Advertisement

The International Emergence of the Performers’ Rights Regime

  • Gowri NanayakkaraEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

An exploration of the emergence and development of the Performers’ Rights Regime (PRR) demonstrates how technological advances and the intentions of maintaining authorial supremacy played a prominent role in shaping the international PRR. While concerns about technological unemployment of performers supported the creation of the PRR at the international level, the need to acknowledge and maintain authorial supremacy over performers seem to have limited its scope. A focus on these two themes is important to appreciate the nature and limitations of the contemporary PRR, which inherently becomes the main considerations within the legislative exploration. This chapter will commence the examination of the way in which the PRR emerged and developed internationally through a couple of international treaties, Rome Convention and TRIPS Agreement, and the chapter that follows will further this discussion into the expansions of PRR through subsequent international treaties and the manner in which they shaped the Sri Lankan PRR.

Keywords

Rome convention TRIPS agreement Authorial supremacy Technological unemployment 

References

  1. Bently, L, and Sherman, Brad, Intellectual Property Law (Oxford University Press 2001).Google Scholar
  2. Bhagwati, J, ‘What It Will Take to Get Developing Countries into a New Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations’ (Trade Policy Research, 2001) http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca.eet/pdf/02-en.pdf.
  3. Blakeney, M, Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights: A Concise Guide to the TRIPS Agreement (Sweet & Maxwell 1996).Google Scholar
  4. Boyle, James, Shamans, Software and Spleens: Law and the Construction of the Information Society (Harvard University Press 1997).Google Scholar
  5. Davies, Gillian, ‘The Rome Convention 1961—A Brief Summary of its Development and Prospects’ (1979) 2 European Intellectual Property Review 154.Google Scholar
  6. Deere, Carolyn, The Implementation Game—The TRIPS Agreement and the Global Politics of Intellectual Property Reform in Developing Countries (Oxford University Press 2008).Google Scholar
  7. Drahos, Peter, ‘Global Property Rights in Information: The Story of TRIPS at the GATT’ (1995) 13 Prometheus 6–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Finger J, Michael, ‘Introduction and Overview’ in J. Michael Finger and Phillip Schuler (eds), Poor People’s Knowledge: Promoting Intellectual Property Rights in Developing Countries (World Bank Publications 2004).Google Scholar
  9. Gervais, Daniel, The TRIPS Agreement: Drafting History and Analysis (Sweet & Maxwell 1998).Google Scholar
  10. Gervais, Daniel, The TRIPS Agreement: Drafting History and Analysis (3rd edn, Sweet & Maxwell 2008).Google Scholar
  11. Goldstein, P ‘Copyright’ (1990–1991) 38 Journal of the Copyright Society of the USA 109.Google Scholar
  12. ILO, ‘The ILO and the Protection of Performers, Record Manufacturers and Broadcasting Agencies’ (1956) 73 International Labour Review 252.Google Scholar
  13. Layton, Ron, ‘Enhancing Intellectual Property Exports through Fair Trade’ in J. Michael Finger and Phillip Schuler (eds), Poor People’s Knowledge: Promoting Intellectual Property Rights in Developing Countries (World Bank Publications 2004).Google Scholar
  14. Liebl, Maureen and Roy, Tirthankar, ‘Handmade in India: Traditional Craft Skills in a Changing World’ in J. Michael Finger and Phillip Schuler (eds), Poor People’s Knowledge: Promoting Intellectual Property Rights in Developing Countries (World Bank Publications 2004).Google Scholar
  15. Matsushita, M, Mavroidis, Petros C, and Schoenbaum, Thomas J, The World Trade Organization-Law, Practice and Policy (2nd edn, Oxford University Press 2006).Google Scholar
  16. Morgan, Owen, International Protection of Performers’ Rights (Hart 2002).Google Scholar
  17. Penna, Frank J, Thormann, Monique, Finger, J Michael, Records of the Diplomatic Conference on the International Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organisations (ILO, UNESCO and BIRPI 1968).Google Scholar
  18. Penna, Frank J, Thormann, Monique, Finger, J Michael, ‘The Africa Music Project’ in J. Michael Finger and Phillip Schuler (ed), Poor People’s Knowledge: Promoting Intellectual Property Rights in Developing Countries (World Bank Publications 2004).Google Scholar
  19. Rembe, Rolfe, ‘Time for a Performers’ Convention’ (1991) 25(4) Copyright Bulletin 25.Google Scholar
  20. Thompson, Edward, ‘Problems’ (1973) 107 International Labour Review 303.Google Scholar
  21. Thompson, Edward, ‘International Protection of Performers’ Rights: Some Current Performers and Technological Change 25 Years After the Rome Convention’ (1986) 125 International Labour Review 575.Google Scholar
  22. Trebilcock, M, and Howse, R, The Regulation of International Trade (3rd edn, Routledge 2005).Google Scholar
  23. Ulmer, Eugen, ‘The Rome Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organisations I’ (1962) 10 Bulletin Copyright Society of the USA 90.Google Scholar
  24. Ulmer, Eugen, ‘The Rome Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organisations II’(1962) 10 Bulletin Copyright Society of the USA 165.Google Scholar
  25. Ulmer, Eugen, ‘The Rome Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organisations III’ (1962) 10 Bulletin Copyright Society of the USA 219.Google Scholar
  26. Von Lewinski, Silk, International Copyright Law and Policy (Oxford University Press 2008).Google Scholar
  27. Yu, Peter K, ‘TRIPs and Its Discontents’ (2006) 10 Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review 369.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of LawCanterbury Christ Church UniversityCanterburyUK

Personalised recommendations