Copyright
 

Dear forum users and forumistki:)

At the moment I hand over the session, and ahead of the exam on copyright. In addition to the test, "with love" prepared by the teacher, you need to pick up a few stories (examples) copyright infringement, have come down to trial or ended happily.

We consider a 4 part GKRF, violations that fall under Article
- 69 chapters of "General" Art. 1225-1254
- 70 chapters of "Copyright" Art. 1255-1302
- 71 "Rights related to copyright" Art. 1303-1344

I remember the story told recently Sandro

If anyone knows these stories, write:)

Esli istoriia is Novoi Zelandii podoidiot, mogu napisat '.

Course will do))

Dear Comrades! Tamila so many beautiful photo coverage we showed, and it is obtained, and no one to help? : eek:

Allena, I now think, and I know these stories, and began to specifically remember anything until he remembered.
I would think ...

Tamila, you might consider the issues of restitution? when the heirs of a court-consuming work by the current owners. such stories in the news on the site to fig

Yuri Antonov won the case against the TV channel "Russia"
 

The Supreme Court of Russia recovered from the channel "Russia" 25 thousand rubles in favor of the singer and composer Yuri Antonov for copyright infringement, which is almost 300 times less than that demanded the actor, reports RIA "Novosti" reports from the courtroom. Thus, the court granted a supervisory appeal Antonova.

Court awarded the plaintiff 20 thousand rubles for property damage, and 5 thousand rubles for moral, while the actor demanded to pay him 5 million rubles material and 2 million rubles for moral damage.

The reason for the trial was broadcast on television channel "Russia" concert Antonova in the Kremlin, which was held in 2004. The plaintiff pointed out that television has excluded from the concert, seven of the 19 songs. Thus, in his opinion, "Russia" had altered his works, had violated its author and the director's design.

In turn, representatives of the channel indicated that the contract they were entitled to the processing of the work. In addition, the broadcast day - May 9, 2004 - in Chechnya, the attack took place, during which killed Chechen President Akhmad Kadyrov, so had to change the television channel broadcasting network, and reduce the concert, which was a force majeure.

In 2005, Simonovsky Court in Moscow decided to reimburse the Antonov 25 thousand rubles. This decision has been criticized and terminated, but on Tuesday reviewing authority of the Supreme Court of Russia, decided to leave the decision of the district court in effect.


Proceedings

[color="# 666686"]Added after 14 minutes[/color]
In the Arbitration Court of Moscow seized from "Infox-Interactive (information site InfoX.ru) to the NTV television. It is indicated that the claim related to the protection of intellectual property, and the sum of its parts as possible in this case - 5 million rubles. It is reported Roem.ru. portal

As explained by the staff blog Roem.ru chief editor InfoX.ru Alexander Pisarev, this lawsuit is going to wean edition of broadcast television content without the signature of someone else, but with the phrase "posted on the internet. According to Mr. Pisarev, this method often used NTV, but given the fact that the channel is broadcast in multi-million audience, causing the maximum possible damage, and therefore the authors rightly claim such a high compensation.

Confirmation of the suit is the audiotape, which was originally posted on InfoX.ru, and then broadcast in the evening edition of "Today" television channel NTV, without reference to InfoX.ru. Attempts to pre-trial resolution of the conflict by InfoX.ru has been taken, this principled position of the plaintiff. "With this trial we want to bring to the attention of TV stations that have any information on the Internet, even if it's just a blog entry, is the author," - said Alexander Pisarev.

Author: Vasya Network
Article Published: June 4, 2009, 12:19.
http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache... & gl = ua

In fact, I wrote in lichku, thank you all very much!

Copyright Infringement on the Internet is often difficult to prove because You need to have on hand proof of where and when it was illegally issued, or on the network without the link, etc.

Tamila, violation of the bus. and related rights in general difficult to prove. and to establish authorship, too, is difficult

Meister, I am not a lawyer, but this is not the copyright is violated, it seems to me, and ownership of things.