The duration of rights conferred by copyright

Author:Cornelia Dumitru
Position:PhD candidate, Faculty of Law, 'Nicolae Titulescu' University of Bucharest (e-mail: cornelia_dumitru1973@yahoo.com).
Pages:52-69
SUMMARY

The duration of copyright protection has been a controversial issue. And yet never completed. It was and is the key issue of copyright, the same as are those concerning the recognition of their nature and content. If the first law to protect a new creation, gave the exclusive right for the author as long as a year, today its duration is, basically the whole life of the author’s plus 70 years for the heirs. Some argue that it is unwise.... (see full summary)

 
FREE EXCERPT
LESIJ NO. XXIII, VOL. 1/2016
THE DURATION OF RIGHTS CONFERRED BY COPYRIGHT
Cornelia
DUMITRU
Abstract
The duration of copyright protection has been a contro versial issue. And yet never completed. It
was and is the key issue of copyright, the same as a re those concerning the recognition of their na ture
and content. If the first law to protect a new creation, gave the exclusive right for the author a s long as
a year , today its duration is, ba sically the whole life of the author’s plus 70 years for the heirs. Some
argue tha t it is unwise. Others that should not be a s such at all.
In r eality, the copyright in the widest sense of the term of copyright for the purposes o f la w
complex that regulates the rela tions between the author with his work and of the relations between the
authors and other s on his work, this right never ceases. The oldest sculpture (Venus Wilfredo),
paintings of Ardeche, Vezere and Altamira, even if you do not know who created them, will belong
forever, not just in the consciousness of humanity as a whole, but also according to unwritten rules of
law before the law was cr eated by humans, to whose who created them. Even if you do not know who
created them and say that they belong to the universal culture. As everyone’s works that were created
right after the r ules of law were crea ted by humans, but before the recognition of copyright by special
laws, will belong forever to the universal culture as well.
As for the right cr eated by and after recognizing and codifying copyright notice that he is tr ying
to har monize the inter ests of authors and those of the public and to make pea ce between the author
with his audience in a more general interest, and the solution for reconciliation and / or har monization
was limiting the length of some of the a ttributes of copyright. A solution tha t makes copyright law
without a r ight to have the benefits after a while, that every owner ha s of his property. F urthermore,
the link between the author and his work remains eter nal because none other tha n the author may not
claim ever to be the author of and ha s a copyright on that work. But neither the author ca n claim ever
to have a r eal ownership of the work that still belongs to him and him only. Copyright proves to be a s
different from any other category of rights.
Keywords: Exclusive right, right limited by time, ownership, monopoly operating.
1. Time limitation of the rights of
the author
Referring to the duration of protection
of works under copyright disputes
(political, legal, doctrinal and
jurisprudential) which were long, even after
it was admitted that the economic rights are
the first to be recognized whereas the moral
ones are due much later for the authors.
PhD candidate, Faculty of Law, "Nicolae Titulescu" University of Bucharest (e-mail:
cornelia_dumitru1973@yahoo.com).
Moral rights, within the protection system
of the Berne Convention, we believe,
rightly, honestly, that precede the
ownership in their existence conditional on
the property. B ut after the economic rights
were afforded to the authors, they were
severely limited in time, and the opposition
against extending the duration of their
protection continues to manifest today. And
it is noteworthy that during the nineteenth
century, personal prop erty rights were
Cornelia DUMITRU 53
LESIJ NO. XXIII, VOL. 1/2016
afforded to the authors, were resumed and
disputes were made on the nature of
copyright and qualification copyright as
ownership was brought to the date of
merchantability rights, the growing interest
including creators, to p atrimonial aspect
of copyright, moral rights passing from the
point of view of immediate interest of
authors in the background.
Arguments against the recognition of
copyright have always existed since ancient
times, the movement copyleft was only
apparently new, because nowadays it does
not make opposition known to history only
as to the means and arguments used not in
its substance, which it's the same. The Pirate
Party today is manifested even in the
parliaments of Western cou ntries which
cannot be said to be opponents of copyright.
The Pirate Party today is manifested even in
the parliaments of Western countries which
cannot be said to be opponents of
copyright
1
. More fair to say that the
movement copy left is new only in the
designation adopted recently by opponents
of copyright, i.e. the position of quasi-
majority, which recognizes the right of
authors in their own works, to be suggestive
and impact greater public debate it causes.
In fact, copyright has enemies since
ancient times. Recall that b oth Plato and
Confucius believed that people are born
with all her ideas, ideas that come to us from
the past and not our own, and our
knowledge is a gift of the gods, so we
cannot claim any rights over them.
Francoise Chaudenson tells us that Socrates
and Plato „artists do not deserve any special
considera tion because beauty that
expressed in their work, was outside and
dictated by a divine force, they a re merely
messengers r ather th an" crea tors "nor the
1
Pirates Party was founded in Sweden in 2006 by an entrepreneur in IT. European Parliament elections in 2009
won 7.13% of votes and a lawmaker. Conf. Mihiescu Marius Party Who is it and what do you aim at International
Hot News.ro, June 8th
2
Chaudenson Francoise, „A qui appartient l`oeuvre d`art”, Armand Colin, 2007, p. 19.
owners of their work. Socrates, even
"hunts" countr y poets because they were a
threat to the future of the city, as later
church fathers condemn the seductions of
art and will delay and hinder th e city
enriching divine.”
2
Aristotle, a disciple of Plato, was also
influenced by the d esign of his master, of
creations and creators, and its concepts,
which were the basis of education in Europe
for hundreds of years, including the most
famous university of the Middle Ages, that
of Padova, marked course all those who
were formed at the school of Aristotle. For
the ancient Greeks, Socrate s, Plato and
Aristotle, artistic creation were nothing
more than an imitation of nature, or an
imitation of imitation. In ancient Greece,
the man could not claim to be the creator,
the actual meaning of the ter m, since the
ideas, inspiration and words were
transmitted artists gods or nine muses, and
art imitates nature only. And d uring the
Dark Ages, no matter how genius, he had,
he could claim creator, because it clashed
with the Church, which claim to be the
creator could only be blasphemy of the
author and his work were purified by fire.
Some consider that the rights belong
to the author as long as the work has not
been made public. With the disclosure of
her work, it would become of all. Not true!
Because if it is true that after being
informed, their work has its own destiny
and can survive its own author (it happens
to all valuable works), one cannot attribute
the authorship of the work to another. And
it could not do it even when the cop yright
was not protected by spec ial laws, but with
the risk of becoming the target of public
opprobrium.

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL