바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science

  • P-ISSN1225-598X
  • E-ISSN2982-6292

Article Contents

Prev
e-Submission

Vol.50 No.4

Citation Share

An Study on the Problems and Improvement of the ‘Considerable Efforts’ to Use Orphan Works: Focused on Mass Digitization in Libraries

Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science / Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, (P)1225-598X; (E)2982-6292
2016, v.50 no.4, pp.333-350
https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2016.50.4.333

(2016). An Study on the Problems and Improvement of the ‘Considerable Efforts’ to Use Orphan Works: Focused on Mass Digitization in Libraries. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 50(4), 333-350, https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2016.50.4.333

Abstract

Article 50 and article 18 related to orphan works in the Copyright Act of Korea and Enforcement Decree of the Copyright Act of Korea define ‘considerable efforts’ to locate copyright owners. This study analyzed the reasonableness of the efforts for mass digitization in libraries. The findings of the study were the duplication of searches on the ‘Finding Copyright’ website and the inquire to copyright trust management organizations by document, ambiguity of search criteria through information networks, and problems due to non-use of international standard identifiers in managing works on copyright register, works with undistributed compensation, and copyright trust management organizations. This study suggests that copyright trust management organizations should register trust works, the government should develop a guideline for detail guidance for searching information networks, and copyright works should be managed using international standard identifiers.

keywords
저작권, 고아저작물, 상당한 노력, 강제허락, 법정허락, 대량디지털화, 도서관, Copyright, Orphan Works, Diligent Search, Compulsory License, Statuary License, Mass Digitization, Library

Reference

1.

노현숙. 2014. 고아저작물 이용을 위한 선결과제에 관한 비교법적 고찰. 아주법학, 7(4), 345-374.

2.

안효질. 2012. 권리자 미확인 저작물에 대한 관리 방안 연구. 서울: 한국저작권위원회.

3.

임원선. 2014. 저작권법. 제4판. 서울: 한국저작권위원회.

4.

정경희 외. 2015. 도서관에서의 고아저작물 활용 및 서비스 방안 연구: 법정허락을 중심으로. 서울: 국립중앙도서관.

5.

정경희. 2014. 도서관보상금체제에서 고아저작물 체제로의 전환 모색. 한국문헌정보학회지, 48(4):193-214.

6.

최나빈. 2016. 고아저작물의 디지털화에 관한 법적 문제 연구: 도서관 내 대량 디지털화를 중심으로. 석사학위논문, 고려대학교 대학원 법학과.

7.

Aplin, T. 2010. A Global Digital Register for the Preservation and Access to Cultural Heritage:Problems, Challenges and Possibilities. In Copyright and Cultural Heritage: Preservation and Access to Works in a Digital World. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar: 3-27.

8.

Covey, D. T. 2013. Response to U.S. Copyright Office NOI on Orphan Works and Mass Digitization. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University. [online] [cited 2015. 11. 30.]<http://repository.cmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1094&context=lib_science>

9.

Center for the Study of the Public Domain. 2005. Orphan Works: Analysis and Proposal. Durham: Center for the Study of the Public Domain. [online] [cited 2015. 11. 5.]<https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/pdf/cspdproposal.pdf>

10.

Council for the Library Copyright Alliance. 2014. Additional Comments of the Library Copyright Alliance to the Copyright Office’s Notice of Inquiry Concerning Orphan Works and Mass Digitization. Washington, DC: American Library Association. [online] [cited 2015. 11. 6.]<http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/storage/documents/lca-additional-ow-comments-16may2014.pdf>

11.

Rosati, E. 2013. The Orphan Works Provisions of the EPR Act: Are They Compatible with UK and EU Laws? European Intellectual Property Review, 35(12), 724-740.

12.

European Commission. 2011. Impact Assessment on the Cross-border Online Access to Orphan Works. Brussels: European Commission. [online] [cited 2015. 12. 15.]<http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/docs/orphan-works/impact-assessment_en. pdf>

13.

The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. 2012. Directive 2012/28/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on Certain Permitted Uses of Orphan Works. [online] [cited 2016. 9. 10.]<http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:299:0005:0012:EN:PDF>

14.

Favale, M. Schroff, S. and Bertoni, A. 2016. The Impossible Quest: Problems with Diligent Search for Orphan Works. [online] [cited 2016. 10. 1.]<http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2806152>

15.

Hansen, D. R., Hinze, G. and Urban J. M. 2013. Orphan Works and the Search for Rightsholders:Who Participates in a ‘Diligent Search’ under Present and Proposed Regimes?. [online][cited 2015. 9. 16.] <https://ssrn.com/abstract=2208163>

16.

International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). 2011. IFLA Statement on Orphan Works. Hague: International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. [online] [cited 2015. 10. 19.]<http://www.ifla.org/publications/ifla-statement-on-orphan-works-2011>

17.

Library Copyright Alliance. 2008. Proposed Amendments to Orphan Works Legislation. [online] [cited 2015. 11. 22.]<http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/storage/documents/lca-ltr-s2913-orphan-worksamendments-17jun08.pdf>

18.

Walker, R. K. 2014. Negotiating the Unknown: A Compulsory Licensing Solution to the Orphan Works Problem. Cardozo Law Review, 35, 983-1018.

Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science

e-Submission OA Policy