How to Balance Interests: Comparative Legal Aspects on the Limitation of Copyright in International Law

Tatiana Brazhnik
{"title":"How to Balance Interests: Comparative Legal Aspects on the Limitation of Copyright in International Law","authors":"Tatiana Brazhnik","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2506003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present article is motivated by the growing interest in the problem of copyright limitation and the comparatively low interest in the problem of legal system connections. Despite the fact that differences in regulation have been recognised for a long period of time, there is still no harmonization in the field. Although recent research works are numerous, it is still not agreed whether common law family or continental law family is better for international use. The issue at hand is influenced by the significant importance of the internet and electronic commerce. Moreover, it addresses the more fundamental question of the division of legal systems. This paper analyses both approaches; shows doctrinal differences in copyright limitation principles; reveals the connection between regulatory frames and existing legal systems; describes the current and potential pitfalls of framework clashes; and identifies modern global legal trends. The findings demonstrate the dependence of recent legal decisions and norms on the philosophical approach applied in a country. In addition, the paper suggests different steps and models of regulatory unification. The theoretical contribution of the work can help the development of new copyright limitation schemes and harmonize international law on this issue","PeriodicalId":129013,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Law eJournal","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy of Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2506003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present article is motivated by the growing interest in the problem of copyright limitation and the comparatively low interest in the problem of legal system connections. Despite the fact that differences in regulation have been recognised for a long period of time, there is still no harmonization in the field. Although recent research works are numerous, it is still not agreed whether common law family or continental law family is better for international use. The issue at hand is influenced by the significant importance of the internet and electronic commerce. Moreover, it addresses the more fundamental question of the division of legal systems. This paper analyses both approaches; shows doctrinal differences in copyright limitation principles; reveals the connection between regulatory frames and existing legal systems; describes the current and potential pitfalls of framework clashes; and identifies modern global legal trends. The findings demonstrate the dependence of recent legal decisions and norms on the philosophical approach applied in a country. In addition, the paper suggests different steps and models of regulatory unification. The theoretical contribution of the work can help the development of new copyright limitation schemes and harmonize international law on this issue
如何平衡利益:国际法中版权限制的比较法学视角
对版权限制问题的兴趣日益浓厚,而对法律制度联系问题的兴趣相对较低,这是本文的动机。尽管在很长一段时间内,人们已经认识到监管方面的差异,但该领域仍然没有协调一致。虽然近年来的研究工作很多,但对于英美法系与大陆法系孰优孰劣仍未达成一致。当前的问题受到互联网和电子商务的重要性的影响。此外,它还处理了法律制度划分这一更根本的问题。本文对这两种方法进行了分析;说明著作权限制原则的理论差异;揭示监管框架与现有法律制度之间的联系;描述当前和潜在的框架冲突陷阱;并指出现代全球法律趋势。调查结果表明,最近的法律决定和规范依赖于一个国家所采用的哲学方法。此外,本文还提出了监管统一的不同步骤和模式。本文的理论贡献有助于新的版权限制方案的发展,并有助于协调这一问题的国际法
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信