جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « حقوق مالکیت فکری » در نشریات گروه « هنر و معماری »

One of the most challenging issues regarding cinematic works, from the past until now, is how the authors or creators of these works are determined and chosen within the legal framework of intellectual property, especially considering multiple people involving in the process of their production such as producers, directors, screenwriters, and composers. Moreover, another debated topic among countries in this field is the issue of the original owner of the cinematic works, which is particularly significant due to the high cost of their production and the need for financial investment by parties other than the creators themselves, namely producers.Thus, using an analytical-descriptive-comparative method, I first examine the creator of cinematic works in terms of general characteristics of authorship in different legal systems, international documents, and Iranian laws relating to copyright. Second, taking into account the nature of cinematic work, I will determine the original owner of these works by using a comparative and foundational approach.The results of this research indicate that the original ownership in legal systems based on copyright law differs from the other legal systems following the rights of production; regardless of the nature of such works, the criteria, examples and approach used to determine the authorship are also very diverse in countries. In addition, despite the silence of the current Iran's copyright law of 1348 on the two mentioned issues, the Iranian legislator's draft law of 1393 has adopted a precise approach to cinematic works, following the French copyright system. Although this approach has some advantages, it can be criticized and does not align with the structure and frameworks of the current film industry in Iran.

Iran's growing cinema requires appropriate legal protection from creators and other contributors involved in production of cinematic works. The "Law on Protection of Authors, Composers, and Artists", which was approved in 1969, serves as the legislation that supports these individuals. While Iran's film industry has developed over the years, the law protecting cinematic works has remained unchanged. There is insufficient support for cinematic works in Iran, with the current law failing to fully protect the rights of authors. Also, cinematic works are not even defined in the existing law. Due to the unique features of cinematic works, such as the involvement of multiple creators and the presence of artistic elements, it is necessary to study their intellectual property rights protection. Thus, this inquiry aims to provide a comparative study of the laws of in different countries including England, the United States, France, and international conventions. Along proposing a definition for cinematic works, specific protective measures, including criteria for authenticity, support duration, and recognition of creators, will be identified. Instead of endorsing inauthentic works that expand the scope of support and is undesirable for a developing country, it would be preferable for the Iranian legislators to explicitly endorse authentic works. Moreover, regarding the authors of such works, there is no specific provision in Iranian law. Drawing from the experiences of the countries studied and international conventions, it is probable to establish the main director, screenplay writer, dialogue writer, and composer as the true creators of these works. By updating the relevant laws, satisfactory and adequate support for creators can be achieved, and therefore, the motivation for producing such works in society would be increased.

This article explores how copyright-based genres in contemporary art conform to intellectual property law. By examining the “appropriation” cases and the criteria of the doctrine of fair-use in them, the limits and borders of legal and creative copying (reduplication?) are determined. This study’s main question is how fair-use as a legal solution helps artists to be more creative? The research hypothesizes that fair-use is the mediating solution of law and art to balance copyright laws strictness. The cases of Jeff Koons and Richard Prince, as examples of influential figures in the history of art and law, have been selected, and the criteria for their fair-use will be analyzed. The Research Method is a doctrinal research method in which the evolution of copyright laws following contemporary art characteristics is expressed through court decrees and reviewing cases. The present analysis results show that fair-use, by considering parody and Transformative use, defends the expression and appearance of the artist’s creativity. Further, the study of court’s performance through doctrinal research method shows that the emergence of creativity is a common goal of intellectual property law and contemporary art.

Works of art are one of the most important issues that are protected by intellectual property rights. In expressing the concept of works of art in intellectual property laws, it is generally mentioned in the literary and artistic property law or copyright of countries. These works also have various examples, including the visual arts and the seven arts, which themselves include two sub-categories of fine arts and applied arts. Given that the issue of intellectual property is a matter of credit, intangible and intangible, it is necessary in the form of descriptive-analytical research, concepts and how to support it in systems of intellectual property rights and due to the emergence and import of intellectual property rights are clearly explained in Our country does not have a jurisprudential background and law in this field. Given the subject matter of this matter, it is necessary to explain issues such as the separation of literary works from works of art, as well as to examine the existence of classification among works of art in the laws in question. The distinction, fragmentation and lack of precise and logical conflict in the laws under consideration, the lack of protection of some works of art in the current system of intellectual property and the need to create special protection systems under the protection systems in intellectual property rights are among the items considered.

Works of art are one of the most important issues that are protected by intellectual property rights. In expressing the concept of works of art in intellectual property laws, it is generally mentioned in the literary and artistic property law or copyright of countries. These works also have various examples, including the visual arts and the seven arts, which themselves include two sub-categories of fine arts and applied arts. Given that the issue of intellectual property is a matter of credit, intangible and intangible, it is necessary in the form of descriptive-analytical research, concepts and how to support it in systems of intellectual property rights and due to the emergence and import of intellectual property rights are clearly explained in Our country does not have a jurisprudential background and law in this field. Given the subject matter of this matter, it is necessary to explain issues such as the separation of literary works from works of art, as well as to examine the existence of classification among works of art in the laws in question. The distinction, fragmentation and lack of precise and logical conflict in the laws under consideration, the lack of protection of some works of art in the current system of intellectual property and the need to create special protection systems under the protection systems in intellectual property rights are among the items considered.

Some of the cultural works which are considered as cultural heritage, regardless of their antiquity and precedence, are simultaneously subject of the legal systems of intellectual property rights and cultural heritage law. This situation can lead to a conflict of interest between private ownership and public law which, in turn, may create many problems for the management of cultural heritage when individuals privately own it. This research tries to remedy such problems by introducing solutions for this conflict of interest without any prejudice to the artists’ rights or the public bodies, the representatives of the society, who are the cultural heritage authorities. From the other side, nowadays many museums utilize modern data technologies as a result of advancement in computer and communication sciences. They publish their artistic works in digital version through the internet. In this way, the data and works are easily accessible. Albeit the new technologies facilitate access to and sharing images, videos, archives, books and historical documents, have also created new challenges especially for identification of owners of the said properties. In the cultural heritage realm, there are many reasons to copy human-made artefacts and relicts either for presentation in museums or for research purposes. Among other things, copyright is one of the most disturbing obstacles to developing digital museums. Copyright faces with numerous confrontations as it can be effortlessly violated. Besides, digital items enjoy less stability because they can be simply copied from a distance. Several users can concurrently use them with ease. Consequently, the cultural heritage authorities should try to implement measures for preventing the violence of copyright. In the end, this paper reaches to the conclusion that management and protection of intellectual properties which also enjoy heritage capacity lead to complicated and multi-faceted problems as they embrace social, historical, cultural, legal and political aspects. On that account, to manage the accessibility and utilization of such collections, all aspects, as mentioned earlier, should be relatively known and taken into consideration. Accordingly, the museums need precise and pre-determined policies and solutions for the proper execution of their tasks, especially when it comes to the management of their intellectual properties. These solutions should assist the museums in meeting their goals and fulfilling their duties. In doing so, the principle of least intervention, management of digital law and monitoring the public access to the collections constitute three vital principles which the Cultural Heritage entity should pay attention to.