GrepLaw |
|
|
This site is a production of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society. Please email if you have questions, contributions, or ideas about improving this site.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Taiwan Rejects US Copyright Extension
|
|
|
|
posted by md
on Friday October 11, @10:35PM
from the dept.
|
|
|
|
|
miladus writes "The US is apparently seeking to export Copyright Extension. Taiwan
has rejected US demands to extend copyrights on works from 50 to 70 years
according to a story on Siliconvalley.com.
Taiwan is the first country the US has chosen to discuss the Sony Bono Copyright
Term Extension Act. Taiwan intellectual property laws are generally inline
with international standards. One student is quoted in the story as saying:"
Why should we be blamed for pursuing knowledge?" It will be interesting
to see if the US will choose to pressure other countries to go along with
the Sony Bono Act."
|
|
|
|
< Copyright on Campus Gets Complicated
| User Victorious in Aussie Spammer's Blocklist Suit >
| |
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
Taiwan Rejects US Copyright Extension
|
Login/Create an Account
| Top
| 5 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One of the arguments presented by the Government to the Supreme Court was that the extention and retroactive features of the law were necessary to bring US Copyright law in line with International Copyright Law. They also argued (correctly I think) that this is an area where the Consitution does give Congress discression.
The above referenced article implies that the law under review does in fact go far beyond current Internationally accepted Copyright protections. If the above referenced article is correct (and I personally believe that it is), then the testimony and arguments presented before the Supreme Court may have been pushing the truth.
The fact that the US Government is PRESSURIZING other sovergn nations to increase their copyright restrictions to bring them in line with our new law implies that (on this point at least) they are trying to mislead the Supreme Court.
TOM
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The arument for the CTEA was harmonization with European copyrights which are generally life+70. The '76 term extension harmonized us with the minimum requirements of the Berne Convention.
It'll be interesting to see if the US continues to press for life+70 if the CTEA is struck down.I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, however the sig limit is too small to contain i
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Article 12 of the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) - one of the WTO Agreements - requires a copyright term of no less than life + 50 years.
When it was argued that the life + 70 years was 'in line with international law', this refers to the term in the European Union, which is life + 70 (when they harmonised, Germany had life plus 70 I think, which is why the higher term).
Not quite misleading the court. But I worry about pressure from the US on all the other countries to increase the term, particularly when it makes bilateral trading agreements with other countries that depend on reaching a 'satisfactory level' of intellectual property protection. Experience indicates that a 'satisfactory level' is sometimes above the level required by such agreements as TRIPS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Humanity has the stars in its future, and that future is too important to be
lost under the burden of juvenile folly and ignorant superstition.
- Isaac Asimov
|
|
|
|
|
[
home |
contribute story |
older articles |
past polls |
faq |
authors |
preferences ]
|