Rights to Digital Databases
Abstract views: 235
/ 
PDF downloads: 178
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59022/ijlp.151Keywords:
Database Rights, Copyright, Ownership, Digital Rights Management, Factual Data, Sui Generis Rights, Data Misappropriation, Trade SecrecyAbstract
This paper examines the legal rights governing digital databases. With the growth of big data, questions have arisen regarding copyright, ownership, access and control of large collections of data. Databases pose a unique challenge because they contain factual information not subject to copyright, yet represent a substantial investment in skills, labor and finances. Through analysis of relevant legislation and case law, this paper explores the protections afforded to digital database creators under copyright law, database rights, misappropriation doctrine, and trade secrecy. Issues analyzed include substantial taking of a database's contents, permissible extraction of insubstantial parts, rights to derivative works, and circumvention of digital rights management. The paper concludes with recommendations for balancing public interest in data access with providing incentives for continued database development.
References
Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991).
European Parliament & Council. (1996). Directive 96/9/EC of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases. Official Journal of the European Communities, L 77/20.
Derclaye, E. (2019). The database directive. In E. Derclaye (Ed.), Research handbook on the future of EU copyright. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Papadopoulou, E. (2018). Electronic databases and copyright. In G. Klass & N. Geist (Eds.), Creating Value in the Digital Era: Protecting and Promoting Identity, Copyright and the Right to Privacy in the Global Marketplace. Rowman & Littlefield.
Reichman, J. H., & Uhlir, P. F. (1999). Database protection at the crossroads: Recent developments and their impact on science and technology. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 14, 793.
Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991).
European Parliament & Council. (1996). Directive 96/9/EC of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases. Official Journal of the European Communities, L 77/20.
Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991).
Davison, M. J. (2011). The legal protection of databases. Cambridge University Press.
U.S. Congress. (1976). Title 17, United States Code, Section 201. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/201
European Parliament & Council. (1996). Directive 96/9/EC of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases. Official Journal of the European Communities, L 77/20.
Davison, M. J. (2011). The legal protection of databases. Cambridge University Press.
Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991).
European Parliament & Council. (1996). Directive 96/9/EC of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases. Official Journal of the European Communities, L 77/20.
Reichman, J. H., & Samuelson, P. (1997). Intellectual property rights in data? Vanderbilt Law Review, 50(1), 51-166.
Davison, M. J. (2011). The legal protection of databases. Cambridge University Press.
Toth, R. L. (2022). Online platform ethics and liability around user data scraping. Journal of Information, Communication & Ethics in Society.
Loth, A. (2022). What’s mine is mine—Licensing considerations for web scraping and the use of data analytics. Landslide, 14(3), 44-51.
Rosati, E. (2019). Copyright and the court: Examining the fundamentals of copyright law. Hart Publishing.
AllahRakha, N. (2023). AI and the Law: Unraveling the Complexities of Regulatory Frameworks in Europe. International Bulletin of Young Scientist, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.59022/ibys.115
Lithgow, M. (2021). Australia’s sui generis database laws: How Australia’s approach differs from the United States and the European Union. Texas A&M Law Review, 8(2), 381-400.
Naeem , A. (2023). REGULATORY SANDBOXES: A GAME-CHANGER FOR NURTURING DIGITAL START-UPS AND FOSTERING INNOVATION. Innovative Academy RSC, 3(8), 120–128. извлечено от https://in-academy.uz/index.php/EJLFAS/article/view/19825
Reichman, J. H., & Uhlir, P. F. (1999). Database protection at the crossroads: Recent developments and their impact on science and technology. Berkeley Tech. LJ, 14, 793.
17 U.S.C. § 107 (1992) link.
Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases [1996] OJ, L 77/20.
AllahrakhaN. (2023). Balancing Cyber-security and Privacy: Legal and Ethical Considerations in the Digital Age. Legal Issues in the Digital Age, 4(2), 78-121. Retrieved from https://lida.hse.ru/article/view/17666
Triaille, J. P., de Meeûs d’Argenteuil, J., & de Francquen, A. (2014). Study on the legal framework of text and data mining (TDM). Publications Office of the European Union.
Loth, A. (2022). What’s mine is mine—Licensing considerations for web scraping and the use of data analytics. Landslide, 14(3), 44-51.
Toth, R. L. (2022). Online platform ethics and liability around user data scraping. Journal of Information, Communication & Ethics in Society.
Davison, M. J. (2019). Database protection in the digital era: The EU Database Directive and its effects outside the EU. In G. B. Dinwoodie (Ed.), Secondary liability of internet service providers. Springer.
Naeem , A. (2023). REGULATORY SANDBOXES: A GAME-CHANGER FOR NURTURING DIGITAL START-UPS AND FOSTERING INNOVATION. Innovative Academy RSC, 3(8), 120–128. извлечено от https://in-academy.uz/index.php/EJLFAS/article/view/19825
United States Code. (1992). Title 17, Section 107. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107
Sag, M. (2020). Internet Safe Harbors and the Transformation of Copyright Law. Notre Dame Law Review, 93, 499.
Davison, M. J. (2019). Database protection in the digital era: The EU Database Directive and its effects outside the EU. In G. B. Dinwoodie (Ed.), Secondary liability of internet service providers. Springer.
Naeem , A. (2023). REGULATORY SANDBOXES: A GAME-CHANGER FOR NURTURING DIGITAL START-UPS AND FOSTERING INNOVATION. Innovative Academy RSC, 3(8), 120–128. извлечено от https://in-academy.uz/index.php/EJLFAS/article/view/19825
Guild v. Google, Inc., 804 F.3d 202 (2d Cir. 2015).
Rakha, A. Naeem,“SIGNIFICANCE OF REGULATION FOR ENHANCING ONLINE ACTIVITY”. Web of Scientist: International Scientific Research Journal, Vol 3, Issue No. 5 (2022).
Allah Rakha, N. (2023). Cyber Law: Safeguarding Digital Spaces in Uzbekistan. International Journal of Cyber Law, 1(5). https://doi.org/10.59022/ijcl.53
Papadopoulou, E. (2018). Electronic databases and copyright. In G. Klass & N. Geist (Eds.), Creating Value in the Digital Era: Protecting and Promoting Identity, Copyright and the Right to Privacy in the Global Marketplace. Rowman & Littlefield.
Rakha, A. Naeem,“SIGNIFICANCE OF REGULATION FOR ENHANCING ONLINE ACTIVITY”. Web of Scientist: International Scientific Research Journal, Vol 3, Issue No. 5 (2022).
Toth, R. L. (2022). Online platform ethics and liability around user data scraping. Journal of Information, Communication & Ethics in Society.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Anna Ubaydullaeva
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
