September 10, 2002
Reporter: sub micro | Washington

American copyright law can be traced back to more than two hundred years ago, when America founding fathers in the formulation of the Federal Constitution clearly stipulates protection to authors and inventors exclusive rights within a certain period of time, in order to promote the progress of science and useful arts. The provisions American copyright law, copyright is a kind of protection provided to include literature, drama, music, art, original works of creators, published and unpublished works can receive the protection.

 

*The scope of protection America rights law*

HarvardUniversity Copyright Law Expert Arthur Miller(Arthur Miller)Said,USA copyright law to the creator through books, music, drama or computer program to express own thought given to the protection of copyright on, its goal is to encourage people to writing, expression, his own thoughts, theory, works of art, music and drama created for his people. It actually represents a transaction between the government and individuals. The government of the creator said, you go to the expression, writing, music, painting, proprietary right we will protect your work, make you because of his creation and benefit.

 

Professor Miller talks about what is not in the list of the protection of copyright law. He said: "a concept American copyright law is the most important in its expression of the people, rather than the idea of providing protection contains expression. A common example, for many centuries, countless writers have described the tragic characters such as Romeo and Juliet, this kind of tragic idea is not copyright protection, copyright protection is able to get Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet" or Chai Tchaikovsky 's music ballet "Romeo and Juliet" etc.."

 

Miller said, according to the American law, thought is free, the purpose of this policy is to make the idea is not to get, so that people can use a thousand ways of expression and creation. Only created out of the finished product, such as a book, play, art and music can be copyright protection, the idea never get copyright protection. There is also a protection against copyright law is the language, who is not willing to give the patent right one language, because doing so would make the language depletion, but not make it more colorful. In short, the copyright law USA more emphasis on originality, rather than just work idea.

 

*Fraser Publishing Co. v. rural telephone Service Corporation*

In this case we introduce occurred in twentieth Century90In the case, is the name of the "Fraser Publishing Co. v. rural telephone Service Corporation" (Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., Inc.), The scope of protection of copyright law in this case. The case is the cause, Kansas rural telephone Service Corporation published a list of names of people, city and the company's local telephone number phonebook. Frist company is specialized in the phone book publishers, a phone book publishing it includes the area covered by the rural telephone company and the surrounding area, the coverage ratio of rural telephone company to Canton, most of the data directory is other local telephone companies allowed to login, only rural telephone companies are not allowed to log on Fraser publishing company its data. However, Fraser Publishing Company finally used a rural telephone company user directory content, put your phone book. Therefore, rural telephone company sued the frist publishing company tort, the federal court and the court of appeal decision support rural telephone company. The court said, rural telephone company phone book although not what originality, but just the facts written, but still protected by copyright law.

 

1991Years, in this case, the Federal Supreme Court of appeal to the USA beyond all expectations, the Federal Supreme Court to overturn the decision of the lower court, the non original database excluded from the protection of copyright law. The decision of the Supreme Court pointed out, the fact is not created, but was found, so the protection of copyright law cannot be. The Supreme Court has rejected the database to protect the "sweat of brow" theory(the sweat of the brow). "Sweat of brow" put a person by virtue of their own labor sweat and copyright protection.

 

America Copyright Bureau for policy and international affairs department official Jesse Feder(Jesse Feder)Explained, "sweat of brow" theory is not creative works to provide a copyright protection based on. The preparation of this theory is specially suitable for information and data, and copyright protection for this kind of work to provide the basis for the. He said: "American Supreme Court for the frist Publishing Co. v. rural telephone company decision is to say, if someone works do not have enough originality and independent production, but through the efforts and the written data, then according to the USA law, protection is not enough to get the copyright law."

 

The publishing company has important significance Feist v. rural telephone service co.. In a narrow sense, the phone book publishers and users can publish through other channels reproduces the telephone directory telephone number. The phone companies could no longer hide relevant information to competitors. In a broad sense, it includes the computer database, the fact was excluded from the protection of copyright law.

 

*Copyright*

Rights and copyright infringement below we talk about copyright person. USA1976The Copyright Act gives the copyright owner the exclusive right to authorize others to engage in and engaged in the following activities: the works copied into multiple copies of the original works and Phonograms, imitation, the works made copies and recording products distribution, public performance of original works in literary, musical, dramatic, and the public display of copyrighted works etc..

 

So, what is the copyright infringement? Copyright Harvard University law expert Miller said: "basically, when someone uses a large number of copyright under the name of the works, and to steal it, in his works, he of copyright person works constitute infringement. In any case, determine to what extent constitute infringement is very difficult. For example: Lawyer strain every nerve to prove a song to imitate another song, let the famous music theorist and writer of a work will constitute a tort testimony is not uncommon, if a plot, characters and dialogue, the reader to see second piece, second pieces of works and the first thing very like, in in this case, let the jury according to expert witnesses to testify whether the accused infringement verdict."

 

*Sony Corp v. Universal Studios*

In addition, America copyright law to take care of the interests of consumers, in the protection of copyright owners proprietary rights at the same time, also impose some restrictions on its, below we have a look at two related cases. The first is the Sony Corp v. Universal Studios case (Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios).

 

Sony Corp USA segment production and sale of earlyBetaFor home video, people can record programs at a time through it, and at a subsequent time watching, this time switching function so that the companies that buy television time from the TV very worried, because the audience can fast forward through direct advertising programs, advertising has lost its original value. The results, advertisers must reduce to television advertising, television stations to reduce to the studios to play fee. In this case, Universal Studios the Sony Corp to court. Universal Studios alleged, Sony Corp recorder time broadcast on their various kinds of movies and TV shows to constitute an infringement, it asked the court to ban, shall be ordered to stop the sale of the Sony CorpBetaSystem of household vtr.

 

The district court judge, non-commercial home use recorded from public radio program belongs to the "fair use", therefore does not constitute copyright infringement. The court also ruled that, even if the family use recorder is tort, Sony Corp also not facilitate infringement. However, the lawsuit to the court of appeal, court of Appeals reversed this decision, in turn ruled that Sony Corp infringement. The case then appealed to the Supreme Court to decide the winner American.

 

1984Years, America federal court in the ratio of five to four majority decision, to sell to the public the video doesn't contribute to the infringement. The court said, a sanctioned copyright person works broadcast on public radio, probably won't against individual users will be their works to record programmes, in another time, and Universal Studios did not explain the conversion technology this time will cause greater damage to the product or the value of the potential market. Sony Corp so successful. The case relates to the rational use of a very important concept "".

 

American Copyright Bureau officials said Feder, the fair use is a principle of the copyright law, it is otherwise it may be considered to provide justification for infringement. It was first established by the judge according to the principle of copyright law, and later developed into the1976A portion of the annual America copyright law.

 

According to the copyright law America, the principle of "reasonable use" is aimed at no copyright prior consent, permission to use copyrighted material co.. Determinants of whether an act of "fair use" Four: the purpose and character of use is commercial or non-profit and educational nature, nature get the copyrighted work, influence the use and the number of the copyrighted work potential market and causing the value.

 

But the Law School of Harvard University, Professor Miller pointed out that, although the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court case of Sony Corp v. Universal Studios has identified the legitimate rights and interests of consumers, but this is not to say, people can get the program at the disposal of the copyright protection. Professor Miller said: "I have no doubt, this is only limited to the home recording, or in their own home recording program for personal use. But, if I put the record at home videos for sale, this is not a 'fair use', but copyright infringement. To do so would be in court."

 

*Quality KingSales Corp. v. Lanza international company case study*

In addition to the "fair use", there is also a concept is also very important, that is the "first sale doctrine", or "Exhaustion", American Copyright Bureau officials said Feder, the first sales mean copyright in copyright protection products sold legally, it can no longer continue to spread the control of the product the.

 

Below we have a look at a related case. Products in California, manufacturing and selling shampoo flavor Lanza Research International will be accompanied by the copyright symbol output to the Malta market, Malta dealers to sell their products to a company calledQuality KingDistributor.Quality KingThe company and the products to America market, discount to retailers, the Lanza companies face fierce competition. Lanza company thinks, according to1976Years of copyright law, only it has obtained copyright protection product rights in USA reproduction and sales, so SueQuality KingTort. The Federal District Court and court of appeal decision support Lanza company.Quality KingThe company may, in this case1997Years to appeal to the American Federal Supreme Court (Quality King Distrib. v. L'anza Research Int'l).

 

The Supreme Court said,1976Years America copyright law "first sale doctrine", also apply to imported products.Quality KingCopyright law is not subject to unauthorized entry and sold with a copyright logo products limited, because the Lanza products distribution right does not includeQuality KingCompany in accordance with the "first sale doctrine" right of resale, common ground says that, as long as it is in the America manufacturing, to sales elsewhere, and in conformity with the principle of 'the first sales', then it should allow its legitimate input.Quality KingSo the company win.

 

Harvard University law professor Miller said: "the copyright law American don't want that copyright is too large, on the one hand it to ensure that the copyright law to give copyright people create and reward power; on the other hand, not to create control product distribution, allowing people to the bookstore and bought the novel or literary works and take home after reading can do the things you want to do, if I read a book, I can get a book to a friend, if I do not want this book, but also need the money, I can also put the book sold. Works can only control the first sale, and therefore be version costs, after that, he can't control others resell rights."

 

The point is that, with some things, such as books or CDs and have this thing's copyright is completely different. According to the "first sale principle", has been copyrighted works such as books, owner can the rental, resale, treatment, or even destroy. But, he can't take the book all copies of this book, because has not to have its copyright, and transfer the copyright must be made by the parties in writing signed to take effect.