Abstract
Copyright law is mandated to make a balance between conflicting issues like incentive and access. This article will try to explore how copyright law can make an attempt to increase access and contribute in the making of information society. In the process of doing it, the article will examine interaction of copyright law with public or private interest. This article will also try to establish link between copyright and free speech which will facilitate role of copyright in strengthening access to information.
This chapter has been derived from the author’s previous publication in 2016 by Springer, titled “Database Law: Perspectives from India”.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The Association of Research Libraries have noted that prices of such journals rose by 115% between 1986–1994 which was the result of a market which was monopolistic and controlled by a small group of publishers. M. Maurer, Raw Knowledge: Protecting Technical Databases for Science and Industry, Workshop on Promoting Access to Scientific and Technical Data for the Public Interest: An Assessment of Policy Options, National Academy of Sciences, January, 1999.
- 2.
Maurer and Scotchmer 1999.
- 3.
Baron 2001.
- 4.
In Elanco Product Ltd v. Mandops Ltd 1980 RPC 213. Patent on herbicide expired. The defendant marketed it with an accompanying leaflet with detailed instruction as to use the herbicide. Much of the information was in public domain. The plaintiff-the original inventor alleged that the leaflet infringed their copyright in the leaflet they provided with the tin. The court granted injunction and held that defendant could not use plaintiff’s skill and judgment to save themselves the trouble and cost of assembling literature.
- 5.
Arrest of Russian programmer on criminal charges for developing software to circumvent Adobe’s copy-protection technology for digital book. http://www.epccentral.org/dmca.html. See also Cathrine Colston 2001.
- 6.
First Evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC on Legal Protection of Databases, Commission of The European Communities, Brussels, 12th December 2005. p. 21.
- 7.
Book Review of Christophe Geiger 2006 E.I.P.R. 357.
- 8.
Apart from high degree of litigiousness due to a legislation on competition, it only solves the problem of undue appropriation by competitors and not by users, recourse to unfair competition is available only ex post, it does not solve the problem of information Samaritan who for non-economic reason extracts data and then make it available to public for free, the legislation does not give any exclusive or transferable right and the concept of unfair competition varies from country to country. The Impact of Protection of Non-Original Databases on the Countries of Latin America and the Caribbean, WIPO, Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights, Eights Sessions, Geneva, 2002. p. 15.
- 9.
Christophe Geiger 2006.
- 10.
OECD Report on the Scientific Publishing Industry, Digital Broadband Content 2005.
- 11.
Christophe Geiger 2006.
- 12.
- 13.
‘The Congress shall have the power securing for limited times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries’. Article 1§ 8, American Constitution.
- 14.
- 15.
Fundamental Rights, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, European Convention on Human Rights.
- 16.
Christophe Geiger 2006.
- 17.
Articles 7 and 10 of Berne Convention, Article 9 of TRIPs, Article 2 of WCT.
- 18.
Christophe Geiger 2006.
- 19.
WCT 1996.
- 20.
Akuate Internet Services v. Star India, CM Appl.4665/2013, Delhi High Court.
- 21.
Article 27, TRIPs.
- 22.
Following Article 3a(1) European Directive 97/36 (on television)—‘Member States may take measures … to ensure that broadcasters under its jurisdiction do not broadcast on an exclusive basis events which are regarded by the Member States as being of major importance for society in such a way as to deprive a substantial proportion of public … of possibility of following such event via live coverage or deferred coverage on free television’.
Article 9, Convention of Council of Europe on Transfrontier Television, 1989, ‘…to examine and where necessary, take legal measure… to avoid right of public to information being undermined due to exercise of exclusive right’. These can be sports, cultural and other events as well.
- 23.
Section 95b(2) German Copyright Act, user is entitled to demand from the right holder support required for exercise of certain legitimate uses, as cited by Christophe Geiger, Copyright and Free Access to Information: For a Fair Balance of Interest in a Globalize World 2006 E.I.P.R. 370.
- 24.
Article 6.4.
- 25.
The maker of a database which is made available to the public in whatever manner my not prevent a lawful user of the database from extracting and/or reutilizing insubstantial part of the contents evaluated qualitatively or quantitatively for any purpose whatsoever.
- 26.
Lawful user of a database which is made available to public in whatever manner may without authorization of the maker of the database, extract or reutilize a substantial part of its content in case of extraction for private purpose of the content of a non-electronic database, in case of extraction for teaching and scientific research for non commercial purpose, in case of extraction for administrative or judicial purpose.
- 27.
Thakur, Database Protection in the European Union and the United States, 2001IPQ 100.
- 28.
Section 53(2)(1) German Copyright Act.
- 29.
Christophe Geiger, Copyright and Free Access to Information: For a Fair Balance of Interest in a Globalize World 2006 E.I.P.R. 371.
- 30.
Eldred v. Ashcroft 537 US 186.
- 31.
Eldred v. Ashcroft 537 US 186.
- 32.
Article 1 § 8 cl 8, US Constitution.
- 33.
Eldred v. Ashcroft 537 US 186.
- 34.
537 US 186.
- 35.
Walterscheid 2000.
- 36.
82 F. 316 (7th Cir. 1897).
- 37.
188 U.S 239 (1903).
- 38.
Drone 1879.
- 39.
Gorman 1963.
- 40.
Samuelson 1986.
References
Baron P (2001) Back to future: learning from the past in the database debate. Ohio State L J 62:880
Colston C (2001) Sui generis database right: ripe for review. J Inf Law Technol 3. http://www.elj.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/01-3/colston.html
Drone ES (1879) A treatise on the law of property in intellectual productions in great Britain and the united states. Little Brown & Co, Boston, p 424
Geiger C (2006) Copyright and free access to information: for a fair balance of interest in a globalize world. Eur Intellect Property Rev 366
Gorman (1963) Copyright protection for the collection and representation of facts. Harvard Law Rev 76:1569
Griffiths J, Suthersanan U (2005) Copyright and free speech. Oxford University Press
Hugenholtz P (1996) Adapting copyright to the information superhighway. The Future of Copyright in a Digital Era’, Kluwer
Maurer SM, Scotchmer S (1999) Intellectual property rights: database protection: is it broken and should we fix it? Science 284:789
OECD Report on the Scientific Publishing Industry (2005) Digital broadband content: Scientific Publishing
Samuelson (1986) Allocating ownership right in computer—generated works. Univ Pitt Law Rev 47:1185
Walterscheid E (2000) The nature of the intellectual property clause in the historical perspective, p 125
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mazumder, A. (2017). Copyright, Access and Information Society. In: Sinha, M., Mahalwar, V. (eds) Copyright Law in the Digital World. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3984-3_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3984-3_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-3983-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-3984-3
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)