Counterfeiting and piracy are among the biggest scourges of social and economic life nowadays. In a press release dated July 20th 2017, the European Commissioner Pierre Moscovici pinpointed that counterfeiting represents a real threat to the health and safety of European consumers and also undermines legitimate business and government revenus”. Counterfeiting and piracy “are some of the fastest growing forms of crime both in Romania and in other countries and threaten the economies of all countries, damaging, also, the trade by discouraging investors and new investment”.
The present article is analyzing reprography as the principal way for scientifically written works piracy. The article reviews the written works categories and the intellectual property categories in which piracy is done.Also, the study is analyzing notions related to the reference subject like: private copy remuneration, reproduction and distribution right, pirated goods and commercial purpose. Reprography analysis underlines the prejudices brought to all the factors involved: authors, copyright owners, consumers and state.The end of the study is dedicated to analysis of art. 1396 alin. (1) lit. a) of Law no. 8/1996 on copyright and related rights infringements and to proposals for amending and completing the Law regarding the authorization of the photocopies centers.
Besides the secular normative history of România, the copyright never generated so many debates like in present.Not only at the national level, but also at the European level, the credibility of a lot of public persons – state presidents, magistrates, parliamentarians, prime ministers – is put under de mark question being accused by plagiarism. These are reported, in most cases, to the drafting and sustaining the PhD thesis. From the legal point of view, the plagiarism refers to the infringement of the moral right of paternity, regulated by art. 10 lit. b) of Law no. 8/1996. Two judicial affairs relatively new are presenting the view of the Romanian courts and, in particular, of the High Court of Cessation and Justice regarding this right: Cause Digital Art vs. SRTV and Cause Ciutacu vs. The Romanian State.
The approaching of the Great Union centennial may be a reason for assessing what consequences the political acts that were internationally established by the Paris Peace Conference of 1919‑1920 had upon the Romanian legislation. If some regulations were clearly and directly determined by the Union, even though they were adopted long after the event, I tried to ponder over the extent in which the intellectual property legislation was influenced by it. A careful research of the premises and the elaboration of Law
no. 126/1923 on literary and artistic property, the only normative act in the field of intellectual property law generated at a time that can be put into the Union’s ranks, shows that, although there is no connection between its adoption and the political acts, it contributed directly to the unification of the Romanian legislation in the matter, being essentially a provision of the Constitution of 1923, which was, however, a direct consequence of the Romanian State unity.
For over two decades, Romanian musical industry has been encountering a constant phenomenon consisting in the apropriation of folklore musical work by its performers. For the general public, this phenomenon seems to be acceptable, as long as no natural person could claim the authorship of those works. The folklore musical work is, by essence, anonymous, collective, orally transmitted and represents the most important form of artistic display of a nation. The folklore musical works belong to the intangible cultural heritage and has to be protected against any attempts of couterfeiting. This article analysis the consequences of this phenomenon and propose efficient legal solutions for stopping it.
** Conf. univ. dr. Universitatea Româno‑Americană, avocat al Baroului Bucureşti.