Conflict of Laws Regulation of Copyright Relations on the Internet (comparing Russia, US and Japan)
Abstract
The article shows the major problems of private international law on copyright. General conflict of laws rules provided by Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works of 1886 are not sufficient to ensure uniform solutions to the international protection of copyrighted works. As is shown on the example of the USA, Japan and Russia the courts of the countries have a great deal of discretion to decide the applicable law for protection of copyrighted works at the international level. The problems of choice of law in the copyright are aggravated with the development of the Internet and its transnational character and limitation of territorial competence of states. The article reviews the current rules of the applicable law and suggests the most relevant rules in the context of the Internet. The article also includes the critical review of the grounds of the courts’ international jurisdiction of the USA, Japan and Russia taking into consideration the copyright infringement on the Internet.
References
Andre L. (2009) Item 6 of the Provisional Agenda. Applicable Law in Copyright Infringe ment Cases in the Digital Environment. Available at: http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/files/27402/11189966001digcxiii_5_e.pdf/digcxiii_5_e.pdf (accessed 04.05.2013)
Artamonova A. (2005) Okhrana avtorskykh prav po mezhdunarodnomu chastnomu i rossiiskomu grazhdanskomu zakonodatel'stvu: sravnitel'no-pravovoy analiz: Diss...kand. Jurid. Nauk. [Copyright Protection under International Private and Russian Civil Legislation: a Comparative Analysis. PhD Thesis]. Moscow, Moscow State University.
Atkinson-Bonasio A. (2011) Intellectual Property in Photographs: Bridgeman Art Library, Ltd. v. Corel Corp. Available at: http://www.alicebonasio.com/Research/PDFs/Intellectual%20Property%20in%20Photographs.pdf (accessed 08.06.2013)
Asoskov A. (2012) Kollizionnoe regulirovanie dogovornykh obyazatel'stv [Conflict of Laws Regulation of Contractual Obligations]. Moscow, Infotropic Media, 264 p.
Belov A. (2001) Razreshenie vneshneekonomicheskikh sporov v sudebnom poryadke [Resolution of Foreign Trade Disputes in Court]. Pravo i ekonomika — Law and economics, no. 4, pp. 30-32.
Brand R. (1998) Tort Jurisdiction in a Multilateral Convention: The Lessons of the Due Process Clause and the Brussels Convention. 26 Brook.
D.Menthe. (2011) Jurisdiction in Cyberspace: A Theory of International Spaces. Available at: http://www.mttlr.org/volfour/menthe.html (accessed 08.06.2013)
Dashyan M. (2007) Pravo informatsionnykh magistraley [Law of Information Highways]. Moscow, Volters Kluwer, 2007, pp. 37-39.
Dobson K. (2009) The Originality of Photographs for Purposes of Copyright Law Before and after Bridgeman Art Library, Ltd. v. Corel. Corp. Florida Coastal Law Review. vol. X:319. 2009, pp. 44-69.
Dogauchi M. (2001) Private International Law on Intellectual Property: a Civil Law Over view. WIPO document WIPO/PIL/01/8. Available at: http://www.wipo.int/pil-forum/en/documents/doc/pil_01_8.doc (accessed 08.06.2013)
Doi T. (2001) Japanese Copyright Law in the 21st Century, N.Y.: Oceana Publications, Inc. Dobbs Ferry, pp. 46-48.
Evstafieva I. (2012) Pravovoe regulirovanie mezhdunarodnogo oborota imischestvennykh avtorskikhprav. Avtoref. Diss. ... kand. yurid. nauk [Legal Regulation of International Turnover of Proprietary Copyright. PhD Thesis]. Saratov, Saratov State University pp. 3-5.
Ginsburg J. (1998) The Private International Law of Copyright in an Era of Technological Change, The Hague: Hague Academy of International Law. pp. 99-101.
Hoegle R., Boam C. (2000) The Internet and Jurisdiction International Principles Emerge but Confrontation Looms. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, vol. 3. no. 1. p. 43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1796.2000.tb00115.x
Kalyatin V. (2004) Pravo v sfere Interneta [Law in the Area of Internet]. Moscow, HSE, p. 79.
Lisitsin-Svetlanov A. (2002) Tendentsii razvitiya mezhdunarodnogo grazhdanskogo protsessa: Diss. doct. yurid. nauk. [Trends in the Development of International Civil Process. PhD Thesis]. Moscow, HSE, p. 150.
Kono T. (2000) Enforcement of Foreign Intellectual Rights in Japan: Jurisdiction and Applicable Law. CASRIP Publication Series: Rethinkingl Intellectual Property, no. 6, p. 21.
Mamaev A. (2008) Mezhdunarodnaya sudebnaya yurisdiktsiya po transgranichnym grazhdanskim delam [International Judicial Jurisdiction on Transborder Civil Cases]. Moscow, Yurayt, p. 24.
McWinney S., Wooden S., McKnown J. (2003) The “Sliding Scale” of Personal Jurisdiction Via the Internet, LLP, Dorsey & Whitney, p. 101.
Patry W. (2000) Choice of Law and International Copyright. Law Journal Library, vol. 48. pp. 383-470. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/840860
Plenter S. (2000) Choice of Law Rules for Copyright Infringements in the Global Informa tion Infrastructure: A Never-ending Story? EIPR, pp. 313-320.
Smirnova K. (2008) Nekotorye osobennosti primeneniya pravila forum non convenience [Some Features of Applying Forum Non Convenience Principle]. Zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo chastnogo prava — Journal of international private law, no. 3 (61), pp. 5-12.
Takahashi K. (2011) Japan's New Act on International Jurisdiction. Available at: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/81536#download (accessed 08.06.2013)
Copyright (c) 2013 Law Journal of the Higher School of Economics
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
