Limitations and exceptions to copyright

Limitations and exceptions to copyright are provisions, in local copyright law or Berne Convention, which allow for copyrighted works to be used without a license from the copyright owner.

A copyright is subject to limitations based on public interest considerations, such as the fair use doctrine in the United States.

The scope of copyright limitations and exceptions became a subject of societal and political debate within various nations in the late 1990s and early 2000s, largely due to the impact of digital technology, the changes in national copyright legislations for compliance with TRIPS, and the enactment of anti-circumvention rules in response to the WIPO Copyright Treaty.

Well known limitations and exceptions include fair dealing in the UK and Canada, as well as the fair use doctrine in the US.

Fair dealing is a limitation and exception to the exclusive right granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work.

In May 2010 a declaration entitled Copyright for Creativity was launched, stating: "While exclusive rights have been adapted and harmonised to meet the challenges of the knowledge economy, copyright’s exceptions are radically out of line with the needs of the modern information society. The lack of harmonisation of exceptions hinders the circulation of knowledge based goods and services across Europe. The lack of flexibility within the current European exceptions regime also prevents us from adapting to a constantly changing technological environment."

The declaration has been written by a group from political party "European People's Party (EPP)" The Declaration focuses on both the exclusive rights and the limitations and exceptions to existing copyright rulings and standards.

Well known limitations and exceptions include fair dealing in the UK and Canada, as well as the fair use doctrine in the US.

Fair use is one of the limitations to copyright intended to balance the interests of copyright holders with the public interest in the wider distribution and use of creative works by allowing as a defense to copyright infringement claims certain limited uses that might otherwise be considered infringement.

Attempts to extend the copyright term granted by law – for example, by collecting royalties for use of the work after its copyright term has expired and it has passed into the public domain – raise such competition concerns.

However, the usage of the term public domain can be more granular, including for example uses of works in copyright permitted by copyright exceptions.

These treaties have harmonized the exclusive rights which must be provided by copyright laws, and the Berne three-step test operates to constrain the kinds of copyright exceptions and limitations which individual nations can enact.

Signatories of those treaties agree to standardize possible limitations and exceptions to exclusive rights under their respective national copyright laws.

The Information Society Directive (familiarly when first proposed, the Copyright Directive) is a directive of the European Union that was enacted to implement the WIPO Copyright Treaty and to harmonise aspects of copyright law across Europe, such as copyright exceptions.

Right to quote or right of quotation or quotation right is one of the copyright exceptions provided by the Berne Convention, article 10: "It shall be permissible to make quotations ... provided that their making is compatible with fair practice, and their extent does not exceed that justified by the purpose".

Limitations and exceptions to copyright relate to a number of important considerations such as market failure, freedom of speech, education and equality of access (such as by the visually impaired).

Limitations and exceptions to copyright relate to a number of important considerations such as market failure, freedom of speech, education and equality of access (such as by the visually impaired).

The concept of user rights has also been recognised by courts, including the Canadian Supreme Court in CCH Canadian Ltd v. Law Society of Upper Canada (2004 SCC 13), which classed "fair dealing" as such a user right.

These kinds of disagreements in philosophy are quite common in the philosophy of copyright, where debates about jurisprudential reasoning tend to act as proxies for more substantial disagreements about good policy.

The scope of copyright limitations and exceptions became a subject of societal and political debate within various nations in the late 1990s and early 2000s, largely due to the impact of digital technology, the changes in national copyright legislations for compliance with TRIPS, and the enactment of anti-circumvention rules in response to the WIPO Copyright Treaty.

The scope of copyright limitations and exceptions became a subject of societal and political debate within various nations in the late 1990s and early 2000s, largely due to the impact of digital technology, the changes in national copyright legislations for compliance with TRIPS, and the enactment of anti-circumvention rules in response to the WIPO Copyright Treaty.

The European People's Party concluded that international instruments for the protection of copyright no longer seem capable of guaranteeing creators and investors a fair return on their activities while ensuring the public’s access to information and respect for privacy.

In May 2010 a declaration entitled Copyright for Creativity was launched, stating: "While exclusive rights have been adapted and harmonised to meet the challenges of the knowledge economy, copyright’s exceptions are radically out of line with the needs of the modern information society. The lack of harmonisation of exceptions hinders the circulation of knowledge based goods and services across Europe. The lack of flexibility within the current European exceptions regime also prevents us from adapting to a constantly changing technological environment."

Copyright is typically thought of as a limited, legally sanctioned monopoly.

These concerns are governed by legal doctrines such as competition law in the European Union, antitrust law in the United States, and anti-monopoly law in Russia and Japan.

These concerns are governed by legal doctrines such as competition law in the European Union, antitrust law in the United States, and anti-monopoly law in Russia and Japan.

These concerns are governed by legal doctrines such as competition law in the European Union, antitrust law in the United States, and anti-monopoly law in Russia and Japan.

These concerns are governed by legal doctrines such as competition law in the European Union, antitrust law in the United States, and anti-monopoly law in Russia and Japan.

These concerns are governed by legal doctrines such as competition law in the European Union, antitrust law in the United States, and anti-monopoly law in Russia and Japan.

These concerns are governed by legal doctrines such as competition law in the European Union, antitrust law in the United States, and anti-monopoly law in Russia and Japan.

Competition issues may arise when the licensing party unfairly leverages market power, engages in price discrimination through its licensing terms, or otherwise uses a licensing agreement in a discriminatory or unfair manner.