Caetano Veloso invited me, while exchanging e-mails, to meet a group of people that, according to him, had been studying copyright law greatly and had some ideas different to mine. I always enjoyed a good conversation and accepted his invitation, despite not believing that good ideas can come from people influenced by “Vanisa Santiago”. Continue reading
Tag Archives: Copyright in Brazil
What’s in a name? State Court of Rio de Janeiro clarified the protection afforded to titles of works of authorship
In comparison with more mundane matters such as consumer complaints against vendors, landlord and tenants disputes or business related matters, copyright cases are still relatively rare for local judges.
Even within the realm of copyright cases, the vast majority is related to allegations of blatant piracy or some form of plagiarism.
However, this week, I learned of a recent decision involving a specific topic within the copyright law. The case revolved around the legal protection afforded to titles of works of authorship and this blogger was positively impressed by the decision which can help clarify the boundaries of protection of titles.
Last week, a debate has grown after blog Caligraffiti complained about invoices for public performance fees for embedding Youtube videos sent by ECAD, the Central Office for Collection and Distribution of Public Performance Rights in Brazil.
The debate has motivated a dedicated post at Forbes online where the charges were considered a scandal. The column, written by Forbes’ contributor Ricardo Geromel, considered that “astonishingly, according to absurd copyright laws in Brazil, the Central Bureau of Collection and Distribution is surprisingly correct in doing so”.
Earlier this week a bill (PL 3336/2012) was proposed by Congressman Walter Feldman from PSDB aiming to curb the widespread violation of copyright on the Internet.
The Bill was clearly inspired by similar legislative efforts in other countries and provides for the blockage of internet sites which are declared to be a “infringer web site” meaning a “website directed to Brazil whose operator or owner is committing or aiding copyright violations under the local legislation”. According to the bill, the entity that will decide whether or not a site infringes upon third parties rights is National authority responsible for the registration of domain names and the allocation of IP addresses in Brazil, “Núcleo de Informações e Coordenação do .br” (NIC.Br). Continue reading
My last post was about a new bill that wants to profoundly change the Brazilian Copyright Act (to the worse, in my view). However, I found that a less ambitious – but still very troubling – bill was introduced last December 13th by Congressman Luciano Castro of the Republic Party of the State of Roraima (Northern Region of Brazil) which aims to limit the term of assignment of rights in copyright-related contracts. The bill received number 2910/2011 and, on January 31st, 2012, it was sent to the Committees of (i) Education and Culture, (ii) Constitution and Justice and (iii) Citizenry for approval. If approved, the bill will continue its path through Congress.
Currently, the Copyright Act does not provide for any limitation on the term of assignments and licenses. Section 49 of the Act determines that assignment can only take place in writing and that a total, unrestricted transfer is possible, with the obvious exceptions of the moral rights of the authors. The same Section further determines that, in the absence of a written contractual provision, the maximum term of the assignment will be deemed to be of 5 years. Continue reading
If you read this blog, you know I follow closely the development of the pre-bill of Copyright Act which is currently being analyzed by the Civil House of the President of the Republic for possible remittance to Congress.
However, apparently, Congressman Nazareno Fonteles from the Labor Party of the state of Piauí (Northeastern region of Brazil) got tired of waiting and decided to present his own bill to change the Copyright Act (Bill no. 31331/12). In principle, this is a smart move because shorter bills have better chances of going faster before Congress. However, his bill is basically a “copy and paste” of everything that is wrong with the pre-bill of Copyright Act proposed by the Ministry of Culture. Worse yet, it is a “copy and paste” of prior versions of the pre-bill which were clearly designed to make copyright flexible to the users, yielding less protection to the content creators and owners. Continue reading