Scholarlink

<p><OrderedList><ListItem><ItemNumber>1.</ItemNumber><ItemContent><p>If it is impossible to establish a common intention of the parties in the event of a dispute over a copyright agreement, then interpretation is to be based on objective grounds, taking the wording of the contract as the starting point.</p></ItemContent></ListItem><ListItem><ItemNumber>2.</ItemNumber><ItemContent><p>If the wording leaves room for different interpretations or provides no indication of the intention, guidance may be sought in other factors, such as the structure of the agreement, the background to the agreement (its purpose), the nature of the subject matter, the balance of power between the parties, etc.</p></ItemContent></ListItem><ListItem><ItemNumber>3.</ItemNumber><ItemContent><p>In such cases, the objectives and nature of copyright may require specific copyright considerations to be taken into account. This may be the case, for ex., where the agreement relates to a moral right which is particularly valuable the design of copyright as a set of distinct exclusive rights, the various possible forms of expression for the work, or the fact that an author is particularly valuable.</p></ItemContent></ListItem><ListItem><ItemNumber>4.</ItemNumber><ItemContent><p>Which of the factor(s) is decisive for interpretation much be determined by an overall assessment of the individual case, just as with contractual interpretation in general.</p></ItemContent></ListItem><ListItem><ItemNumber>5.</ItemNumber><ItemContent><p>If a result cannot be reached in a review according to the specified criteria, there may be reason to resort to more general principles of interpretation, such as <i>contra proferentem</i>. On the other hand, there is no reason why the particular nature of copyright should justify the application of any interpretative principles specific to copyright.</p></ItemContent></ListItem></OrderedList></p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

“The Detective Series”

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月8日

查看全文

摘要

1.

If it is impossible to establish a common intention of the parties in the event of a dispute over a copyright agreement, then interpretation is to be based on objective grounds, taking the wording of the contract as the starting point.

2.

If the wording leaves room for different interpretations or provides no indication of the intention, guidance may be sought in other factors, such as the structure of the agreement, the background to the agreement (its purpose), the nature of the subject matter, the balance of power between the parties, etc.

3.

In such cases, the objectives and nature of copyright may require specific copyright considerations to be taken into account. This may be the case, for ex., where the agreement relates to a moral right which is particularly valuable the design of copyright as a set of distinct exclusive rights, the various possible forms of expression for the work, or the fact that an author is particularly valuable.

4.

Which of the factor(s) is decisive for interpretation much be determined by an overall assessment of the individual case, just as with contractual interpretation in general.

5.

If a result cannot be reached in a review according to the specified criteria, there may be reason to resort to more general principles of interpretation, such as contra proferentem. On the other hand, there is no reason why the particular nature of copyright should justify the application of any interpretative principles specific to copyright.