Tag: <span>En</span>

I am NINE years old!!!

Hi, my name is BLawgDog, the second Internet baby of Uncle DONG (the first one? uncle Dong said he forgot the name…what an old man). I was born in 26 Aug 1999 and you may see my baby face at here (in Chinese). I have a little sister named SheCan.net, and actually I have a lot of cloned brothers all around the Chinese bloggersphere.

The following is a collection of my previous clothes and logos … a little outdated … but so cozy and memorable, hah.

 

BLawgDog is one of the key resources on Cyber Law and Intellectual Property Law in great China. It is a bilingual website both in Chinese and English (click here). BlawgDog provides fresh IP news and the most convincing comments either in academic sphere or in practising arenas. It’s Google PR = 4 and the average page view is 2000/day by the end of Aug. 2008.

The Premier's Promise

""I, together with Liu Qi (Beijing party chief), promise that Beijing will stay as clean as now after the Olympics, and Beijing will be clean forever."(Chinese: 我和刘淇书记立个保证,奥运会后,北京还要保持这么干净,北京要永远干净。) Premier Wen Jiabao said on 4 August. I don’t know why Xinhua neglected the last sentence of the promise in its English report. I hope this sentence will not trigger the Gov’s political denial of any negative news on Beijing’s  urban environment. Because under the current regime, if any officer admit that the air quality turns bad after the Olympics, he / she would be kicking the Premier of central Gov and the Beijing Party Chief. Who dare?

 

As I expected, while searching the Internet, I find a funny article in the website of Chinese official news agency titled as Promise the Everlasting Cleanness together with the Premier. Silently, the burden of keeping Beijing’s cleanness was switched to the Beijing people in this article.  

 

Free Access in the Forbidden Village – if not City

South China Morning Post reported yesterday that the Olympic Village in Beijing wins praise for comforts – including some bizarre twists. You, if lucky enough to be permited stepping into this forbidden village (video), will find many exciting things: free access to those blocked websites including BBC Chinese network, the online sites of Taiwanese newspapers like Liberty Times, and Hong Kong’s Apple Daily, and you will even find an entire shelf of photo albums featuring nude Chinese women in the bookstore.

 

That’s terrific. I guess the reason of this considerate arrangement is: the athletes and their coaches will be surely under a great pressure during the Olympics, so it is a necessity for them to relax when they go back to the Olympic village. Therefore, since an Australian therapist who has been to four Olympics had not expected something like this in the bookshop of an Olympic village, these nude pictures must be, again, one of the plausible creativity of our great Beijing 2008.

 

Public Domain in Chinese Copyright Law

 
Public Domain in the Context of Chinese Copyright Law:
A Perspective of Pluralism
 
 
 
This is an English abstract of Hao Dong’s doctorate dissertation (2008) defended at China University of Political Science and Law. The fulltext of the dissertation was written in Chinese.
 
 
Abstract
 
 
This dissertation tries to achieve three aims: (1) to elaborate the concept of public domain in a pluralistic perspective, which maps the subjects of the public domain in two dimensions: de jure publicand de facto public; (2) to analyze the subjects in the de jure public in the context of Chinese copyright law, such as the news, the content-illegal works, and the abandoned works (copyright wavied by copyright owners); (3) to explore the subjects within the de jure private but highly possible to fall into the de facto public (such as the orphan works, the procedure-unlawful works and some parts of a work that can hardly be protected) .
 
Chapter one reviewed the concept of “public domain” in various disciplines. The terms of “public sphere” or “public realm” are used in political philosophies to describe a space where people can discuss the public affairs openly and impartially.  In the institutional economics, the term “public domain” is employed to describe some “residual public attributes” of specific properties which are legally assigned to the individuals. In sociology and some legal feminism context, the “public domain” was used to describe the res publica as “a bond of a crowd, of a people, of a polity rather than the bonds of family or friends”. In the context of the copyright law, some scholars regard the public domain as the terra nullius and the expansion of the copyright protection is regarded as an enclosure movement, whilst some scholars  merely treat the public domain as a logic mirror of the proprietary right. This chapter also reviewed “public domain” in the language of Chinese. This chapter argues that the concept of public domain can hardly be clarified with an approach of private/public dichotomy. A better way of elaborating public domain should be defining the “public” with a pluralist approach.
 
Chapter two justifies the pluralistic approach with copyright theory in the context of Chinese copyright law. Firstly, Chinese copyright law is based upon a utilitarian philosophy and the rights vested to the copyright owners are statutory rights but not natural right. Therefore, the concept of public domain is not logically premised by the concept of the private copyright. Secondly, because copyright is mainly an exclusive right to authorize/prohibit others acting, once the copyright owners waive the right deliberately or fail to exercise the right, the works may slip to the de facto public. Third, in a utilitarian framework of copyright law, the de facto public is sensitive to the incentives, the lower the incentives vested to the copyright owners, the higher ratio the works will go into the de facto public. Thus the statutory damages for the copyright infringement can be a key factor of balancing the interests, adjusting it may be more efficient than considering introduce a new right.
 
Chapter three analyzed the copyright waiving. Although most Chinese scholars believe copyright cannot be waived in China because of the existence of moral rights, this chapter firstly argues that such notion will not stand unless copyright is a natural right. Secondly, this chapter alerted that one has to analyze an alleged “waiving” conduct carefully, because it may be actually a conduct of authorization. A valid waiving conduct should satisfy five prerequisites, and it will leads to three legal consequences. Thirdly, as to the waiving of the moral rights, it is a mistake to make an overall conclusion on whether or not they can be waived. Each moral right has its specific features that should be analyzed respectively. Right of publication and the right of integrity can neither be transferred nor be waived. Right of revision cannot be transferred but can be waived, whereas right of attribution can either be transferred or be waived.
 
Chapter four shifted to the micro-analysis of the de jure public. On the term of copyright protection, I criticized the perpetual protection to the moral right in Chinese copyright law after a comparative research. Then I illustrated that the term of copyright protection is not as clear as it supposed to be because of the uncertainty of a copyright owner’s life expectancy. This brings the problem of orphan works, which will be specifically discussed in the next chapter. On the copyrightability of a work, this chapter argues that the “idea/expression” dichotomy can hardly draw the line between public domain and the domain of exclusive right. On the contrary, with the perspective of pluralism, one may find that even a work as a whole is copyrightable, some parts of it may still be within the de jure public. originality should always be a basic test for copyright infringement. As for the works created for/by the government, this chapter illustrated both the British “crown works” and the choice of denying their copyrightability. Chinese copyright law follows the latter. However, the right of publication and/or the right of compilation are actually reserved by the government with some administrative regulations. As for the news, this article argues that although they are excluded from copyright protection, they are works. This chapter propose to categorize news with three types, then bring them into the pools of full protection, statutory license and public domain respectively. Lastly, this chapter analyzed the provision of denying copyright protection to “illegal works” in Article 4 of Chinese Copyright Law, and propose to examine it with Three-Step Test stipulated in the TRIPS.
 
Chapter five focuses upon orphan works. orphan works are works whose copyright owners can hardly be located, hence the users may not exploit the works lawfully with the licenses issued by right owners. Although this term comes from the united states, The dilemma of orphan works and abandon software also exists in the context of Chinese copyright system, and this phenomena may be more widespread because the history of Chinese copyright law in the recent 100 years are inconsistent, unsteady and intermittent. Furthermore, the current Chinese copyright system is of not mature enough. It not merely lacks solutions for  the orphan work problem, but also exists unreasonable provisions that may worsen it. Four factor should be considered when one is about to solve the problem: (1) comply with the three-step test; (2) based on existing legal system of the country; (3) minimize the cost of both right owners and users; (4) guarantee the predictability of the benifits and the obligations. Based on these four premises, this article critically reviewed the solutions in the U.S., Canada and Japan, and then proposed a set of multi-method and integrated suggestion that suit to the features of Chinese copyright regime. The dilemma of orphan works is a typical example of the transformation from the de jure private to the de facto public.
 
The four annexed tables collected the key provisions of de jure public in various countries.
 
Keywords:
Public Domain, Copyright, Pluralism, Unlawful Works, orphan Works

 

 

Public Domain in Chinese Copyright Law

 
Public Domain in the Context of Chinese Copyright Law:
A Perspective of Pluralism
 
 
 
This is an English abstract of Hao Dong’s doctorate dissertation (2008) defended at China University of Political Science and Law. The fulltext of the dissertation was written in Chinese.
 
 
Abstract
 
 
This dissertation tries to achieve three aims: (1) to elaborate the concept of public domain in a pluralistic perspective, which maps the subjects of the public domain in two dimensions: de jure publicand de facto public; (2) to analyze the subjects in the de jure public in the context of Chinese copyright law, such as the news, the content-illegal works, and the abandoned works (copyright wavied by copyright owners); (3) to explore the subjects within the de jure private but highly possible to fall into the de facto public (such as the orphan works, the procedure-unlawful works and some parts of a work that can hardly be protected) .
 
Chapter one reviewed the concept of “public domain” in various disciplines. The terms of “public sphere” or “public realm” are used in political philosophies to describe a space where people can discuss the public affairs openly and impartially.  In the institutional economics, the term “public domain” is employed to describe some “residual public attributes” of specific properties which are legally assigned to the individuals. In sociology and some legal feminism context, the “public domain” was used to describe the res publica as “a bond of a crowd, of a people, of a polity rather than the bonds of family or friends”. In the context of the copyright law, some scholars regard the public domain as the terra nullius and the expansion of the copyright protection is regarded as an enclosure movement, whilst some scholars  merely treat the public domain as a logic mirror of the proprietary right. This chapter also reviewed “public domain” in the language of Chinese. This chapter argues that the concept of public domain can hardly be clarified with an approach of private/public dichotomy. A better way of elaborating public domain should be defining the “public” with a pluralist approach.
 
Chapter two justifies the pluralistic approach with copyright theory in the context of Chinese copyright law. Firstly, Chinese copyright law is based upon a utilitarian philosophy and the rights vested to the copyright owners are statutory rights but not natural right. Therefore, the concept of public domain is not logically premised by the concept of the private copyright. Secondly, because copyright is mainly an exclusive right to authorize/prohibit others acting, once the copyright owners waive the right deliberately or fail to exercise the right, the works may slip to the de facto public. Third, in a utilitarian framework of copyright law, the de facto public is sensitive to the incentives, the lower the incentives vested to the copyright owners, the higher ratio the works will go into the de facto public. Thus the statutory damages for the copyright infringement can be a key factor of balancing the interests, adjusting it may be more efficient than considering introduce a new right.
 
Chapter three analyzed the copyright waiving. Although most Chinese scholars believe copyright cannot be waived in China because of the existence of moral rights, this chapter firstly argues that such notion will not stand unless copyright is a natural right. Secondly, this chapter alerted that one has to analyze an alleged “waiving” conduct carefully, because it may be actually a conduct of authorization. A valid waiving conduct should satisfy five prerequisites, and it will leads to three legal consequences. Thirdly, as to the waiving of the moral rights, it is a mistake to make an overall conclusion on whether or not they can be waived. Each moral right has its specific features that should be analyzed respectively. Right of publication and the right of integrity can neither be transferred nor be waived. Right of revision cannot be transferred but can be waived, whereas right of attribution can either be transferred or be waived.
 
Chapter four shifted to the micro-analysis of the de jure public. On the term of copyright protection, I criticized the perpetual protection to the moral right in Chinese copyright law after a comparative research. Then I illustrated that the term of copyright protection is not as clear as it supposed to be because of the uncertainty of a copyright owner’s life expectancy. This brings the problem of orphan works, which will be specifically discussed in the next chapter. On the copyrightability of a work, this chapter argues that the “idea/expression” dichotomy can hardly draw the line between public domain and the domain of exclusive right. On the contrary, with the perspective of pluralism, one may find that even a work as a whole is copyrightable, some parts of it may still be within the de jure public. originality should always be a basic test for copyright infringement. As for the works created for/by the government, this chapter illustrated both the British “crown works” and the choice of denying their copyrightability. Chinese copyright law follows the latter. However, the right of publication and/or the right of compilation are actually reserved by the government with some administrative regulations. As for the news, this article argues that although they are excluded from copyright protection, they are works. This chapter propose to categorize news with three types, then bring them into the pools of full protection, statutory license and public domain respectively. Lastly, this chapter analyzed the provision of denying copyright protection to “illegal works” in Article 4 of Chinese Copyright Law, and propose to examine it with Three-Step Test stipulated in the TRIPS.
 
Chapter five focuses upon orphan works. orphan works are works whose copyright owners can hardly be located, hence the users may not exploit the works lawfully with the licenses issued by right owners. Although this term comes from the united states, The dilemma of orphan works and abandon software also exists in the context of Chinese copyright system, and this phenomena may be more widespread because the history of Chinese copyright law in the recent 100 years are inconsistent, unsteady and intermittent. Furthermore, the current Chinese copyright system is of not mature enough. It not merely lacks solutions for  the orphan work problem, but also exists unreasonable provisions that may worsen it. Four factor should be considered when one is about to solve the problem: (1) comply with the three-step test; (2) based on existing legal system of the country; (3) minimize the cost of both right owners and users; (4) guarantee the predictability of the benifits and the obligations. Based on these four premises, this article critically reviewed the solutions in the U.S., Canada and Japan, and then proposed a set of multi-method and integrated suggestion that suit to the features of Chinese copyright regime. The dilemma of orphan works is a typical example of the transformation from the de jure private to the de facto public.
 
The four annexed tables collected the key provisions of de jure public in various countries.
 
Keywords:
Public Domain, Copyright, Pluralism, Unlawful Works, orphan Works

 

 

SheCan.Net for sale. 出售域名SheCan.Net

International Domain "SheCan.Net" is suitable to the websites of Gender organization, Women’s Developing Projects and Blogs on Gender or Women.

This Domain is of my beloved name. The previous version of BLAWGDOG.COM has been using it for 3 years. Now it is still working for my old website: "Minority Woman Protection". So although it is for sale, I will still choose the buyer. Please send me E-mail to the following address with your bid, your aim of using it and your current website by or before 1 June 2008.

Donnie's Email address

=============Chinese================

EU Intellectual Property Legislations

European Intellectual Property Legislations
(except, trade secret, patent and trademark)


Directive 2006/116/EC
Directive 2006/116/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights.
OJ L372/12 (27.12.2006)

 
Directive 2006/115/EC
Directive 2006/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property
OJ L376/28 (27.12.2006)
 
Corrigendum to Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Directive
Corrigendum to Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights
OJ L195/16 (02.06.2004)

 
Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Directive
Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights
OJ L 157/45 (30.04.2004)

 
•  Artist’s Resale Rights Directive
Directive 2001/84/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2001 on the resale right for the benefit of the author of an original work of art
OJ L 272/32 (13.10.2001)

 
•  Copyright Directive
Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society
OJ L 167/10 (22.06.2001)

 
•  Database Directive
Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases
OJ
L 077/20 (27.03.1996)
 
•  Term Directive
Council Directive 93/98/EEC of 29 October 1993 harmonizing the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights
OJ
L 290/9 (24.11.1993)
Directive 93/98/EEC has been repealed and replaced by Directive 2006/116/EC, without prejudice to the obligations of the Member States relating to the time-limits for transposition into national law of the Directives.

 
•  Satellite and Cable Directive
Council Directive 93/83/EEC of 27 September 1993 on the coordination of certain rules concerning copyright and rights related to copyright applicable to satellite broadcasting and cable retransmission
OJ
L 248/15 (06.10.1993)
 
•  Rental Directive
Council Directive 92/100/EEC of 19 November 1992 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property
OJ
L 346/61 (27.11.1992)
(original version; also available: consolidated version)
Directive 92/100/EEC has been repealed and replaced by Directive 2006/115/EC, without prejudice to the obligations of the Member States relating to the time-limits for transposition into national law of the Directives.
 
•  Software Directive:
Council Directive 91/250/EEC of 14 May 1991 on the legal protection of computer programs
OJ
L 122/42 (17.05.1991)

 

From:
http://www.ivir.nl/legislation/intellectual-property/europe.html

More legislations (especially that of the Nethelands) can be found at: