How the Two Child Abuse Cases Helped to Shape the Test of Originality of Photographic Works

Marian Jankovic
{"title":"How the Two Child Abuse Cases Helped to Shape the Test of Originality of Photographic Works","authors":"Marian Jankovic","doi":"10.5817/mujlt2023-2-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author intends to assess the approach to finding originality in photographic works in the courts of the United States of America and the approach developed by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The means through which such assessment is to be made are two cases, each decided in a respective jurisdiction; nonetheless they are connected via both factual and legal circumstances - both involving child abuse and a dispute regarding a copyright infringement in a photographic work. The article will thoroughly assess the legal circumstances of each case and describe the methods of identification of originality applied therein. Following the said assessment, an analysis of the possible merger of both methods will be conducted, with emphasis on the possible added value for the test of originality applied to photographic works within the copyright framework of the European Union. The author’s intention is to conduct a comparison between both approaches to highlight their individual advantages and disadvantages, with a final assessment of their possible joint application in cases involving copyright infringement of photographic works within the copyright framework of the European Union.","PeriodicalId":38294,"journal":{"name":"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5817/mujlt2023-2-2","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 author intends to assess the approach to finding originality in photographic works in the courts of the United States of America and the approach developed by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The means through which such assessment is to be made are two cases, each decided in a respective jurisdiction; nonetheless they are connected via both factual and legal circumstances - both involving child abuse and a dispute regarding a copyright infringement in a photographic work. The article will thoroughly assess the legal circumstances of each case and describe the methods of identification of originality applied therein. Following the said assessment, an analysis of the possible merger of both methods will be conducted, with emphasis on the possible added value for the test of originality applied to photographic works within the copyright framework of the European Union. The author’s intention is to conduct a comparison between both approaches to highlight their individual advantages and disadvantages, with a final assessment of their possible joint application in cases involving copyright infringement of photographic works within the copyright framework of the European Union.
两起虐童案如何影响摄影作品独创性检验
作者打算评估美利坚合众国法院寻找摄影作品原创性的方法和欧洲联盟法院制定的方法。作出这种评估的方式是两种情况,分别由各自的司法管辖区决定;尽管如此,他们还是通过事实和法律环境联系在一起——既涉及虐待儿童,也涉及侵犯摄影作品版权的纠纷。本文将对每一案件的法律情况进行全面的评估,并阐述其中适用的原创性认定方法。在作出上述评估后,我们将分析两种方法合并的可能性,重点是在欧洲联盟版权框架内对摄影作品进行原创性检验可能带来的附加价值。作者的意图是对这两种方法进行比较,以突出其各自的优点和缺点,并最终评估它们在欧盟版权框架内涉及侵犯摄影作品版权的案件中可能的联合应用。
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
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信