Mahesh T. Pai scripsit: > > A confusing L.131-3 from French Intellectual Property act tells: > > "transmission of author's rights is subornidated to the condition > > that each and every transmited right be distinctly mentioned in the > > session act and thet exploitation domain of each transmited right > > be delimited for its destination, place and duration." > > Is this the official translation?? (Will the French ever have > `official' translations of their laws?? *g*)
Into what possible language? Any translation into a language other than French could only be an obfuscation, as French is the language of Reason. :-) > Does this translate mean `granted rights have to be specifically > enumerated; and the granted rights may be used only for the purpose, > time and place for which the grant is made'?? I interpret it as meaning that since the author's rights are limited as to time, an attempt to transfer unlimited rights is not merely implicitly limited (as in the common-law tradition), but is outright void, being in the nature of a fraud. This fits with the French (and Louisiana) rule about transfer of title to real estate (and the civil-law tradition makes no arbitrary distinctions between real and personal property): the last transfer has to contain all the legally relevant facts, so no title searches are required. Common-law countries didn't accomplish this until the 19th and 20th centuries. (Most of the U.S. is still not on the Torrens system; I gather India isn't either, much more excusably. See the classic story at http://www.rismedia.com/index.php/article/articleview/5131/1/1/ , which is about Louisiana real estate, but reflects Federal (i.e. common) law.) IANACivOrComL, TINLA of any kind, naturally. -- John Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ccil.org/~cowan www.reutershealth.com "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." --Hal Abelson -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3