Skip Navigation


Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice Advance Access originally published online on January 30, 2006
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2006 1(4):283-292; doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpl005
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
1/4/283    most recent
jpl005v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zemer, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2006). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

Contribution and collaboration in joint authorship: too many misconceptions

Lior Zemer*
*Lecturer in Law, University of Leicester; Visiting Assistant Professor, Boston University School of Law. I am indebted to Leslie Green Wendy Gordon, Mary Jane Mossman and Carys Craig for their comments.

Legal context: This Article examines the requirements of collaboration and contribution in joint authorship. It discusses the main UK case law and provides a comparative assessment of the requirements in the US and Canada.

Key points: The author identifies and examines misconceptions surrounding the definition of joint authorship; the nature of the requirements of collaboration and contribution; the confusion within the definition of what amounts to sufficient contribution. The author asserts that joint authorship cannot be determined by using similar conceptions applicable to individual authorship. At the heart of the argument is the belief that the unavoidable result of the present definition of joint authorship is denial of reward for authors and artists.

Practical significance: This Article argues that the rules of joint authorship, as presently configured, do not recognize intellectual input that should be recognized. The Article defends the proposition that this has far-reaching effects on the creative process. It discourages authors from creating or contributing valuable materials to other authors. More importantly, the flaws inherent in the present definitions of collaboration and contribution in joint authorship contradict the aims of our copyright system through the denial of authorial contributions and withholding of reward from authors.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.