Comparative Study of the Protection of Non-Original Databas Creators

Document Type : Scientific Research

Authors

1 Assisstant Professor, Private Law Department. Payam Noor University of Qom (Corresponding Author)

2 : M.A. in Intellectual Property Law, Qom University

Abstract

 
 
 
Abstract
Databases can be a valuable commercial assets and the law protects them in two ways: under the law of copyright and the IP sui generis rights. The originality requirement for a database means that some databases are not protected under copyright even if substantial investments have been made to produce them; and it has been discussed whether such investments should also be protected, for example, by a sui generis right. There may have been considerable effort in the creation of a database. This effort is known in intellectual property law as the sweat of the brow. Database rights specifically protect this effort and investment; and investment includes any investment, whether of financial, human or technical resources. A sui generis database right is considered to be a property right, comparable to but distinct from copyright, and exists to recognize the investment that is made in compiling a database, even when this does not involve the creative aspect that is reflected by copyright. In this article, after analyzing the concept and necessity of establishing an IP sui generis protection and its history in the field of non-original databases, had surveyed its elements in international and national level. As a result, establishment of this protection is necessary to determine the rights and duties in this area and eliminate ambiguities and uncertainties.

Keywords

References

Mexico Federal Law on Copyright, Date of Enacted: December 5, 1996, Date of entry into force: March 24, 1997.
Brazil Law No. 9.610 of February 19, 1998 (Law on Copyright and Neighboring Rights).
Bennett Moses, L., (2011). Sui generis rules. In Marchant, G., Allenby, B. & Herkert, J. (Eds). The growing gap between emerging technologies and legal-ethical oversight : the pacing problem. Dordrecht New York: Springer.
Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works , of September 9, 1886.
Convention Establishing the World Intellectual Property Organization, Signed at Stockholm on July 14, 1967.
Derclaye, E. (2008).The legal protection of databases: A comparative analysis. Edward Elgar Publishing.
………………. (2012). Recent French decisions on database protection: Towards a more consistent and compliant approach with the Court of Justice’s case law? European Journal for Law and Technology, Vol. 3.
…………….. (2005). The European Court of Justice Interprets the Database Sui Generis Right for the First Time. European Law Review, Vol. 30.
Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases.
Drahos, P. (1996). A philosophy of intellectual property. Dartmouth Publishing Company.
Feist Publications Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co. Retrieved from: http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/499_US_340.htm
France Intellectual Property Code, date of enacted: June 1, 1992.
Gasaway, L. (2006). Databases and the law. Cyberspace law course, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Retrieved from: http://www.unc.edu/courses/2006spring/law/357c/001/projects/dougf/node1.html
Green paper on copyright and the challenge of technology (copyright issues requiring immediate action), Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/green- papers/pdf/green_paper_copyright_and_chanllenge_of_thecnology_com_(88)_172_final.pdf
Judge, E. F., & Gervais, D. J. (2010). Of Silos and Constellations: Comparing Notions of Originality in Copyright Law. Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, Vol. 27, 2010.
Kalaskar, B. (2012). Traditional knowledge and sui generis law. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 3, Issue 7.
OseiTutu, J. J. (2011). Emerging Scholars Series: A Sui Generis Regime for Traditional Knowledge: The Cultural Divide in Intellectual Property Law. 15 Marq. Intellectual Property L. Rev. 147.
Protection of Non-Original Databases. Retrieved from: http://www.wipo.int/policy/en/sccr/
Radomsky, L. (2000). Sixteen Years after the Passage of the U.S. Semiconductor Chip Protection Act: Is International Protection Working. 15 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1049.
Rungrojtanakul, C. (2005). Legal Protection of Sui Generis Databases. Theses and Dissertations. Paper 15.
Suthersanen, U .(2011). Function, Art and Fashion: Do We Need the EU Design Law? Queen Mary School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 88.
South Korea Law No. 12137. Amended on December 30, 2013.
The British Horseracing Board Ltd and Others v William Hill Organization Ltd. Retrieved from: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/celex.jsf?celex=62002CJ0203&lang1=en&type=TXT&ancre=
Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, signed in Marrakesh, Morocco on 15 April 1994.
WIPO Copyright Treaty, adopted in Geneva on December 20, 1996.
Wipo glossary. Retrieved from: http://www.wipo.int/tk/en/resources/glossary.html#46
WIPO International Bureau. (June 30, 1997). Existing National and Regional Legislation Concerning Intellectual Property in Databases, DB/IM/2.
WIPO Report. (2001). Intellectual Property Needs and Expectations of Traditional Knowledge Holders (WIPO Report on Fact-Finding Missions on Intellectual Property and Traditional Knowledge) (1998- 1999). Retrieved from: http://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/tk/768/wipo_pub_768.pdf
WTO Secretariat Note. (2000). The Convention on Biological Diversity and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, IP/C/W/216, of October 3, 2000.
 
 
Civil Law Knowledge
Volume 6, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1
September 2017
Pages 50-60

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics