Private Law
mina kavyani; nejadali almasi
Abstract
Publishing literatures and artworks under copyright protection in the internet and the possibility of widespread infringement of these rights by millions of internet users all over the world, raises this important question that “Which law would be applicable in conflict of two or more laws?” ...
Read More
Publishing literatures and artworks under copyright protection in the internet and the possibility of widespread infringement of these rights by millions of internet users all over the world, raises this important question that “Which law would be applicable in conflict of two or more laws?” In addition, “In determination of governing law in copyright infringement in cyberspace, are traditional conflict of laws rules still applicable or new rules are needed in this area”? This article studies the issue by the separation of two assumptions of agreement and disagreement on applicable law in contractual and non-contractual infringement of copyright in cyberspace. In contractual infringement, which has the agreement on the governing law, the procedure of most of the countries and international conventions is, acceptance of principle of will. In contractual infringement in absence of agreement on governing law, different criteria have been adopted which the most important one of them is applying the law of the country which has the closest relation with the contract. In non-contractual infringement which has been agreed on governing law, there are two general viewpoints between lawyers, countries and international regulations. Some don’t accept the principle of will because of the connection of torts with public discipline and others recognize rule of will in determination of the governing law before and after the loss. Finally in assumption of disagreement in non-contractual infringement, which is the most common kind of infringement of these right in cyberspace, among different theories (including Lex Fori, Lex Loci Delicti, Lex Loci Protectionis) the theory of the law of the closest country, has been suggested as the most appropriate solution in order to determine the governing law.
Nejadali Almasi; seyyed hossein asadi
Abstract
The right to sue the court is based on the jurisdiction of the judicial authority. This jurisdiction may be created simultaneously for more than one court in more than one country. In the statutes, there are cases that due to the impossibility of implementing the rules related to local jurisdiction and, ...
Read More
The right to sue the court is based on the jurisdiction of the judicial authority. This jurisdiction may be created simultaneously for more than one court in more than one country. In the statutes, there are cases that due to the impossibility of implementing the rules related to local jurisdiction and, in particular, the involvement of an external element, the Tehran court, is competent. The jurisdiction of the court in these cases is a symbol of the general jurisdiction of the courts of Iran and because of its headquarters is the capital of Iran. For this reason, using the statutes and with the induction of existing laws, it is possible to extend the jurisdiction of this court as a rule, to other similar cases. In this way, by adopting this rule, not only the defect of the law is resolved, but also the parties get rid of the confusion. In addition, the court that deals with the matter is not afraid of being incompetent or likely protest to it. This topic, which has the capability of designing the title "expandingof local competence of the capital's court" in Iran's law, will be examined in the present paper.