首页> 外文期刊>European intellectual property review >A Pause in Private Copying: Judicial Review Holds the UK Private Copying Exception to be Unlawful because there was no Evidence to Support the Decision not to Provide Compensation to Right Holders
【24h】

A Pause in Private Copying: Judicial Review Holds the UK Private Copying Exception to be Unlawful because there was no Evidence to Support the Decision not to Provide Compensation to Right Holders

机译:暂停私人复制:司法复审认为英国私人复制例外是非法的,因为没有证据支持不向权利人提供赔偿的决定

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The Personal Copies for Private Use exception to copyright infringement came into force in October 2014 to permit copying of lawfully acquired copyright works by individuals for their private use. The legislation was challenged by way of judicial review on the basis that it failed to provide "fair compensation" for copyright owners for the permitted copying by way of a levy on blank media or equipment used for recording as required by the Copyright Directive. In British Academy of Songwriters, Composers and Authors, Musicians' Union and UK Music 2009 Ltd v Secretary of State of Business, Innovation and Skills/ while the court upheld that the legislation as drafted was within the discretion provided under the Copyright Directive, ultimately it was unlawful as there was insufficient evidence to support the conclusion that the private copying permitted would cause zero or de minimis harm to the copyright owners, such that no compensation was needed. The legislation was quashed by the judge with agreement from the parties with prospective effect. The judge left open the issue of whether this was also retrospective. No reference has been made to the CJEU, although leave to apply for such a reference has been granted.
机译:自2014年10月起,侵犯版权的私人使用私人副本例外规定生效,允许个人复制合法获得的版权作品供私人使用。该立法受到司法审查的质疑,理由是该立法未能按照版权指令的要求,通过对空白媒体或用于记录的设备征税,为版权所有者提供“公平补偿”。在英国歌曲作者,作曲家和作者学院,音乐家联盟和UK Music 2009 Ltd诉商业,创新和技能国务卿/中,法院维持了起草的法律属于《版权指令》规定的酌处权,最终之所以成立是非法的,因为没有足够的证据来支持这样的结论,即许可的私人复制将对版权拥有者造成零损害或最低限度的损害,因此无需赔偿。经双方同意,法官取消了该立法,具有前瞻性效力。法官未就此是否也具有追溯力的问题悬而未决。尽管已准予申请引用,但未提及欧洲法院。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号