In Network Ten Pty Ltd v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd,1 the High Court will have
the opportunity to consider for the first time certain fundamental issues relating to
television broadcast copyright. The central question for the Court relates to the
scope of the exclusive rights of the owner of copyright in a television broadcast
under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) and, as a corollary, what constitutes an
infringement of television broadcast copyright. In particular, the High Court will
consider whether, as was held by the Full Federal Court, the owner of copyright in
a television broadcast has the exclusive right to make a cinematograph film of, or
re-broadcast, any of the visual images in the broadcast, irrespective of whether
those images constitute a ‘substantial part’ of the broadcast.
The outcome of the case will have important implications for the Australian
broadcasting industry, in particular as regards the way in which television
broadcasters use other broadcasters’ material. Yet the case will also afford the High
Court the rare chance to provide guidance on such vexed questions as what is a
copyright ‘work’ or ‘subject matter’, and to analyse critically the nature of the
‘substantial part’ requirement in copyright law.
In Network Ten Pty Ltd v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd,1 the High Court will have
the opportunity to consider for the first time certain fundamental issues relating to
television broadcast copyright. The central question for the Court relates to the
scope of the exclusive rights of the owner of copyright in a television broadcast
under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) and, as a corollary, what constitutes an
infringement of television broadcast copyright. In particular, the High Court will
consider whether, as was held by the Full Federal Court, the owner of copyright in
a television broadcast has the exclusive right to make a cinematograph film of, or
re-broadcast, any of the visual images in the broadcast, irrespective of whether
those images constitute a ‘substantial part’ of the broadcast.
The outcome of the case will have important implications for the Australian
broadcasting industry, in particular as regards the way in which television
broadcasters use other broadcasters’ material. Yet the case will also afford the High
Court the rare chance to provide guidance on such vexed questions as what is a
copyright ‘work’ or ‘subject matter’, and to analyse critically the nature of the
‘substantial part’ requirement in copyright law.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/98aba/98abadb1435b0cfbe63f2dabdddc22693678da81" alt=""