Moral Rights a Comparative Analysis

The Colour of Copyright

∗ LLB (University of Asmara), LLM (Cornell University), JSD candidate, Cornell Law School. 1 Copyright law is generally categorised into economic and moral rights of authors. Almost all countries of the world today protect the economic rights of authors. Certain countries, for instance the US, have a very limited moral rights concept. One of the challenges that creators of works of authorship suffer in this age of technology is that it has become so easy and cheap to reproduce works of authorship. The cost of producing a song is much more than burning it on a CD. In addition, the intangibility of the property rights in creative works also allows the non-rivalrous consumption of the good. This non-rivalrous character does not deter the buyer of an original CD from allowing his or her friend to make a copy of it. Both the original and copy CDs can be consumed at the same time without reducing the value of the original CD for the original buyer. 2 John Stuart Mill, the grand philosopher of liberalism, explained how intellectual property rights can incentivise creations. He emphasised the need for granting authors a limited time monopoly for their creations. The debate about whether granting authors limited monopoly rights serves as an incentive for creativity is as prevalent today as it was in the 1800s (Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy (2002), p. 9, available at http://www.iprcommission.org/papers/pdfs/final_report/Ch1final.pdf (accessed 8 September 2010)). However, it is not necessarily true to assume that people invest time and effort to create works because of the incentives granted to them by copyright laws. The Creative Commons is a non-profit organisation that is dedicated to making access to information easy. For instance, the movement with Mozilla Firefox and other open source software is one of them. For further discussion on the works of the Creative Commons movement, see http://creativecommons.org/about/ (accessed 3 June 2010). Contemporary copyright law grants limited monopoly of protection in the sense that the copyright holder does not have absolute rights. The term of protection is limited in time. It is also limited for certain forms of exploitations that fall within the general exceptions of copyright laws. See, for instance, section 102 of the 17 USC (United States Code). 3 Historically, in the 1950s there was a prevalent view that the rationale for intellectual property rights protection was mainly to protect against retaliation from foreign governments. For instance,

The article is devoted to the study of the general provisions of intellectual property law in Ukraine. The article notes that the importance of protecting property rights in the intellectual sphere has been growing rapidly in recent decades. A theoretical and practical understanding of the nature of intellectual property rights was carried out based on the analysis of current legislation and available scientific, methodical and journalistic materials. The list of laws that regulate activities in the field of intellectual property, both at the national and international level, is given. It is interesting to note that in Ukraine there are quite a lot of special legislative acts regulating the above activities. Attention is focused on the adaptation of Ukrainian legislation to the legal system of the European Union. International legal acts regulating the protection of intellectual property rights are given. Scientific and regulatory approaches to defining the concept of intellectual property rights are considered. It is established that this concept can be considered in two ways: objective and subjective. In an objective sense, in the legal literature, intellectual property law is considered as a system of legal norms that regulates homogeneous social relations in the field of intellectual property. In a subjective sense, the right of intellectual property is considered as personal property and non-property rights of natural persons, which according to the current legislation belong to the authors for the results of intellectual activity. Special attention is paid to the interpretation of the concepts of property and non-property intellectual property rights. Property intellectual property is the author's rights to the results obtained from his creative activity, similar to the property rights of those who create material objects with their labor (devices, devices, mechanisms, new information technologies, etc.). Non-property intellectual property rights are a set of moral, mental, rational, intellectual and other human rights, which by their nature cannot be alienated from the owner. A comparative analysis was made between intellectual property law and property law in general, and their relationship was also analyzed.

This study aims to analyze and determine the criteria for intellectual property rights (copyright) as objects of inheritance in civil law and to analyze and determine the status of intellectual property rights (copyright) as objects of inheritance in civil law. Intellectual property rights are material rights, rights to objects originating from the work of the brain, the result of the work of the ratio. The result of the work of reasoning human ratios. The result of his work is in the form of immaterial objects, intangible objects, for example, copyrighted songs. Article 16 paragraph (1) Law no. 28 of 2014 concerning Copyright stipulates that by its nature copyright is an intangible movable object. Immaterial property rights are property rights whose objects are intangible objects (intangible objects). In this case many things can be used as objects of property rights which are included in the scope of incorporeal objects. For example, billing rights, rights arising from the issuance of securities, rental rights and so on. The results of the study concluded that copyright (copy rights) which is part of Intellectual Property Rights has criteria as an object of inheritance, because copyright law determines copyright as an intangible movable object that gives moral rights and economic rights to its creators which are exclusive which can be transferred to his heirs. Copyright (copy rights) which is part of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) according to civil law has the position of an object of inheritance, because the law of inheritance is regulated in book II of the Civil Code which regulates objects. Inheritance object according to civil law is an object that is the property of someone who died.

Intellectual property rights (IPRs) are significant because India is a signatory to TRIPS agreement and member of WTO. Intellectual property rights are the monopoly rights enjoyed by the original creator. It includes exclusive rights allocated to the creator for reaping the profits of his creation by his intellectual wit and innovation. Intellectual property rights (IPRs) are the rules which are formed to protect the inventions from being copied by others. This is done in order to protect the economic value of the new creation which is done by the innovator. Granting Patents rights, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets are some of the main forms of IPRs. The awareness about IPRs is essential for the youth so as to develop their entrepreneurial skills which will help them to be the leaders in every field. A field survey on awareness about IPR has conducted for a specified purpose with a definite objective with specific community or target group. It uses questionnaires or interviews so as to assess knowledge of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and its types such as patents, copyrights, trademarks. The purpose of this study is to examine the awareness of intellectual property rights (IPR) among youth i.e. college students. The significance of this study can be understood in two ways. - (i) to sensitize the youth regarding IPRs (ii) to make them understand the role of infringements of IPR. Questionnaire containing 20 questions was designed on various aspects of IPR awareness covering definitions of IPR and its different types -patents, copyrights, trademarks, process of registration of IPR like patents, IPR infringement and its consequences, IPR laws, IPR- mechanism, personal experiences on IPR. The survey gave optimist results about the awareness assessment of the youth about Intellectual Property Rights awareness. Although many of the respondents did not have 100% clarity a bout IPR yet they tried to respond well. However, more conceptual clarity and practical guidance is required to sensitize them about IPR and provide them actual knowledge ab out IPR.

The mission of legal philosophy and philosophical hermeneutics has always been to comprehend the nature of intellectual property rights and the intellectual property rights system for the purpose of improving them. The difficulty of this task lies in the limitations in legal thinking resulting from the division of labor in the legal profession. A clear perception of the nature of intellectual property rights and the intellectual property rights system can only be obtained when we transcend intellectual property rights law. If we adopt the thinking of legal philosophy and the logic of dialectics to analyze the intellectual property rights system and explore the differing nature of institutional structures and their interrelationships, we can show that the intellectual property rights system is essentially an institutional arrangement involving balancing different considerations and implying a high level of political intellect. Only when intellectual property rights legislation possesses this kind of wisdom will people voluntarily abide by its rules in their life and work.

The potential of traditional knowledge of the indigenous people of Tenganan Pegringsingan, Manggis District, Karang Asam Regency, Bali, leads readers to a new insight that this potential can be measured through the concept of Intellectual Property Rights. This is in accordance with the parameters listed in WIPO and the mandate of Government Regulation No. 56 of 2022 concerning Public Intellectual Property. However, this potential has not been identified as an intellectual property right. This article explores the diverse traditional wisdom within the indigenous community of Tenganan that potentially has an intellectual property right. This traditional wisdom is recorded as part of the knowledge in the Intellectual Property Rights regime using a proprietary system. This study employs a qualitative method with hermeneutic analysis to explore the traditional wisdom of the indigenous people of Tenganan and its potential for protecting intellectual property rights. The results of this study aim to identify the traditional knowledge of the Tenganan indigenous community and classify it within the intellectual property rights regime as regulated in Indonesia’s Intellectual Property Rights Law, with the expectation of supporting the communal intellectual property of the Tenganan people.

Reviewed by: No Trespassing: Authorship, Intellectual Property Rights, and the Boundaries of Globalization J. G. Matthews No Trespassing: Authorship, Intellectual Property Rights, and the Boundaries of Globalization. By Eva Hemmungs Wirtén . Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004. xii, 224 pp. $50.00. ISBN 0-8020-8835-X. Eva Hemmungs Wirtén's No Trespassing is an insightful exploration of the influences technological change and globalization wield on notions of authorship and intellectual property rights. The matter of cultural ownership lies at the heart of this book, and the author brilliantly shows how it describes the historical, dynamic tensions between private ownership of and public access to information. Indeed, the very term "cultural ownership" juxtaposes two concepts that might seem at odds. Broadly defined, "culture" denotes a common historical, social, and artistic heritage shared by a group. "Ownership," on the other hand, describes entitlements purchased by individuals and other entities with capital to spend. In many ways, suggests Hemmungs Wirtén, the ambivalence between private ownership and public access sponsors the development of copyright and intellectual property law and legislates who controls access to information, both nationally and internationally. Beginning with a reading of Victor Hugo's inaugural address to the 1878 Exposition Universelle and its subsequent influence upon the development of international copyright laws, Hemmungs Wirtén proceeds to skillfully weave together chapters on the English translation and publication of Peter Høeg's Smilla's Sense of Snow; the enduring impact that the development of photocopy machines have had on copyright legislation; media as commodities; the challenges of developing cultural property rights that are different from postcolonial and imperialistic paradigms of ownership and trade; and the safeguarding of public domain rights in respect to contemporary attempts (in the United States) to extend copyright privileges. As this summary indicates, Hemmungs Wirtén's breadth of inquiry isremarkable. Her ability to express clearly this complex topic, particularly its formidable legal aspects, is all the more impressive considering her academic background, which is in literature and information science. The author is most [End Page 291] compelling, however, when she focuses on a specific event, author, and/or work and considers its historical, legal, and theoretical significance to her topic, as she does in the first three and in the concluding chapters of this work. While chapters 4 and 5 are informative discussions on the economics of copyright and the cultural dimensions of intellectual property, respectively, they lack the interpretive dimension that distinguishes the other sections. Despite these criticisms, No Trespassing is a remarkably readable and judiciously documented volume. Chapter 2, "Inventing F. David: Author(ing) Translation," is particularly compelling in its consideration of the translation problem. Is translation a type of authorship? What are the publishing rights of authors and translators? Who has the "last word" on what translation makes it into print? No Trespassing is especially relevant in a day and age when individual rights are constantly compromised by aggressive privatization throughout the world. As global interdependence and technological progress shrink the planet, the gap between who controls and who has access to information treacherously widens. Hemmungs Wirtén convincingly argues that copyright and intellectual property rights litigation perpetuates postcolonial cycles of cultural imperialism that further divide and oppress individuals by treating information, including cultural property, as a commodity. In such a market even cultural goods and services traditionally held in the public domain, such as literature and art, are accessible for a fee. The title calls to mind lurid orange-and-black signs posted on fence posts and alley entrances warning people to stay out or stay away on pain of penalty. It evokes a sense of peril and punishment. Ironically, this book invites readers to consider timely, complex cultural and legal issues in lucid, respectful prose. No Trespassing deserves a wide readership, including students of cultural studies, publishing history, and new media. Readers interested in relationships between copyright and authorship as well as law and literary production will find this book a compelling resource. Likewise, librarians and information ethicists interested in copyright as well as the development of information regulation and data-sharing standards may discover new arguments to underscore freedom to information positions and policies that are...

While information technologies present organizations with opportunities to become more competitive, unsettled social norms and lagging legislation guiding the use of these technologies present organizations and individuals with ethical dilemmas. This paper presents two studies investigating the relationship between intellectual property and privacy attitudes, Machiavellianism and Ethical Ideology, and working in R&D and computer literacy in the form of programming experience. In Study 1, Machiavellians believed it was more acceptable to ignore the intellectual property and privacy rights of others. Programmers and R&D workers considered violating intellectual property rights more acceptable. Programmers did not consider violating privacy rights more acceptable, but R&D workers did. Finally, there was an interaction between Machiavellianism, programming and R&D. Machiavellians who also had programming experience or worked in R&D found violations of intellectual property much more acceptable. The effect of Machiavellianism on attitudes toward violations of privacy was enhanced by working in R&D, but not by programming experience. In Study 2, idealists believed it was less acceptable to ignore the intellectual property and privacy rights of others. Relativists found it more acceptable to violate intellectual property rights, though they did not consider it more acceptable to violate privacy rights. Those with programming experience were more accepting of intellectual property rights violations, but not of privacy violations. Finally, programming experience moderated the relationship between idealism, relativism and attitudes toward these unethical information practices. Implications for diminishing unethical behavior among Machiavellians, Relativists, programmers and those in R&D are discussed.

‘The Debauched Commons: A Dark Parable’ summarizes issues regarding intellectual property rights and immaterial culture through a nuanced reading of how First Nations Peoples worldwide have been forced by forms of neoliberal-capitalist exploitation of the knowledge commons to ring-fence and/or commodify their lived traditions, in many cases dating back 100,000 years and clearly predating any and all Western (First World) concepts of ownership. The intention of the structuralist-inspired reading of this enforced defensive position is to emphasize and clarify issues concerning prior art and moral rights, two of the most ambiguous and gamed elements of copyright and patent law. Drawing upon the international context of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) and the Convention for Safeguarding Intangible Heritage (2003), this essay will focus, in part, on the travails of Aboriginals in Australia as representative of First Peoples worldwide and their long-exploited and long-expropriated traditions, inclusive of land, but foremost lived knowledge, but also their often compromised position vis-à-vis various Australian state and Commonwealth legislation concerning recognition of their copyright, moral rights, and intellectual property rights. In this complex dance between tradition, heritage, and law, the so-called public domain often also becomes a de facto warehouse for the eventual conversion of intangible rights to collectively held and stored cultural property, which is then leveraged and/or converted to cultural capital by both public institutions and private companies. The primary premise of the analytic to be applied is that commodification of knowledge is more or less co-equal to the digitization of culture and the regimes of expropriation and/or outright theft associated with platform cultures. Platform culture, in turn, implicates otherwise benign, or apparently benign institutions (for example, academia and the art world) claiming to advance understanding and resolution of the twin nemeses of post-contemporary cultural politics—diversity and justice. The subtle machinations of what has come to be called the art-academic industrial complex will thus be analyzed for implicit and explicit practices that are reducible to the appropriation of native rites and rights, and laws and lores, for self-serving reasons inclusive of radical-chic posturing and politically correct tokenism.

Patenting Medical Products

From a legal perspective, analyze the connotation and logical relationship of intellectual property rights in Emei martial arts, point out the Legal dilemma in protecting Emei martial arts intellectual property rights, and then propose solu-tions to the problems. The study believes that the intellectual property rights of Emei martial arts refer to the intellectual property rights based on the intellec-tual achievements and commercial logos of Emei martial arts. The legal dilemma in the protection of intellectual property rights in Emei martial arts mainly manifests as follows: the identity of the rights subject of intellectual property rights in Emei martial arts and the intangible cultural heritage of Emei martial arts is the root cause of the conflict between public and private interests; to some extent, the sports nature of the intellectual property rights of Emei martial arts has influenced the legal recognition of this part of Emei martial arts intel-lectual property rights in the academic community; the inadequacy of the legal system is the fundamental reason why the intellectual property rights of Emei martial arts are difficult to obtain comprehensive protection. Based on this, the study proposes that technological innovation is a logical prerequisite for the protection of intellectual property rights in Emei martial arts. It can be achieved by extracting the classic techniques of Emei martial arts, constructing repre-sentative martial arts routines, and creating Emei martial arts competition pro-jects; The improvement of the legal system is the legal foundation for the pro-tection of intellectual property rights in Emei martial arts. In this process, it is necessary to particularly strengthen the important position and role of the Sports Law in the protection of intellectual property rights in Emei martial arts, and improve the basic position and auxiliary function of relevant intellectual property laws in the protection of intellectual property rights in Emei martial arts; The enrichment of theory is a powerful argument for the protection of in-tellectual property rights in Emei martial arts. Strengthening theory must be combined with the characteristics of sports, in order to build a solid legal foun-dation for the protection of the object of rights. In addition, the protection of intellectual property rights in Emei martial arts should focus on benefits, which requires balancing public and private interests and promoting the realization of public welfare through private rights protection

Intellectual property rights are legal rights that protect intellectual assets, which hold signifi cant value for individuals and even greater importance for the economy and society as a whole. Liability insurance against the infringement of intellectual property (IP) rights is becoming increasingly relevant as a mechanism for managing unforeseen risks arising from third-party proprietary claims and from unauthorized use of intellectual property rights. This paper fi rst examines the nature and scope of various intellectual property rights, alongside the advantages of liability insurance in cases of infringement of such rights. It then explores what may constitute the subject-matter of insurance coverage, based on the nature of intellectual property rights, general insurance principles, and contractual frameworks. The aim is to distinguish this specifi c type of liability insurance within the broader context of IP protection. Finally, the paper examines the scope of insurance coverage in relation to specifi c costs incurred when the insured appears as a defendant in legal proceedings, as well as when the insured takes actions to protect and enforce their intellectual property rights.

The paper analyses tensions between intellectual property rights, human rights and the right to health in four respects. First, it considers whether intellectual property rights are human rights by reappraising, in particular, Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 15(1) the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the report of the High Commissioner on Human Rights on the impact of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Second, it looks at the tensions between intellectual property rights and the right to health, specifically in relation to whether a rights-based approach to health can be used as a mechanism to facilitate access to medicines, re-examining Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Third, it discusses the implications of the right to health for intellectual property rights with reference to the experiences of using a human rights-based discourse to assert the right to health in the context of pharmaceutical product patents, compulsory licences and access to medicines, particularly anti-retroviral drugs for people living with HIV/AIDS in Brazil and South Africa. Fourth, the paper concludes by drawing attention to two significant initiatives at the World Health Organisation (WHO) with human rights implications: the WHO the Resolution on Public Health, Innovation and Essential Health Research and Intellectual Property Rights of 27 May 2006; and the WHO Global Strategy and Plan of Action on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property of 24 May 2008.

Intellectual property rights (IPR) are rights that are born as a result of a person's intellectual labor; hence, IPR is a legal structure of intellectual property protection as a result of the work performed by the creator or inventor. This research approach combines normative and empirical legal research with descriptive research characteristics. According to the study's findings, there is still a lack of public awareness, particularly among creative economy players, in terms of preserving their inventions and not being registered, resulting in many infringements of their works. The existence of IPR may be a source of increased income for participants in the creative economy. Intellectual Property Rights are governed by the Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 28 of 2014 on Copyright and the Government Regulation (PP) No. 56 of 2021 on the Management of Song and/or Music Copyright Royalties. As a result, anyone who infringes Intellectual Property Rights will face legal consequences.