Global mandatory fair use : the nature and scope of the right to quote copyright works / Tanya Aplin, Lionel Bently.

"Imagine an international instrument which does not merely oblige contracting parties to confer rights on copyright holders (permitting only optional, narrowly circumscribed, exceptions), but also mandates limitations. Imagine, too, that such an instrument requires parties to permit use of material...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Aplin, Tanya Frances (Author)
Bently, Lionel, 1964- (Author)
Language:English
Published: Cambridge, United Kingdom ; New York, NY : Cambridge University Press, 2020.
Series:Cambridge intellectual property and information law.
Subjects:
Physical Description:xxv, 253 pages ; 25 cm.
Format: Book

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a2200000 i 4500
001 in00006429696
003 OCoLC
005 20220616131442.0
008 200420t20202020enk b 001 0 eng
010 |a  2020018242 
015 |a GBC0H0396  |2 bnb 
016 7 |a 019997717  |2 Uk 
020 |a 9781108835459  |q hardcover 
020 |a 1108835457  |q hardcover 
020 |z 9781108884099  |q electronic book 
035 |a (OCoLC)1152433839 
040 |a DLC  |b eng  |e rda  |c DLC  |d YDX  |d OCLCF  |d UKMGB  |d YDX  |d OCLCO  |d GUL  |d EVK  |d UtOrBLW 
042 |a pcc 
049 |a EVKA 
050 0 4 |a K1420.5  |b .A75 2020 
100 1 |a Aplin, Tanya Frances,  |e author.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/nr2002034890 
245 1 0 |a Global mandatory fair use :  |b the nature and scope of the right to quote copyright works /  |c Tanya Aplin, Lionel Bently. 
264 1 |a Cambridge, United Kingdom ;  |a New York, NY :  |b Cambridge University Press,  |c 2020. 
264 4 |c ©2020 
300 |a xxv, 253 pages ;  |c 25 cm. 
336 |a text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a unmediated  |b n  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a volume  |b nc  |2 rdacarrier 
490 1 |a Cambridge intellectual property and information law 
504 |a Includes bibliographical references (pages 230-248) and index. 
505 0 |a Introduction -- History of Article 10(1) Berne -- Preliminary considerations about the nature of the quotation exception -- Article 10(1) Berne : requirements -- Article 10(1) Berne : the meaning of quotation -- Article 10(1) Berne : fair practice -- Consequences of global, mandatory fair use -- Conclusion. 
520 |a "Imagine an international instrument which does not merely oblige contracting parties to confer rights on copyright holders (permitting only optional, narrowly circumscribed, exceptions), but also mandates limitations. Imagine, too, that such an instrument requires parties to permit use of material which has been taken from existing works and incorporated in a later work, irrespective of the purpose of so doing, but only on condition that the use is in accordance with fair practice. Imagine that the mandatory limitation allows re-use of transformed versions of works, including parodies, and even the whole of a protected work. Imagine, indeed, a regime of global, mandatory, fair use. Surely such a fantasy, or 'thought experiment' is a pointless, 'academic' exercise given the political economy of international copyright and the dominant place within it occupied by the socalled 'three-step test,' which has long been thought to cast a cloud over the legitimacy of the US fair use defence?1 Yes and no. Yes, it is pointless to imagine, but no, this is not because it is impossible to achieve; it is pointless to imagine because there is no need to imagine it. It already exists.2 This is precisely the effect of Article 10(1) of the Berne Convention.3 This much-neglected provision already mandates global fair use.4 This is a proposition that will seem shocking to some, on both sides of copyright's polarised political spectrum. To so-called 'maximalists,' global, mandatory fair use is unthinkable because US fair use is itself legally dubious, in the light of the international requirement that exceptions must be confined to certain, special cases. Section 107 of the US Copyright Act 1976 is only maintainable because there is a body of jurisprudence that transforms the open norm of fair use' into a series of reasonably clearly understood and well-defined instances. Adoption of such an open-norm by other jurisdictions, without such jurisprudence, fails to offer certainty as to the limited scope of the limitation that international law appears to demand. At the opposite end, that of the 'copy-left' movement, the proposition cannot be correct, because, were it so, the international acquis would not be as appalling as it is taken to be"--  |c Provided by publisher. 
650 0 |a Fair use (Copyright)  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85046891 
650 0 |a Copyright.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85032446 
650 7 |a Copyright.  |2 fast  |0 (OCoLC)fst00878706 
650 7 |a Fair use (Copyright)  |2 fast  |0 (OCoLC)fst00919859 
700 1 |a Bently, Lionel,  |d 1964-  |e author.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n96035249 
776 0 8 |i ebook version :  |z 9781108884099 
830 0 |a Cambridge intellectual property and information law.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/no2008010696 
907 |y .b141757565  |b 220404  |c 210126 
998 |a dx  |b 210319  |c m  |d a   |e -  |f eng  |g enk  |h 0  |i 4 
999 f f |i 1e61fd10-f807-554c-9169-fff49c6dcfb7  |s 7d5cfd9c-c5ae-5389-8afa-f0da6c8e0a1e  |t 0 
952 f f |p Can Circulate  |a Michigan State University-Library of Michigan  |b Michigan State University  |c MSU Schaefer Law Library  |d MSU Schaefer Law Library - Level 1  |t 0  |e K1420.5 .A75 2020  |h Library of Congress classification  |i Printed Material  |m 35157002602743  |n 1