| Budget Amount *help |
¥2,800,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,800,000)
Fiscal Year 2002: ¥700,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000)
Fiscal Year 2001: ¥700,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000)
Fiscal Year 2000: ¥700,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000)
Fiscal Year 1999: ¥700,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000)
|
|---|
| Research Abstract |
In the first year of research, 1999, German and Japanese copyright laws are comparatively studied in their provisions regarding copyright license. German copyright law has many mandatory provisions which make contract clauses void to protect "weak" copyright holders against "strong" or "greed" or licensee, for example, a clause mandating copyright holder to withhold all uses of her copyrighted work in advance shall be deemed void. In contrast, the Japanese copyright has very few provisions regarding to copyright contracts.
2000 was consumed to paint a big picture of legal scheme for copyright contract regulation. In this connection, the U.S. law is a unique model in providing for rarely mandatory clauses contract is regulated only when its enforcement is anticompetitive or immoral. Comparative to the U.S. law EU law is more paternalistic, and eager to protect copyright owners.
In 2001, the research was forwarded to conflicts of law analysis of international copyright contract The EU law has a long experience in this field, too. The EU law starts with freedom of contract and allows designation of applicable law by contract But, when necessary the mandatory provisions of the country of court or of the third country shall apply without regard to the law of the designated country.
In 2002, the implementation process by each member country of the EU Info Soc Directive was partly followed because it is still under way at this point. The focus was on Article 6, which was most controversy, that set forth relationship between technological measures and copyright limitations.
|
