The Pros And Cons Of Copyright Law

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) defines anti-competitive practices as the many ways firms restrict inter-firm competition to maintain or to increase their relative market position and profits without necessarily providing goods and services at a lower price or at a higher quality. The American Federal Trade Commission states that anti-competitive practices include activities such as price fixing, group boycotts and exclusionary exclusive dealings. These activities are generally grouped as agreements between competitors (horizontal conduct) and monopolization (single firm conduct).

Copyright laws must be flexible in addressing and supplementing the needs of Australia’s modern society. However, the failure of the existing, and outdated Copyright Act 1968 (Cwth) in fulfilling the needs of the Australian public has triggered the need for copyright reform. Copyright reform aims to reconsider the relationship between copyright, innovation, technology, research, and economic growth, where it would provide flexible laws fundamental to the broad dissemination of knowledge. Copyright laws should strike a balance between the interests of the creator and the Australian public in terms of access to knowledge, culture and education. Copyright reform aims to

The DMCA, focusing on its anti circumvention procurements as excessively defensive and condemning the WGIP for its absence of enthusiasm for the unintended outcomes of mechanical authorization. Her key knowledge, one that I have developed here, is that the DMCA certainly gives clients the capacity to bypass duplicate controls be that as it may, not the capacity to get the product that would carry out the occupation. She inquires whether it is legal for individuals to create or disseminate advances that will empower execution of the exemptions and restrictions on the circumvention boycott incorporated with the statute.

1: A copyright is a form of protection given to authors or creators of “original works of authorship” including literary, dramatic, musical, artistic and other intellectual works.

In the article "When Stealing Isn't Stealing" the author explains that an individual’s original work should be lawfully protected.

In 1909, the United States government passed a measure that would allow individuals to make a legal claim over their own intellectual property. Meaning that individuals who own intellectual property, which is considered works, are given exclusive rights to the materials they produce. Copyright law has been creates an environment that owners of the materials or works grant others who do not own that work permission to use it for their own needs (Copyright, n.d.). The intent of Title 17 the Copyright law, is that even though an owner has rights over their work, in some specific instance a non-owner may be able to copy, repeat, or use material that is not their own. This action is called fair use; which is found in Section 107 of Title 17.

I learned from John that if one has a copyright, that means they own the right to produce whatever is copyrighted. Further, that person has the right to create derivative works of the copyright and control who makes derivative works as well. An example of a derivative work would be when someone makes a movie based off of a novel. Also, the person with the copyright has the power to distribute copies, transfer ownership, and decide who can perform or display the work in public. John also explained that the ownership of a copyright lasts a total of seven years, and after that, a copyright without ownership is called a public domain. That means it is free to use in the public world.

Copyright is type of legal right which protects work produced by you once your idea has been verbally and physically expressed. The name of the current copyright act in the UK is the “Copyright, Designs and Patents Act” which was founded in 1988.

The origins of Australia and Singapore’s law of copyright are connected as both the laws first originated from the United Kingdom (UK). The first copyright statute, British Statute of Anne 1710 which was named after Queen Anne, was initially applied to the copying of books only. As the first modern copyright law, it recognized copyright as an author’s right, a major and important change in philosophy and in law. Registration of works in the Stationers’ Company register book was required of the owners of the rights as a condition of protection.

Copyright Infringement is the infringement of the exclusive rights of an author by the unauthorized use of their work:

Under the U.S. Copyright law, the creator of a work is the owner of that work, until copyright ownership is relinquished. The “Works Made for Hire” doctrine was added to the Copyright Act in 1976 as a way of documenting copyright ownership of works created primarily by freelance artists.

In many jurisdictions, copyright laws foster interoperability, either by allowing for a specific reverse engineering exception to owners’ exclusive rights or by giving wide fair-dealing measures. As the reverse engineering exception commonly operates, firm A may design a new product compatible with an existing product controlled by software owned by B, by first copying B’s program in object or machine code form in order to understand how it works and what is required for it to interact with other software. A will then not infringe B’s copyright provided no substantial amount of B’s program is copied.

As per them, copyright is not a tool that only employs to protect privacy and very soon courts identify this and implying as a term in a contract and finding a breach of trust into privacy.

Copyright protection extends to expressions and not to ideas . Originality is the threshold standard of requirement of copyright. The case Walter v Lane [1900] AC 539 expounded the three essential elements (labour, skill and judgment ) of originality. The court adapted to sweat of brow test with no element of creativity require to make the work original. Copyright can be granted if a work is created through the effort of an individual despite the work containing statement of facts and no creative input by an author.

As per Indian Copyright law traditional knowledge fails to adhere the requirements that are precedent to copyright protection. Hence, the protection can easily be denied