Talk:Copyright law of Japan

Bias?

I think this article is rather biased, sentences like the one below give the article an unprofessional impression.
"In other words, the clever user who tries to free-ride on the original genius of the creator of this or that tune has to be educated, and forced to participate in a trusted system in order to obtain the desired tunes. No one has so far mentioned about either fair use or the reach of the public domain."

---

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.141.201 (talk) 15:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Ive been told by several sources that promotional materials (ie. movie posters) are not covered by copyright in Japan. Can anyone expand/confirm/debunk this? --168.156.89.181 04:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

• Want someone who speaks Dutch to read thesis by Andreas Bovens.

this one? It's already in English.

Nope. Another much big one.

---

Can somebody expand on this:

The concept of public domain in Japan is controversial. Because there is no concept of public domain in Japan's copyright law, even though the materials are claimed public domain, there can be some restrictions such as about commercial use, which has a conflict with GFDL.

Does copyright never expire in Japan? Is it not possible for a copyright holder to give a licence that waives all copyright restrictions? ( 19:11, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I did a quick reading of the CRIC site, and there's no mention of how one may renounce copyright (automatically granted to all except certain Government documents) to one's work. A-giau 02:55, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This is not unusual in copyright law, I don't think the UK and USA are any different.

Why even bother adding the GFDL blurb in there? Isn't that by an American? I'm sure plenty of "American" clauses don't apply in Japan. It sounds like GNU zealotry to me. I will remove it for the time being.

Postage stamps

Does anyone know how this relates to Japanese postage stamps? They aren't mentioned. BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 00:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Discrepancy with Japanese Language Version

The exceptions and limitations to copyright section in English specifically lists educational use as one exemption to the requirement for express permission from the author. However, this particular exemption doesn't exist in the Japanese version of the page at all (not to mention the wildly differing structure, which makes comparison difficult). How recent is the information on the respective pages? I'd mark this entire page as needing some serious review.

Midnightbrewer (talk) 03:42, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:United States copyright law which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 12:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Autumn 2012 developments

I think the article should mention the "illegal downloading means jailtime" development as reported here and here (examples of reliable sources). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:23, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Copyright law of Japan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080307032034/http://www.cric.or.jp:80/cric_e/index.html to http://www.cric.or.jp/cric_e/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:44, 30 November 2016 (UTC)