Chapter 4 of the Copyright Review Committee‘s Consultation Paper considers the position of rights-holders in copyright law in general, and how such rights-holders contribute to the process of innovation in particular (update: you can download a pdf of the Paper here (via DJEI) or here (from this site)). The intersection between copyright and innovation is clear in the case of rights-holders, who benefit from the rights conferred by copyright law in two main ways: they can commercially exploit their works, and they protect the artistic integrity of their works. The central premise from which copyright law has developed is that it is the potential reward provided by copyright that encourages the art, movie, music, programming and writing. In that sense, copyright law fosters and protects innovation. Moreover, copyright provides rights-holders legal protection for the artistic integrity of their works. Nevertheless, both of these justifications look not only to the rights-holder, but also to the public benefit of the work: the State affords copyright protection to rights-holders because a diverse range of work is for the public benefit or the common good; and the appropriate reward afforded to the rights-holder is not an end in itself, but rather the means to this diversity, competition and innovation.…
Author: Eoin
Dr Eoin O'Dell is a Fellow and Associate Professor of Law at Trinity College Dublin.
Chief Justice argues creation of new court of appeal essential – The Irish Times
From the Irish Times:
Unlike its counterparts in the common law world, Ireland does not have an intermediate appeal court, leading to a situation where the Supreme Court was overwhelmed by the volume coming from the High Court. The creation of a court of appeal was promised in the programme for government, she said.
News Media and “New Media” – New Zealand Law Commission Consultation on Regulation « Inforrm’s Blog
News Media and “New Media” – New Zealand Law Commission Consultation on Regulation
28
02
2012
The Law Commission of New Zealand is undertaking a review of the current regulatory regime for news media with respect to its adequacy in catering for new and emerging forms of news media – sometimes referred to as the “new media”. It published a comprehensive “Issues Paper” [Word] for consultation on 12 December 2011. Responses are required by 12 March 2012 and can be made online.
The Privacy Paradox – Stanford Law Review
The Privacy Paradox
Privacy and Its Conflicting Values
How should the legal system adjust to our evolving and oftentimes conflicting expectations of privacy? Experts weigh in on this important question in areas ranging from political data to government searches in this 2012 Symposium Issue.
2012 Symposium – Stanford Technology Law Review – First Amendment Challenges in the Digital Age
2012 Symposium
First Amendment Challenges in the Digital Age
Audio recordings of the panels are now available at the above link
Twitter Libel Actions in Three Jurisdictions – Courtney Love, Chris Cairns, Joseph Meggitt « Inforrm’s Blog
Twitter Libel Actions in Three Jurisdictions – Courtney Love, Chris Cairns, Joseph Meggitt
19
02
2012
Three libel actions involving Twitter have been in the news around the world this week. The first is in the USA and involves Courtney Love (again). The second is due to be the first twitter libel trial – in England in two weeks’ time. Finally, in Australia there is news of a claim against Twitter Inc itself as the publisher of a defamatory tweet.
Times contempt challenge thrown out in Strasbourg – Adam Wagner « Inforrm’s Blog
Times contempt challenge thrown out in Strasbourg – Adam Wagner
14
02
2012
In the case of Michael Seckerson v United Kingdom (App Nos. 32844/10 and 33510/10) the European Court of Human Rights rejected as “inadmissible” Times Newspapers’ challenge to its 2009 conviction for contempt of court. The decision, which was made by seven judges, is a good example of an early stage “strike-out” by the Court which is nonetheless a substantial, reasoned decision
This case demonstrates that prosecution for contempt for breach of the secrecy of the jury room is not incompatible with Article 10.
#CRC12 Paper: Chapter 3 – Copyright Council of Ireland
One of the main issues on which the Copyright Review Committee invites submissions is whether there ought to be a Copyright Council of Ireland (the Council). The model which is proposed for discussion in the Consultation Paper would be an independent self-funding organisation, created by the Irish copyright community, recognised by the Minister, and based on principal objects that ensure the protection of copyright and the general public interest as well as encouraging innovation (update: you can download a pdf of the Paper here (via DJEI) or here (from this site)).
The copyright communities in many other countries – such as Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom – have established copyright councils. The functions of these copyright councils are very similar, representing the interests of their members, principally rights-holders and collecting societies. However, the model in the Paper goes considerably further, with a broadly-based subscribing membership, so that every interested member of the Irish copyright community (such as all of the various categories of person and organisation which made submissions to the Review) could be subscribing members of the Council if they wish to be. Such a body has the potential to be an important resource for the Irish copyright community and the general public, especially if it undertakes processes of public education on copyright, recommends standards of best practice, and gathers evidence to support the process of ongoing copyright reform.…