2011-05-31 11:49:59 来源: 互联网 责编:楷维留学指南
无论如何,要求现有的知识产权法对电视节目模式予以版权保护有些过于牵强,但可运用反不正当竞争法以及商标法的有关规定对此进行补缺。
【作者简介】黄世席(1969—),安徽砀山人,山东大学法学院副教授,山东大学体育法研究中心主任。
【注释】
[1] Albert Moran and Justin Malbon, Understanding the Global TV Format, Bristol: Intellect Books, 2006, p.6. [2] Jay Rubin Rubin, Search Term Begin Television Search Term End Formats: Caught in the Abyss of the Idea/Expression, Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment LawJoirnal, 2006, Vol. 16, p. 669. [3] Minniear v. Tors, 266 Cal. APp. 2d 495 (Ct. APp. 1968)。
[4] Fink v. Goodson-Todman Enterprises, Ltd., 9 Cal. APp. 3d 996 (Ct. APp. 1970)。
[5] Sheehan v. MTV Networks, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3028 (DNY 1992)。
[6] Endemol v. Twentieth TV 1998 US Dist Lexis 19049. [7] CBS v. ABC O2 Civ. 8813 (LAP) January 13, 2003. [8] Ben Challis & Jonathan Coad, Format Fortunes: Is there Legal Recognition for the Television Format Right? http://www.ifla.tv/uk-format-fortunes.html, 2010-5-30. [9] GREen v. Broadcasting Corporation of New Zealand, [1988] 2 All ER 490 C.A. [1989] R.P.C. 700 (Privy Council)。
[10]Daniel Doherty, Can the Format of a Television Programme AttrACT Copyright Protection (23 November 2004), http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_room/room/view_category.asp?catcode=41, 2010-5-30. [11] Feist Publications Inc v. Rural Telephone Service Co (1991) 49 9 US 340 at 337. [12] GREen v. Broadcasting Corporation of New Zealand [1989] R.P.C. 700. [13] Lisa Logan, The Emperor‘s New Clothes? The Way Forward: TV Format Protection under Unfair Competition Law in US, UK and France: PArt 2, Entertainment Law Review, 2009, Vol. 20, Issue 3, p.88. [14] Miles v. ITV Network Ltd [2003] WL 23192242. [15] AETN Television Networks v. Channel 4 Television Corporation and Betty TV Limited [2006] EWHC (Ch) HC 05 C03102, 7 APril 2006. [16] Jonathan Coad, Passing off, format rights and TV programme titles, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & PrACTice, 2006, Vol. 1, No. 10, p.635. [17] Caroline Hilger, No Copyright Protection for TV Show Formats, http://merlin.obs.coe.int/iris/2003/8/Article31.en.html, 2010-7-8. [18] TF1 SA v. Antenne 2 (1993) E.L.R. E-63, Cour d’’APpel de Versailles (123rd chamber) March 11, 1993. [19] Saranga Production v. Canal Plus Paris Court of First Instance, September 7, 2005 unpublished. [20] Jonathan Coad, Dutch Supreme Court Confirms Format Rights Decision: Castaway v. Endemol, http://www.swanturton.com/ebulletins/archive/JKCDutchSupremeCourtFormatRightsDecision.aspx, 2010-5-31. [21] 程德安:《媒介知识产权》,西南师范大学出版社2005年版,第216页。
免责声明:本站注明稿件来源为互联网或其他媒体的文、图或视频等稿件均为转载稿,本站转载出于非商业性的教育和科研之目的,并不意味着赞同其观点或证实其内容的真实性。如转载稿涉及版权等问题,请作者在两周内速来电或来函联系。
若文章来源为“楷维留学指南www.keywin.org”,转载时请务必注明出处。
[英国]拉邦三一学院 Trinity Laban Conservatoire
[楷维推荐指数]: 0 [所在州/地区]: [所在城市]: [学费]:¥0/年
[哈萨克斯坦]哈萨克英国技术大学 Kazakh-British Technical University
[楷维推荐指数]: 0 [所在州/地区]: [所在城市]: [学费]:¥0/年
[日本]久留米大学 Kurume University
[楷维推荐指数]: 0 [所在州/地区]:福冈县 [所在城市]: [学费]:¥0/年
[法国]瓦尔德马恩-巴黎第十二大学 Université Paris-Est Créteil Val de Marne (UPEC)
[楷维推荐指数]: 0 [所在州/地区]:瓦勒德马恩省 [所在城市]: [学费]:¥0/年
[伊朗]伊朗科技大学 Iran University of Science and Technology
[楷维推荐指数]: 0 [所在州/地区]: [所在城市]: [学费]:¥0/年