미분배보상금의 발생을 전제로 미분배보상금의 일부를 공익목적 이유로 사용할 수 있도록 하고 있으나, 일본의 경우는 미리 공통목적사업으로 할당하여 이를 분배받지 못하는 권리자를 위하여 사용하도록 하고 나머지는 모두 분배를 한다는 점에서 근본적인 차이가 있다. 이와 같이 양국의 제도는 표면적으로는 흡사해 보이지만, 제도운용과 관련하여서는 실질적으로 상당한 차이점이 존재함을 발견하였으며, 특히 수업과정에서의 저작물 이용에 관한 보상금제도는 한국이 먼저 도입하여 시행하고 있는바 양국의 법제도 운영은 서로에게 참고가 될 수 있을 것으로 보여진다.Considering the importance of education, the use of works in school education has been tried to improve education quality by limiting them to copyrights. Changes in the media environment have affected the scope of use of works in school education. Moreover, scope of copyright restrictions has also been expanded as remote education is available. Japan and Korea were revised to expand online education in 2018 and 2020 respectively and the revised Acts are implemented in 2020. Thus this article reviewed similarities and differences comparatively on the provisions for limitations on the use of works for the purpose of education in the two national legal systems. As a result, notable differences between two national laws were the scope of collection of compensation for the use of works in the course of classes and the method of distribution of compensation. In relation to the payment of compensation for the use of works for educational purposes, Korea Copyright Law allows the collecting society to collect and distribute the compensation for both textbook and the use of works in the course of teaching. Meanwhile, Japanese copyright law allows users to pay the royalties of textbooks to copyright holders but, it allows a collecting society to collect the compensation from users. The compensation system in Korea uses undistributed compensation for public interest purposes, meanwhile, under Japanese copyright law, a common purpose fund is mandatorily allocated in advance in order to use for those who are not able to receive the compensation, and the rest of the compensation should be distributed to right holders. As such, the two countries’ systems look similar on the surface, but there is also a real difference. Hence, this article will help two countries to operate their legal system regarding the provisions for the limitations on the copyrights for the educational purpose by referring to each other’s legal system.

Art. 17 DSMCD a Class of Its Own? How to Implement Art. 17 Into the Existing National Copyright Acts – Also a Comment on the Recent German Discussion Draft

Pushing Libraries and Archives to the Edge of the Law

Copyright is the right of Intellectual Property (right over the wealth of Intellectual). The right over the wealth of intellectual, is the right to enjoy economic result of some intellectual creativity. In the terms of copyright in Copyright Act No.28 year 2014 explained that “copyright is an exclusive right of the creator or the right recipient to announce or reproduce the creation or give permission for it without any reduce a limitations or restrictions according to the applicable law”. In this case, copyright can be transfer to the inheritor or to the other parties. This research aims to know the division ordinances in inheritance in the concept of mawaris and copyright Act No.28 years 2014. This transfer is aims to respect the struggle, thought, creativity of the creator, and to keep the benefts felt by society and his inheritor. The fnding of study are according to copyright act, the creation that get a copyright is all of creation in art and science that metioned in copyright act. In Islam not all of creation get a protection by copyright but it must to have some of requirements as pure, halal or legal, thayyib or good, and it doesn’t damage a moral of society. The copyright division in inheritance is regulated in civil law book and mawaris concept. Takharruj system or mutual agreement system is allowed be use after the division in the concept of mawaris. Keyword: Copyright, Mawaris, Intellectual property, Sharia

현재 우리나라의 저작권 침해 구제의 상황을 보면, 형사적 구제수단에 지나치게 의존하는 양상을 보이고 있으며, 그것은 남고소로 인한 여러 가지 폐해로 이어지고 있다. 이러한 현상에는 여러 가지 원인이 있지만, 현행 저작권법상의 민사적 구제수단, 특히 손해배상제도가 저작권침해의 억지를 위해 충분한 역할을 못 하는 데 기인하는 면도 적지 않다. 침해억지적 기능을 가지는 유일한 현행법상의 제도인 법정손해배상 제도는 등록 요건 등으로 인해 대다수 사건에는 큰 힘을 발휘하지 못 하고 있다. 이러한 상황에서 최근 특허법 및 부정경쟁방지법에서 징벌적 손해배상의 한 유형이라고 할 수 있는 3배배상 제도를 도입한 것은 시사하는 바가 크다. 외국의 입법사례를 보면, 저작권법에 2배 또는 3배의 배수 배상 제도 또는 부가적 배상제도를 포함하여 징벌적 손해배상 제도를 도입한 예가 상당히 많다. 그리고 일부 나라에서는 법정손해배상 제도와 징벌적 손해배상 제도를 함께 규정하고 있기도 하며, 우리나라에서도 기존의 법률에서 법정손해배상제도와 3배배상 제도를 동시에 규정한 예들이 있다. 한편으로 법정손해배상제도를 활성화하는 방향은 손해배상 총액의 상한이 규정되어 있지 않은 상태에서 자칫 남용될 경우 큰 문제를 야기할 소지가 없지 않다. 이러한 사정들을 고려할 때, 우리 저작권법상의 침해 구제 제도에 대한 바람직한 개선방향은 형사적 구제수단의 남용을 제한하는 입법과의 병행추진을 전제로, 저작권법에 최근의 특허법 및 부정경쟁방지법 개정에 포함된 것과 거의 같은 징벌적 손해배상 제도를 추가로 도입하는 것이라 생각한다.

In this paper, we reviewed the notes on using Web map image provided by Web map service, from the viewpoint of copyright act. The copyright act aims to contribute to creation of culture by protecting the rights of authors and others, and promoting fair exploitation of cultural products. Therefore, everyone can use copyrighted materials to the extent of the copyright limitation based on copyright act. The Web map image, including maps, aerial photo and satellite image, are one of copyrighted materials, so it can be used within the limits of copyright. However, the available range of Web map image under the copyright act is not wide. In addition, it is pointed out that the copyright act has not been able to follow the progress of digitalization of copyrighted materials. It is expected to revise the copyright act corresponding to digitalization of copyrighted work.

Copyright generally vests in the author, the human creator of the work. But because, at least until recently, most authors have been ill-equipped to commercialize and disseminate their works on their own, the author has granted rights to intermediaries to market her works. Since most authors are the weaker parties to publishing, production, or distribution contracts, the resulting deal may favor the interests of the intermediary to the detriment of the author’s interests. Many national copyright laws have introduced a variety of corrective measures, from the very first copyright act, the 1710 British Statute of Anne, which instituted the author’s reversion right (still in force, albeit much modified, in U.S. copyright law), to detailed limitations on the form and scope of grants found in many continental European copyright laws. Recently, the Netherlands and France have amended their copyright laws to reinforce author-protective provisions; the French reforms particularly envision the publishing contract in the digital environment. But many author contracts, especially in the digital environment, grant rights for multiple territories: how does the international dimension of these agreements affect the practical ability of individual countries to regulate authors’ contracts with respect to exploitations occurring within their borders? If, on the one hand, “lawmakers tend to be provincial in developing copyright-contract rules, remaining focused on largely local parties and interests rather than on policies common to many jurisdictions,” and, on the other, general principles of private international law leave to the parties the determination of the law applicable to their contract, may the parties simply avoid “provincial” protections of authors’ economic interests by choosing (or the stronger party imposing) the law of a less author-interventionist jurisdiction to govern the full territorial extent of the * Morton L. Janklow Professor of Literary and Artistic Property Law, Columbia University School of Law. Research for this article was made possible through The Philippe P. Dauman Faculty Research Fund, established in 2007 by Philippe P. Dauman, Columbia Law School ‘78 and The Philippe and Deborah Dauman Family Foundation. Copyright  2015 Jane C. Ginsburg and Pierre Sirinelli. ** Professor of Law, Universite de Paris I (Pantheon-Sorbonne). The authors are most grateful to Professor Marie-Elodie Ancel and Professor Edouard Treppoz. Thanks as well to Professor Dirk Visser, Professor Mireille van Eechoud, and Dr. Silke von Lewinski, and to Professor George Bermann and other participants in the Columbia Law School faculty workshop. GINSBURG & SIRINELLI, PRIVATE INT’L LAW ASPECTS OF AUTHORS’ CONTRACTS, 39 COLUM. J.L. & ARTS 171 (2015) 172 COLUMBIA JOURNAL OF LAW & THE ARTS [39:2 transfer? This Article will first discuss two examples of reforms of copyright-contract law, then will consider the extent to which private international law rules may render these reforms largely ineffective for authors who grant rights for multiple territories. Finally, we will propose private international law approaches that preserve local author-protective contract restrictions without rendering the implementation of the international agreement unduly cumbersome or unpredictable. We recognize that our approach departs from classic, contentneutral, private international law rules, because it seeks to impose a particular outcome. But content-neutral choice of law rules are what create the problem that provoked this examination in the first place: the rule of “party autonomy,” that directs courts to look to the law the parties choose for their contract enables the stronger party to avoid weaker party protections simply by submitting the contract to a less-constraining national law. The proposed rule remains within the general private international law (nonsubstantive) framework because it in no way instructs states to adopt author-protective measures. It simply endeavors to ensure, if a state does determine to recalibrate the balance of power between authors and exploiters, that the contract not set the state’s efforts to protect its resident authors to naught. GINSBURG & SIRINELLI, PRIVATE INT’L LAW ASPECTS OF AUTHORS’ CONTRACTS, 39 COLUM. J.L. & ARTS 171 (2015) 2015] PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW ASPECTS OF AUTHORS’ CONTRACTS 173