Protection of Choreographic Works: A Comparative Approach
Titulo:

Protection of Choreographic Works: A Comparative Approach
.

Sumario:

Este artículo explora las complejidades del reclamo de derechos de autor para las obras de danza, lo cual no es tan sencillo como para otras formas artísticas. A pesar de estos desafíos, la proliferación de las redes sociales y las tecnologías de internet en las últimas décadas ha mejorado significativamente la capacidad de identificar a los creadores originales de obras de danza y hacer cumplir sus derechos, especialmente cuando estas obras se vuelven virales. El artículo examina las condiciones bajo las cuales los movimientos de danza y las obras coreográficas son consideradas susceptibles de protección por derechos de autor y evalúa el éxito de los esfuerzos de protección en diferentes sistemas legales. El análisis busca aclarar el panor... Ver más

Guardado en:

Revista La Propiedad Inmaterial

1657-1959

2346-2116

Pérez Acevedo, Natalia

UNIVERSIDAD EXTERNADO DE COLOMBIA

10.18601/16571959.n39.02

2025-02-05

43

80

Colombia

obras de danza,

coreografía,

derechos patrimoniales,

originalidad,

fijación,

sistemas legales,

derechos morales

derecho de autor,

Natalia Pérez Acevedo - 2025

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.

http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

id metarevistapublica_uexternado_revistalapropiedadinmaterial_42-article-10201
record_format ojs
spelling Protection of Choreographic Works: A Comparative Approach
Centro de Estudios de la Propiedad Intelectual
obras de danza,
coreografía,
derechos patrimoniales,
originalidad,
fijación,
sistemas legales,
Abad Carles, Ana. Historia del ballet y de la danza moderna. Alianza Editorial, 2004.
derechos morales
Núm. 39 , Año 2025 : Enero-Junio
Artículo de revista
application/pdf
Revista La Propiedad Inmaterial
Pérez Acevedo, Natalia
Español
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0
Natalia Pérez Acevedo - 2025
Copyright Law, Article 10.1. (NL).
Senftleben, Martin. “Overprotection and Protection Overlaps in Intellectual Property Law - the Need for Horizontal Fair Use Defences”. In: Annette Kur and Vytautas Mizaras (Eds.), The Structure of Intellectual Property Law (Chapter 8). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2011. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1597123 (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Taber, Isaiah West. Loïe Fuller dansant avec son voile [Photo], 1897. In L’Historie par l’Image [online]. Available at: https://histoire-image.org/fr/etudes/loie-fuller-incarnation-symbolisme-scene Thakur, Nishant and Anil Varkey, Sandra. “Closed list approach versus open-ended approach in subject-matter copyright”. In SCC Times [online], 28 March 2021. Available at: https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2021/03/28/copyright-2/ (Accessed: 9 October 2022).
The New York Times. “The Copyright Law and Dance”. In The New York Times [online], 11 January 1981. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/1981/01/11/arts/the-copyrightlaw-and-dance.html (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Academy of General Education, Manipal and Others v B Malini Mallya, 2009 (Supreme Court of India).
Bikram’s Yoga College v Evolation Yoga, Case No. 13-55763, 9th Cir., Oct. 8, 2015.
Case 6 U 117/06, 2007 (Higher Regional Court of Cologne).
CCH Canadian Ltd v Law Society of Upper Canada, 2004 (Supreme Court of Canada).
derecho de autor,
Este artículo explora las complejidades del reclamo de derechos de autor para las obras de danza, lo cual no es tan sencillo como para otras formas artísticas. A pesar de estos desafíos, la proliferación de las redes sociales y las tecnologías de internet en las últimas décadas ha mejorado significativamente la capacidad de identificar a los creadores originales de obras de danza y hacer cumplir sus derechos, especialmente cuando estas obras se vuelven virales. El artículo examina las condiciones bajo las cuales los movimientos de danza y las obras coreográficas son consideradas susceptibles de protección por derechos de autor y evalúa el éxito de los esfuerzos de protección en diferentes sistemas legales. El análisis busca aclarar el panorama legal en torno a la protección de las obras de danza y las implicaciones para los creadores en la era digital.
Consorts Huston et autres c. Société Turner Entertainment Co.; Syndicat Français des Artistes Interprètes et autres c. Société Turner Entertainment Co. et autres, 1991 (Cour de Cassation Francaise).
“History of Copyright”. In Wikipedia, 12 November 2020. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_copyright (Accessed: 28 August 2022).
Publication
“Dance Notation”. In Encyclopaedia Britannica [online]. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/art/dance-notation (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
“Choreography”. In Cambridge Dictionary [online], 24 August 2022. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/choreography (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Creutzenberg Jan. “Can Tradition be Copyrighted? A Symposium on #dancecopyright. In: Seoul Stages [Blog], 5 April 2019. Available at: https://seoulstages.wordpress.com/2019/04/05/can-tradition-be-copyrighted-a-symposium-on-dancecopyright/ (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Coyle, M. “The History of Copyright”. In: Lawdit Solicitors [online], 23 April 2003. Available at: https://lawdit.co.uk/readingroom/the-history-of-copyright (Accessed: 28 August 2022).
Carrière Laurent. Choreography and Copyright: Some Comments on Choreographic Works as Newly Defined in The Canadian Copyright Act. Montreal: Leger Robic Richard, Lawyers, 2003. Available at: https://www.robic.ca/en/publications/choreographyand-copyright-some-comments-on-choreographic-works-as-newly-defined-in-thecanadian-copyright-act/ (Accessed: 28 August 2022).
“Dance”. In: Cambridge Dictionary [online], 18 December 2019. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/dance (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Derclaye, Estelle. Research Handbook on the future of EU Copyright. Edward Elgar Publishing, 200 9. Available at: https://books.google.de/books/about/Research_Handbook_on_the_Future_of_EU_Co.html?id=MIIOdtjZLCkC&redir_esc=y (Accessed:22 October 2022.
Gowling WLG. “So you think you can dance? Copyright protection of dance moves”. In: Gowling WLG [online], 12 de mazo de 2019. Available at: https://gowlingwlg.com/en/insights-resources/articles/2019/copyright-protection-of-dance-moves/ (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Ginsburg, Jane. “Overview of Copyright Law”. In Rochelle Dreyfuss and Justine Pila (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Intellectual Property Law. Oxford University Press, 2017; Columbia Public Law Research Paper No. 14-518, 2016. Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/1990 (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Campaign. “History of advertising: No 148: Mehdi Norowzian’s Joy” [Photo]. In: Campaign, 24 September 2015. Available at: https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/history-advertising-no-148-mehdi-norowzians-joy/1365197
Iriarte Ahón, Erick and Medina Plasencia, Ruddy. Guía de derecho de autor para coreógrafos. Instituto Nacional de la Defensa de la Competencia y la Propiedad Intelectual (Indecopi); United States Agency for International Development (USAID), 2013.
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
Karjiker, Sadulla. “Justifications for Copyright: The Economic Justification”. South African Intellectual Property Law Journal, vol. 2 , 2014, pp. 13 -41. Available at: https://blogs.sun.ac.za/iplaw/files/2016/04/Sadulla-Karjiker-Justifications-for-copyright-the-economicjustification.pdf (Accessed: 23 October 2022).
Kraut, Anthea. Choreographing Copyright: Race, Gender, and Intellectual Property Rights in American Dance. Oxford University Press, 2015.
Kemp, Deborah. “Copyright on Steroids: In Search of an End to over Protection”, McGeorge Law Review, vol. 41 , Iss. 4 , 2017. Available at: https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/mlr/vol41/iss4/1 (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Lepage, Anne. “Overview of exceptions and limitations to copyright in the digital environment”. In: Unesco’s e-Copyright Bulletin, January-March 2003. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001396/139696E.pdf (Accessed: 22 October 2022).
MasterClass. “History of Dance: Universal Elements and Types of Dance”. In: MasterClass, Articles [online], 19 November 2021. Available at: https://www.masterclass.com/articles/history-of-dance (Accessed: 28 August 2022).
Pavis, Mathilde; Waelde, Charlotte, and Whatley, Sarah. “Who Can Profit from Dance? An Exploration of Copyright Ownership”, Dance Research: The Journal of the Society for Dance Research, vol. 35 , n.° 1 , 2017, pp. 96-110. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/90010869 (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Richard, Arnold; Dinwoodie, Graeme; Bently, Lionel, and Derclaye, Estelle. “IP Law Post-Brexit”. Judicature, vol. 101 , n.° 2 , 2017. Available at: https://judicature.duke.edu/articles/ip-law-post-brexit/ (Accessed: 2 January 2025).
Royal Spanish Academy [Real Academia Española, RAE]. Dictionary of the Spanish Language [Diccionario de la lengua española], 2001.
Giles, Katherine. “Shall We Dance: Dancing and Copyright Law”. In: Arts Law Centre of Australia, 31 March 2005. Available at: https://www.artslaw.com.au/article/shall-wedance-dancing-and-copyright-law/ (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
“Breve historia de la danza”. En Los bailes de salón [en línea]. (Consulta: 28 de agosto de 2022). Disponible en: https://moldes1.tripod.com/tecnica/historia.html
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/view/10201
Cofemel - Sociedade de Vestuário SA v G-Star Raw CV, 2019, Case C‑683/17.
39
Eva-Marie Painer v Standard Verlags GmbH, 2011 (Court of Justice of the European Union). Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Company, 1991, 499 U.S. 340.
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (UK).
Van Camp, Julie. “Copyright of Choreographic Works”. In: Stephen F. Breimer, Robert Thorne, and John David Viera (Eds.), 1994-95 Entertainment, Publishing and the Arts Handbook (pp. 5 9-92). New York: Clark, Boardman, and Callaghan, 1994. Available at: https://home.csulb.edu/~jvancamp/copyrigh.html (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Waelde, Charlotte; Whatley, Sarah, and Pavis, Mathilde. “Let’s Dance! But who owns it?” European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 36 , 2004, pp. 217 -228.
Yoo Joo-Hyun. “Copyright Battle Rocks Traditional Dance World: Debate Rages over Whether Certain Styles Belong to Artists or to the Culture”. In: Korea JoongAng Daily [online], 13 January 2019. Available at: https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2019/01/13/features/Copyright-battle-rocks-traditional-dance-world-Debate-rages-over-whethercertain-styles-belong-to-artists-or-to-the-culture/3058082.html (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Act No 121/2000 Coll. on Copyright and Rights Related to Copyright and on Amendment to Certain Acts, Article 2.1.(CZ).
Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, 1979.
Code de la Propiété Intellectuelle 1992, Article L 112-1.4 (FR).
Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices (Third Edition), January 28, 2021.
Horgan v. MacMillan, Inc, 1986 (United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit).
Copyright Act 1957, Section 2(h) (IN).
The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, S 3(2) (UK).
Copyright Act 1992, § 4 (3.8) (EE).
Croatian Copyright and Related Rights Act (CRRA), Article 5.2.(HR).
Traylor, Martha M. “Choreography, Pantomime and the Copyright Revision Act of 1976”. New England Law Review, vol. 16 , 1981, pp. 227 ss.
Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC, 2019, OJ L130/92.
Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, 2001, OJ L167/10.
Directive 2006/116/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights, 2006, OJ L372/12.
Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the legal protection of computer programs, 2009, OJ L111/16.
Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on Legal Protection of Databases, 2004, OJ L77/20.
Engraving Copyright Act 1734.
Fine Arts Copyright Act 1862.
Intellectual Property Code [FR].
Law 2121/1993, Article 2(1) (GR).
Law No 633/1941, Article 2.3. (IT).
Law on Copyright and Neighbouring Rights of 29 June 1993, Article 3.3. (BG).
United States Congress Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights. Copyright Law Revision: Studies Prepared for the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Eighty-Sixth Congress, 1st Session [Second Session]. US Government Printing Office, 1960. Available at: https://books.google.nl/books?id=a49nEUU-eZsC&printsec=frontcover&hl=nl&pli=1#v=onepage&q&f=false (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Constitution of India (Bhāratīya Samvidhāna), Article 21.
Tjia, Rick. “Copyright for Choreography: What you need to know”. In: Dance Informa Magazine [online], 4 May 2021. Available at: https://www.danceinforma.com/2021 /05 /04 /what-you-need-to-know-about-copyright-for-choreography/ (Accessed: 29 August2022).
Tribunal Supremo [España], Sala de lo Civil. Sentencia núm. 82/2021, Casación e Infracción Procesal Núm. 1443/2018.
Hyperion Records v. Sawkins, 2005 (United Kingdom Court of Appeal).
Infopaq International A/S v Danske Dagblades Forening, 2009 (Court of Justice of the European Union).
The United States Copyright Office. Circular 52. Copyright Registration of Choreography and Pantomime. The United States Copyright Office, 2017. Available at: https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ52.pdf (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Interlego v Tyco, 1989 (United Kingdom Judicial Committee of the Privy Council).
Johan Deckmyn and Vrijheidsfonds VZW v Helena Vandersteen and Other’s, 2014 (Court of Justice of the European Union).
Levola Hengelo BV v Smilde Foods BV, 2018, Case C-310/17.
Urheberrechtsgesetz (UrhG), 1965, §2 Para. 2. (DE).
Massine v. de Basil, 1938 (United Kingdom Court of Appeal).
Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd. and others v. Meltwater Holding BV and others, 2011, EWCA 890 Civ, 2012.
Norowzian v Arks Limited, 2000 (United Kingdom Court of Appeal).
Pastor v. Chen, 2002 (British Columbia Provincial Court).
Institute for Inner Studies & Ors. v Charlotte Anderson & Ors, 2014 (Delhi High Court).
Walter v Lane, 1900 (House of Lords of the United Kingdom).
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
Law on Intellectual Property’ approved by means of the Royal Legislative Decree 1/1996, of 12 April 1996, Article 10.1.c (ES)
United States Code, Title 17, § 101; 106A.
The Albany Law Journal. “The Serpentine Dance, by Marie Louise Fuller”. The Albany Law Journal, vol. 46 , 1892, pp. 165 -166. Available at: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.35112100788530&view=1up&seq=180&skin=2021 (Accessed: 29 August 2022 ).
Text
Merchandising v Harpbond, 1983 (United Kingdom Court of Appeal).
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ARTREF
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Economic Rights,
Moral Rights
Journal article
Fixation,
Originality,
Dance Works,
Choreography,
Copyright,
This article explores the complexities of claiming copyright for dance works, which is not as straightforward as for other artistic forms. Despite these challenges, the proliferation of social media and internet technologies in recent decades has significantly enhanced the ability to identify the original creators of dance works and enforce their rights, especially when these works go viral. The article examines the conditions under which dance moves and choreographic works are considered copyrightable and assesses the success of enforcement efforts across different legal systems. The analysis aims to clarify the legal landscape surrounding the protection of dance works and the implications for creators in a digital age.
Protection of Choreographic Works: A Comparative Approach
Legal Systems,
1657-1959
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/download/10201/17426
2025-02-05T14:08:21Z
2025-02-05
2025-02-05T14:08:21Z
https://doi.org/10.18601/16571959.n39.02
43
10.18601/16571959.n39.02
80
2346-2116
institution UNIVERSIDAD EXTERNADO DE COLOMBIA
thumbnail https://nuevo.metarevistas.org/UNIVERSIDADEXTERNADODECOLOMBIA/logo.png
country_str Colombia
collection Revista La Propiedad Inmaterial
title Protection of Choreographic Works: A Comparative Approach
spellingShingle Protection of Choreographic Works: A Comparative Approach
Pérez Acevedo, Natalia
obras de danza,
coreografía,
derechos patrimoniales,
originalidad,
fijación,
sistemas legales,
derechos morales
derecho de autor,
Economic Rights,
Moral Rights
Fixation,
Originality,
Dance Works,
Choreography,
Copyright,
Legal Systems,
title_short Protection of Choreographic Works: A Comparative Approach
title_full Protection of Choreographic Works: A Comparative Approach
title_fullStr Protection of Choreographic Works: A Comparative Approach
title_full_unstemmed Protection of Choreographic Works: A Comparative Approach
title_sort protection of choreographic works: a comparative approach
title_eng Protection of Choreographic Works: A Comparative Approach
description Este artículo explora las complejidades del reclamo de derechos de autor para las obras de danza, lo cual no es tan sencillo como para otras formas artísticas. A pesar de estos desafíos, la proliferación de las redes sociales y las tecnologías de internet en las últimas décadas ha mejorado significativamente la capacidad de identificar a los creadores originales de obras de danza y hacer cumplir sus derechos, especialmente cuando estas obras se vuelven virales. El artículo examina las condiciones bajo las cuales los movimientos de danza y las obras coreográficas son consideradas susceptibles de protección por derechos de autor y evalúa el éxito de los esfuerzos de protección en diferentes sistemas legales. El análisis busca aclarar el panorama legal en torno a la protección de las obras de danza y las implicaciones para los creadores en la era digital.
description_eng This article explores the complexities of claiming copyright for dance works, which is not as straightforward as for other artistic forms. Despite these challenges, the proliferation of social media and internet technologies in recent decades has significantly enhanced the ability to identify the original creators of dance works and enforce their rights, especially when these works go viral. The article examines the conditions under which dance moves and choreographic works are considered copyrightable and assesses the success of enforcement efforts across different legal systems. The analysis aims to clarify the legal landscape surrounding the protection of dance works and the implications for creators in a digital age.
author Pérez Acevedo, Natalia
author_facet Pérez Acevedo, Natalia
topicspa_str_mv obras de danza,
coreografía,
derechos patrimoniales,
originalidad,
fijación,
sistemas legales,
derechos morales
derecho de autor,
topic obras de danza,
coreografía,
derechos patrimoniales,
originalidad,
fijación,
sistemas legales,
derechos morales
derecho de autor,
Economic Rights,
Moral Rights
Fixation,
Originality,
Dance Works,
Choreography,
Copyright,
Legal Systems,
topic_facet obras de danza,
coreografía,
derechos patrimoniales,
originalidad,
fijación,
sistemas legales,
derechos morales
derecho de autor,
Economic Rights,
Moral Rights
Fixation,
Originality,
Dance Works,
Choreography,
Copyright,
Legal Systems,
citationissue 39
citationedition Núm. 39 , Año 2025 : Enero-Junio
publisher Centro de Estudios de la Propiedad Intelectual
ispartofjournal Revista La Propiedad Inmaterial
source https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/view/10201
language Español
format Article
rights http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0
Natalia Pérez Acevedo - 2025
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
references Abad Carles, Ana. Historia del ballet y de la danza moderna. Alianza Editorial, 2004.
Copyright Law, Article 10.1. (NL).
Senftleben, Martin. “Overprotection and Protection Overlaps in Intellectual Property Law - the Need for Horizontal Fair Use Defences”. In: Annette Kur and Vytautas Mizaras (Eds.), The Structure of Intellectual Property Law (Chapter 8). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2011. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1597123 (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Taber, Isaiah West. Loïe Fuller dansant avec son voile [Photo], 1897. In L’Historie par l’Image [online]. Available at: https://histoire-image.org/fr/etudes/loie-fuller-incarnation-symbolisme-scene Thakur, Nishant and Anil Varkey, Sandra. “Closed list approach versus open-ended approach in subject-matter copyright”. In SCC Times [online], 28 March 2021. Available at: https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2021/03/28/copyright-2/ (Accessed: 9 October 2022).
The New York Times. “The Copyright Law and Dance”. In The New York Times [online], 11 January 1981. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/1981/01/11/arts/the-copyrightlaw-and-dance.html (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Academy of General Education, Manipal and Others v B Malini Mallya, 2009 (Supreme Court of India).
Bikram’s Yoga College v Evolation Yoga, Case No. 13-55763, 9th Cir., Oct. 8, 2015.
Case 6 U 117/06, 2007 (Higher Regional Court of Cologne).
CCH Canadian Ltd v Law Society of Upper Canada, 2004 (Supreme Court of Canada).
Consorts Huston et autres c. Société Turner Entertainment Co.; Syndicat Français des Artistes Interprètes et autres c. Société Turner Entertainment Co. et autres, 1991 (Cour de Cassation Francaise).
“History of Copyright”. In Wikipedia, 12 November 2020. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_copyright (Accessed: 28 August 2022).
“Dance Notation”. In Encyclopaedia Britannica [online]. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/art/dance-notation (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
“Choreography”. In Cambridge Dictionary [online], 24 August 2022. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/choreography (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Creutzenberg Jan. “Can Tradition be Copyrighted? A Symposium on #dancecopyright. In: Seoul Stages [Blog], 5 April 2019. Available at: https://seoulstages.wordpress.com/2019/04/05/can-tradition-be-copyrighted-a-symposium-on-dancecopyright/ (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Coyle, M. “The History of Copyright”. In: Lawdit Solicitors [online], 23 April 2003. Available at: https://lawdit.co.uk/readingroom/the-history-of-copyright (Accessed: 28 August 2022).
Carrière Laurent. Choreography and Copyright: Some Comments on Choreographic Works as Newly Defined in The Canadian Copyright Act. Montreal: Leger Robic Richard, Lawyers, 2003. Available at: https://www.robic.ca/en/publications/choreographyand-copyright-some-comments-on-choreographic-works-as-newly-defined-in-thecanadian-copyright-act/ (Accessed: 28 August 2022).
“Dance”. In: Cambridge Dictionary [online], 18 December 2019. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/dance (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Derclaye, Estelle. Research Handbook on the future of EU Copyright. Edward Elgar Publishing, 200 9. Available at: https://books.google.de/books/about/Research_Handbook_on_the_Future_of_EU_Co.html?id=MIIOdtjZLCkC&redir_esc=y (Accessed:22 October 2022.
Gowling WLG. “So you think you can dance? Copyright protection of dance moves”. In: Gowling WLG [online], 12 de mazo de 2019. Available at: https://gowlingwlg.com/en/insights-resources/articles/2019/copyright-protection-of-dance-moves/ (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Ginsburg, Jane. “Overview of Copyright Law”. In Rochelle Dreyfuss and Justine Pila (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Intellectual Property Law. Oxford University Press, 2017; Columbia Public Law Research Paper No. 14-518, 2016. Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/1990 (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Campaign. “History of advertising: No 148: Mehdi Norowzian’s Joy” [Photo]. In: Campaign, 24 September 2015. Available at: https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/history-advertising-no-148-mehdi-norowzians-joy/1365197
Iriarte Ahón, Erick and Medina Plasencia, Ruddy. Guía de derecho de autor para coreógrafos. Instituto Nacional de la Defensa de la Competencia y la Propiedad Intelectual (Indecopi); United States Agency for International Development (USAID), 2013.
Karjiker, Sadulla. “Justifications for Copyright: The Economic Justification”. South African Intellectual Property Law Journal, vol. 2 , 2014, pp. 13 -41. Available at: https://blogs.sun.ac.za/iplaw/files/2016/04/Sadulla-Karjiker-Justifications-for-copyright-the-economicjustification.pdf (Accessed: 23 October 2022).
Kraut, Anthea. Choreographing Copyright: Race, Gender, and Intellectual Property Rights in American Dance. Oxford University Press, 2015.
Kemp, Deborah. “Copyright on Steroids: In Search of an End to over Protection”, McGeorge Law Review, vol. 41 , Iss. 4 , 2017. Available at: https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/mlr/vol41/iss4/1 (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Lepage, Anne. “Overview of exceptions and limitations to copyright in the digital environment”. In: Unesco’s e-Copyright Bulletin, January-March 2003. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001396/139696E.pdf (Accessed: 22 October 2022).
MasterClass. “History of Dance: Universal Elements and Types of Dance”. In: MasterClass, Articles [online], 19 November 2021. Available at: https://www.masterclass.com/articles/history-of-dance (Accessed: 28 August 2022).
Pavis, Mathilde; Waelde, Charlotte, and Whatley, Sarah. “Who Can Profit from Dance? An Exploration of Copyright Ownership”, Dance Research: The Journal of the Society for Dance Research, vol. 35 , n.° 1 , 2017, pp. 96-110. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/90010869 (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Richard, Arnold; Dinwoodie, Graeme; Bently, Lionel, and Derclaye, Estelle. “IP Law Post-Brexit”. Judicature, vol. 101 , n.° 2 , 2017. Available at: https://judicature.duke.edu/articles/ip-law-post-brexit/ (Accessed: 2 January 2025).
Royal Spanish Academy [Real Academia Española, RAE]. Dictionary of the Spanish Language [Diccionario de la lengua española], 2001.
Giles, Katherine. “Shall We Dance: Dancing and Copyright Law”. In: Arts Law Centre of Australia, 31 March 2005. Available at: https://www.artslaw.com.au/article/shall-wedance-dancing-and-copyright-law/ (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
“Breve historia de la danza”. En Los bailes de salón [en línea]. (Consulta: 28 de agosto de 2022). Disponible en: https://moldes1.tripod.com/tecnica/historia.html
Cofemel - Sociedade de Vestuário SA v G-Star Raw CV, 2019, Case C‑683/17.
Eva-Marie Painer v Standard Verlags GmbH, 2011 (Court of Justice of the European Union). Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Company, 1991, 499 U.S. 340.
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (UK).
Van Camp, Julie. “Copyright of Choreographic Works”. In: Stephen F. Breimer, Robert Thorne, and John David Viera (Eds.), 1994-95 Entertainment, Publishing and the Arts Handbook (pp. 5 9-92). New York: Clark, Boardman, and Callaghan, 1994. Available at: https://home.csulb.edu/~jvancamp/copyrigh.html (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Waelde, Charlotte; Whatley, Sarah, and Pavis, Mathilde. “Let’s Dance! But who owns it?” European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 36 , 2004, pp. 217 -228.
Yoo Joo-Hyun. “Copyright Battle Rocks Traditional Dance World: Debate Rages over Whether Certain Styles Belong to Artists or to the Culture”. In: Korea JoongAng Daily [online], 13 January 2019. Available at: https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2019/01/13/features/Copyright-battle-rocks-traditional-dance-world-Debate-rages-over-whethercertain-styles-belong-to-artists-or-to-the-culture/3058082.html (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Act No 121/2000 Coll. on Copyright and Rights Related to Copyright and on Amendment to Certain Acts, Article 2.1.(CZ).
Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, 1979.
Code de la Propiété Intellectuelle 1992, Article L 112-1.4 (FR).
Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices (Third Edition), January 28, 2021.
Horgan v. MacMillan, Inc, 1986 (United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit).
Copyright Act 1957, Section 2(h) (IN).
The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, S 3(2) (UK).
Copyright Act 1992, § 4 (3.8) (EE).
Croatian Copyright and Related Rights Act (CRRA), Article 5.2.(HR).
Traylor, Martha M. “Choreography, Pantomime and the Copyright Revision Act of 1976”. New England Law Review, vol. 16 , 1981, pp. 227 ss.
Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC, 2019, OJ L130/92.
Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, 2001, OJ L167/10.
Directive 2006/116/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights, 2006, OJ L372/12.
Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the legal protection of computer programs, 2009, OJ L111/16.
Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on Legal Protection of Databases, 2004, OJ L77/20.
Engraving Copyright Act 1734.
Fine Arts Copyright Act 1862.
Intellectual Property Code [FR].
Law 2121/1993, Article 2(1) (GR).
Law No 633/1941, Article 2.3. (IT).
Law on Copyright and Neighbouring Rights of 29 June 1993, Article 3.3. (BG).
United States Congress Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights. Copyright Law Revision: Studies Prepared for the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Eighty-Sixth Congress, 1st Session [Second Session]. US Government Printing Office, 1960. Available at: https://books.google.nl/books?id=a49nEUU-eZsC&printsec=frontcover&hl=nl&pli=1#v=onepage&q&f=false (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Constitution of India (Bhāratīya Samvidhāna), Article 21.
Tjia, Rick. “Copyright for Choreography: What you need to know”. In: Dance Informa Magazine [online], 4 May 2021. Available at: https://www.danceinforma.com/2021 /05 /04 /what-you-need-to-know-about-copyright-for-choreography/ (Accessed: 29 August2022).
Tribunal Supremo [España], Sala de lo Civil. Sentencia núm. 82/2021, Casación e Infracción Procesal Núm. 1443/2018.
Hyperion Records v. Sawkins, 2005 (United Kingdom Court of Appeal).
Infopaq International A/S v Danske Dagblades Forening, 2009 (Court of Justice of the European Union).
The United States Copyright Office. Circular 52. Copyright Registration of Choreography and Pantomime. The United States Copyright Office, 2017. Available at: https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ52.pdf (Accessed: 29 August 2022).
Interlego v Tyco, 1989 (United Kingdom Judicial Committee of the Privy Council).
Johan Deckmyn and Vrijheidsfonds VZW v Helena Vandersteen and Other’s, 2014 (Court of Justice of the European Union).
Levola Hengelo BV v Smilde Foods BV, 2018, Case C-310/17.
Urheberrechtsgesetz (UrhG), 1965, §2 Para. 2. (DE).
Massine v. de Basil, 1938 (United Kingdom Court of Appeal).
Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd. and others v. Meltwater Holding BV and others, 2011, EWCA 890 Civ, 2012.
Norowzian v Arks Limited, 2000 (United Kingdom Court of Appeal).
Pastor v. Chen, 2002 (British Columbia Provincial Court).
Institute for Inner Studies & Ors. v Charlotte Anderson & Ors, 2014 (Delhi High Court).
Walter v Lane, 1900 (House of Lords of the United Kingdom).
Law on Intellectual Property’ approved by means of the Royal Legislative Decree 1/1996, of 12 April 1996, Article 10.1.c (ES)
United States Code, Title 17, § 101; 106A.
The Albany Law Journal. “The Serpentine Dance, by Marie Louise Fuller”. The Albany Law Journal, vol. 46 , 1892, pp. 165 -166. Available at: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.35112100788530&view=1up&seq=180&skin=2021 (Accessed: 29 August 2022 ).
Merchandising v Harpbond, 1983 (United Kingdom Court of Appeal).
type_driver info:eu-repo/semantics/article
type_coar http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
type_version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
type_coarversion http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
type_content Text
publishDate 2025-02-05
date_accessioned 2025-02-05T14:08:21Z
date_available 2025-02-05T14:08:21Z
url https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/view/10201
url_doi https://doi.org/10.18601/16571959.n39.02
issn 1657-1959
eissn 2346-2116
doi 10.18601/16571959.n39.02
citationstartpage 43
citationendpage 80
url2_str_mv https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/download/10201/17426
_version_ 1823377211932016640

Código QR

Estadísticas y Métricas Alternativas

Títulos similares