Categories
Foreign Articles

Field C., 2001, The journal of the copyright society of the U.S.A., p. 633

Did Napster save copyright? A proposal to amend section 511 of the Copyright Act using A&M Records v. Napster to solve the Supreme Court’s eleventh amendment abrogation riddle.  

Categories
Foreign Articles

Field C., 2003, The journal of the copyright society of the U.S.A., p. 49

Copyright, technology, and time: perspectives on “interactive” as a term of art in copyright law.  

Categories
Foreign Articles

Finell J. – G., 2008, Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Journal, vol. 19, no. 1 (2008), p. 32

Scandalous notes: a musicologist discusses new developments in music technology that challenge copyright attorneys and expert witnesses. 

Categories
Foreign Articles

Fischer M., 1987, The journal of the copyright society of the U.S.A., vol. 34, p. 249

Reserving all rights beyond copyright: Nonstatutory restrictive notices.  

Categories
Foreign Articles

Fitzgerald B. – Olwan R., 2010, European Intellectual Property Review, Issue 11/2010, p. 565

Copyright law in the United Arab Emirates in the digital age.  

Categories
Foreign Articles

Fitzgerald B., 2008, European Intellectual Property Review, 30/2008, 2, p. 43

Copyright 2010: The future of copyright. 

Categories
Foreign Articles

Fitzgerald J., 2008, Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, vol. 3, no. 4 (Apr. 2008), p. 236

“Innocent infringement” and the Community unregis¬tered design right: the position in the UK and Ireland.  

Categories
Foreign Articles

Fitzpatrick S., 2003, European Intellectual Property Review. 25/2003, 5, p. 215

Prospects of further copyright harmonisation?  

Categories
Foreign Articles

Foged T., 2010, EIPR, vol. 32, no. 1 (Jan. 2010), p. 20

Licensing schemes in an on-demand world. 

Categories
Foreign Articles

Forkner A. et. al., 2007, The journal of the copyright society of the U.S.A., vol. 56, p. 719

Pretty woman meets the man who wears the star: fair use after Campbell v. Acuff-rose music and American geophysical union v. Texaco.