지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2003.12
- 수록면
- 121 - 128 (8page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Copyright is divided into two categories, which are economic rights and moral rights. Unlike economic right, moral right is personal right which is an extension of the author's character and personality. Personality is not transferable, which is why the author always retains the moral rights even after the author sells or transfers the copyright to another person. The existence of moral rights is, however, not well known to architects, especially to Korean architects. Since its birth at the revision meeting for the Berne Convention in 1928, moral rights have become a stronghold to protect the personal rights
of architects, artists, writers or musicians.
European architects, particularly those of France, Italy, Germany, etc. have long been privileged to enjoy the moral rights, while the architects of Commonwealth countries of the United Kingdom (UK) or North America have not. After the enactment of UK's CDPA (Copyright, Designs & Patents Act) in 1988, however, there has been a strong demand of architects in those countries which do not respect the moral rights.
Australia is still one of those countries which do not respect it, although she has introduced the moral right provision into her copyright act of 2000 for the first time in her history. The newly introduced moral rights of attribution (or paternity right) and integrity were piecemeal and incomplete. They only guide the copyright users or building owners how to avoid the potential lawsuits from architects. Nevertheless, they were in part welcomed by Australian architects since they were the first step to leap into the final goal, the moral rights in its true meaning of words.
Although Australian moral rights are incomplete, they suggest a great deal of improvement for the Korean counterpart. In this study, Australian moral rights are analyzed in respect of architectural design and more protection of moral rights for Korean architects is sought from the analysis.
of architects, artists, writers or musicians.
European architects, particularly those of France, Italy, Germany, etc. have long been privileged to enjoy the moral rights, while the architects of Commonwealth countries of the United Kingdom (UK) or North America have not. After the enactment of UK's CDPA (Copyright, Designs & Patents Act) in 1988, however, there has been a strong demand of architects in those countries which do not respect the moral rights.
Australia is still one of those countries which do not respect it, although she has introduced the moral right provision into her copyright act of 2000 for the first time in her history. The newly introduced moral rights of attribution (or paternity right) and integrity were piecemeal and incomplete. They only guide the copyright users or building owners how to avoid the potential lawsuits from architects. Nevertheless, they were in part welcomed by Australian architects since they were the first step to leap into the final goal, the moral rights in its true meaning of words.
Although Australian moral rights are incomplete, they suggest a great deal of improvement for the Korean counterpart. In this study, Australian moral rights are analyzed in respect of architectural design and more protection of moral rights for Korean architects is sought from the analysis.
목차
Abstract
1. 서론
2. 건축저작물의 정의 및 기본적 조건
3. 호주의 건축저작권 변천과정 및 저작인격권의 도입
4. 호주의 저작인격권 분석
5. 결론 및 제언
참고문헌
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
建築 관련 著作人格權 중 同一性維持權에 관한 硏究
대한건축학회 논문집 - 계획계
2004 .10
-
국내 저작권법 중 건축 관련 조항의 개정에 관한 연구
대한건축학회 논문집 - 계획계
2015 .02
-
한미 양국의 건축저작권 침해보상에 관한 비교연구
대한건축학회 논문집 - 계획계
2007 .05
-
디지털 저작권관리와 Rights Language
한국산업정보학회논문지
2003 .06
-
한국과 영국의 건축 저작인격권 비교연구 ( A Comparative Study on the Architectural Copyright between Korea and U.K. with Particualr Reference to Moral Rights )
대한건축학회 논문집
1997 .12
-
ARCHITECTURE WITHOUT ARCHITECTS(1)
건축사
1972 .01
-
건축사 양성시스템과 건축교육의 비교 고찰
건축
2016 .02
-
국내 건축설계산업 육성을 위한 건축사제도의 개선 방향
건축
2013 .12
-
건축저작권법 제정 이후 미국의 건축저작물 보호에 대한 현황 및 판례 연구
대한건축학회 논문집 - 계획계
2006 .02
-
요양병원 간호사의 도덕적 고뇌와 도덕적 민감성
한국산학기술학회 논문지
2018 .06
-
단지설계에 있어서 MㆍA(Master Architect)설계방식에 관한 연구
대한건축학회 논문집 - 계획계
2005 .02
-
중국의 건축사 수급과 설계용역비 산정기준에 관한 연구
대한건축학회 논문집 - 계획계
2013 .05
-
건축사 행정처분 관련 행정심판 판례 연구
대한건축학회 논문집 - 계획계
2003 .10
-
건축설계산업의 방향
건축
2013 .12
-
A Brief Sketch of Architectural Works Copyright with the United States Cases : Analysis based on Thomas Shine v. David M. Childs and Skidmore Owings & Merrill, LLP Case
ARCHITECTURAL RESEARCH
2007 .06
-
영국의 건축사 자격과 등록에 대한 제도
건축
2016 .02
-
건축가의 해외에서의 일 : 일본과 본인의 경우
건축
2007 .07
-
이 시대 우리 건축인들은 무엇을 하여야 하는가?
건축
2017 .08
-
건축가란?
건축
2015 .08
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-540-013738709