« Internet Privacy Ctd. | Main | AALL Petition for By-Law Amendments Regarding SIS Fees »
September 14, 2010
Who Owns Computer-Generated Works That Require No "Human Intervention"
The "usual suspects are: a) the author of program; b) the user of the program; c) the program; and d) none" according to Mark Perry and Thomas Margoni, (University of Western Ontario, Faculty of Law) in From Music Tracks to Google Maps: Who Owns Computer Generated Works? [SSRN] Let's add, maybe it's a joint work when we are talking about output that has been computer-generated without direct “human intervention" beyond a mouse click.
From the authors abstract:
Increasingly the digital content used in everyday life has little or no human intervention in its creation. Typically, when such content is delivered to consumers it comes with attached claims of copyright. However, depending on the jurisdiction, approaches to ownership of computer-generated works vary from legislated to uncertain. In this paper we look at the various approaches taken by the common law, and the legislative approach take in the United Kingdom.
Hat tip to Media Law Prof Blog. {JH]
September 14, 2010 in Information Technology, New Publications, Scholarship | Permalink
Comments
Well, we actually exclude the category of joint works, since under Canadian law (which is the jurisdiction for which we develop policy recommendations), it represents a poorly defined category (see pag. 14, and fn 41 & 42). However, at a deeper analysis, the joint work category would probably be excluded for CGW also in the U.S., as well as in other common and civil law jurisdictions. We are about to publish a paper on joint works in comparative law, where we will discuss some of these issues.
Posted by: T. Margoni | Feb 10, 2011 3:18:16 PM
