A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE SUBCONSCIOUS COPYING DOCTRINE
Öz
The copyright law's notion of subconscious copying has generated a great deal of discussion and controversy. The concept of subconscious copying is evaluated critically in this article, which also explores the key arguments for and against it. The philosophy is essentially based on the notion that people may unintentionally produce works that are strikingly similar to works that already exist due to subconscious influences. Inconsistencies in court rulings result from variations in the doctrine's application and interpretation across various legal systems.
The article highlights the standards that courts apply to assess whether subconscious copying has taken place and explores significant court judgments that have developed the notion of subconscious copying. While some courts place a strong emphasis on the availability of the original work and the degree of likeness, other courts value time distance as a crucial consideration. The article also contrasts the techniques taken by various legal systems, including the strict liability system in the US and the necessity of a causal connection in the UK and Canada.
In conclusion, the notion of subconscious copying is still a complicated and divisive topic in copyright law. Although it makes an effort to overcome the difficulties caused by unintentional impacts on creativity, its application and justification face considerable difficulties. The article advocates for a fair strategy that takes into account the needs of both the public and intellectual property rights' integrity.
Anahtar Kelimeler
subconscious copying, copyright law, case law, creativity, implicit memory
Kaynakça
- Alden, Carissa L. (2007), ‘A Proposal to Replace the Subconscious Copying Doctrine Note’, Cardozo Law Review, N: 4, V:29, p. 1729-1764.
- Balganesh,Shyamkrishna (2012), ‘The Normavitiy Of Copying in Copyright Law’, Duke Law Journal, N:2, V:72, p. 203-284.
- Beckerman-Rodau, Andrew (2010), ‘The Problem with Intellectual Property Rights: Subject Matter Expansion’, Yale Journal of Law and Technology, N:1, V:13, p. 35-88.
- Boon, Marcus (2010), In Praise of Copying Cambridge, Harvard University Press, p.285.
- Feldman, Robin (2010), ‘The Role of the Subconscious in Intellectual Property Law’, Hastings Science and Technology Law Journal, N:1, V:2, p. 1-24.
- Goldstein, Paul & Hugenholtz, P.Bernt (2019), International Copyright Principles, Law, and Practice, Fourth Edition, Oxford University Press.
- Gordon, Wendy J. (1990), ‘Review: Toward a Jurisprudence of Benefits: The Norms of Copyright and the Problem of Private Censorship by by Paul Goldstein’, The University of Chicago Law Review, N:3, V:57,p.1009-1049.
- Hollingsworth, Joel S. (2000), ‘Stop Me If I’ve Heard This Already: The Temporal Remoteness Aspect of the Subconscious Copying Doctrine’, Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal, N:2, V:23,p. 457-475.
- Jaeger, Christopher Brett(2008), ‘Does That Sound Familiar: Creators’ Liability for Unconscious Copyright Infringement Note’, Vanderbilt Law Review, N:6, V:61,p. 1903-1934.
- Landes, William M. & Posner, Richard A. (1989), ‘An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law’, The Journal of Legal Studies, N:2, V:30, p. 265-309.