미국의 공정이용법리에서‘변형적 이용’ 기준의 기원과 의의
The Origin of ‘Transformative Use’ Test in Fair Use Doctrine
0
조회
0
다운로드
13
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This article deals with the concept issue on what ‘transformative use’ means in the fair use context. This issue is also can be spoken out as “whether a single and universal test of transformative use is possible, which can be applied to all patterns of use.”To find an answer to this question, this article first tries to understand what exactly Judge Leval meant by ‘transformative use’ when he used the term first in his foundational article “Toward a Fair Use Standard” and in what context. The transformative use test was proposed by Judge Leval after his two cases had been reversed in the appellate court. And the defendants in those cases wrote biographies by using copyrighted and unpublished letters and other private documents. This article suggests that the transformative use test have not been applied consistently because the fact patterns of the relevant cases are so diverse that courts could not create a universally applicable black letter law. Judge Leval himself objected to “adopt a bright-line standard.” And this article also suggests that a pattern-oriented rule is more preferable to a bright-line rule.
Abstract
This article deals with the concept issue on what ‘transformative use’ means in the fair use context. This issue is also can be spoken out as “whether a single and universal test of transformative use is possible, which can be applied to all patterns of use.”To find an answer to this question, this article first tries to understand what exactly Judge Leval meant by ‘transformative use’ when he used the term first in his foundational article “Toward a Fair Use Standard” and in what context. The transformative use test was proposed by Judge Leval after his two cases had been reversed in the appellate court. And the defendants in those cases wrote biographies by using copyrighted and unpublished letters and other private documents. This article suggests that the transformative use test have not been applied consistently because the fact patterns of the relevant cases are so diverse that courts could not create a universally applicable black letter law. Judge Leval himself objected to “adopt a bright-line standard.” And this article also suggests that a pattern-oriented rule is more preferable to a bright-line rule.
참고문헌 (15)
- Na, Jongkhab, "John Locke's Rights of Property and Intellectual Property: Implications to Digital and High Technology in the Information Society" (2001), Washington University
- Patterson, L., "Ray, Copyright in Historical Perspective" (1968), Vanderbilt University Press
- 남형두, "저작권의 역사와 철학", 산업재산권, (26), pp.245~306 (2008), 한국산업재산권법학회
- 박준우, "공정이용법리의 기원과 의의 - 퍼블릭도메인의 확보를 위한 공정이용규정의 제안 -", 법학논총, 29(2), pp.123~140 (2009), 법학연구소
- 신재호, "著作權法의 基本原理에 대한 再照明", 비교사법, 11(3), pp.603~628 (2004), 한국비교사법학회
- 한지영, "지적재산의 철학에 관한 연구-로크의 노동이론을 중심으로-", 산업재산권, (20), pp.1~28 (2006), 한국산업재산권법학회
- Barton Beebe, "An Empirical Study of U.S. Copyright Fair Use Opinions, 1978-2005" (2008), U. Pa. L. Rev
- Michael W., "Carroll, Fixing Fair Use" (2007), N.C. L. Rev
- Pierre N., "Leval, Toward a Fair Use Standard" (1990), Harvard L. Rev
- Michael J. Madison, "A Pattern-Oriented Approach to Fair Use" (2004), Wm. & Mary L. Rev
- John Tehranian, "Fair Use - The Triumph of Natural-Law Copyright" (2005), U.C. Davis L. Rev
- Stephen B. Thau, "Copyright, Privacy, and Fair Use" (1995), Hofstra L. Rev
- Rebecca Tushnet, "Copy This Essay: How Fair Use Doctrine Harms Free Speech and How Copying Serves It" (2004), Yale L.J
- Lloyd L. Weinreb, "Fair's Fair: A Comment on the Fair Use Doctrine" (1990), Harv. L. Rev
- Matt Williams, "Recent Second Circuit Opinions Indicate That Google's Library Project Is Not Transformative" (2007), Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J