000049119 000__ 02707cam\a22004335i\4500
000049119 001__ 49119
000049119 003__ SzGeWIPO
000049119 005__ 20240708150417.0
000049119 006__ m    eo  d        
000049119 007__ cr bn |||m|||a
000049119 008__ 240321s2023\\\\enk\\\\\o\\\\\000\0\eng\d
000049119 0247_ $$a10.1093/grurint/ikad102$$2doi
000049119 035__ $$a(OCoLC)1427545198
000049119 040__ $$aSzGeWIPO$$beng$$erda$$cSzGeWIPO$$dCaBNVSL
000049119 041__ $$aeng
000049119 24504 $$aThe Copyrightability of Works of Applied Art in China ‒ :$$bCase Note of Guiding Case No. 157 by the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China.
000049119 264_1 $$a[Oxford, England] :$$bOxford University Press (OUP),$$c2023
000049119 300__ $$a1 online resource (pages 1142–1145)
000049119 336__ $$atext$$2rdacontent
000049119 337__ $$acomputer$$2rdamedia
000049119 338__ $$aonline resource$$bcr$$2rdacarrier
000049119 4901_ $$aGRUR International,$$x2632-8550 ;$$v72, 12, 2023
000049119 520__ $$aWith comparatively new copyright laws, China’s courts are still crystalizing the standards of copyrightability. In recent years, case law has particularly clarified that works of applied art qualify for copyright protection, but the enforcement of such claims was long deemed risky in practice due to the uncertainty regarding the interpretation of the protection requirements.  Guiding Case No. 157 of the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China demonstrates a newfound consistency in the application of copyright protection standards to works of applied art. Doctrinally, the case law analysis highlights that Chinese courts have merged two distinct copyrightability requirements, originality and aesthetics, settling for that which we call a threshold of ‘original aesthetics’.  Practitioners litigating international portfolios should be aware of the potential to successfully enforce copyright claims over works of applied art in China. The doctrinal delineation between originality and aesthetics is of importance not only within the scope of academic research, but also serves trial attorneys when pleading copyright infringement cases.
000049119 542__ $$fhttps://academic.oup.com/grurint/article/72/3/231/6998505
000049119 588__ $$aCrossref
000049119 590__ $$aPublished online: 10-Oct-23
000049119 650_0 $$aIntellectual property.
000049119 650_0 $$aCopyright$$zChina$$xLaw and legislation.
000049119 650_0 $$aCopyright$$xArt$$zChina.
000049119 650_0 $$aCopyright.
000049119 650_0 $$aCopyright infringement.
000049119 650_0 $$aPatents.
000049119 7001_ $$aRentsch, Rudolf A,$$eauthor.
000049119 7001_ $$aZingg, Raphael,$$eauthor.
000049119 7731_ $$tGRUR International$$wGRUR
000049119 830_0 $$aGRUR International,$$x2632-8550 ;$$v72, 12, 2023.
000049119 85641 $$uhttps://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikad102$$yonline version
000049119 904__ $$aJournal article
000049119 980__ $$aGRUR