Deeds created during labor relations
Deeds created during labor relations copyright law, if one employs someone to create a work, then the copyright holder will be the creator of the work himself and not the employer. However, the contract may provide otherwise. If the agreement does not give that the work created during the employment relationship will belong to the employer, then the result will normally belong to the employee, i.e., the one who made it.
This is because of the conception of copyright in continental countries as a right closely linked to the creator’s personality. The employer has the economic rights to the work to the extent that it needs to perform the appropriate activities that the employer performs at the time the work is created, e.g., in the case of a magazine article, the employer has the economic right to display the work to the public, the right to reproduce the book before the people, the right to reproduce the work as part of the magazine, but not the right to prepare the derivative works.
In commonplaces, the opposite happens. Copyright for works created within the employment (“Works for hire”) belongs to the employer unless otherwise provided in the contract. In the CCNV v Reid case, adjudicated by the US Supreme Court in 1989, the court ruled that “work created within the scope of employment” is created under an agency contract.
The following factors must be considered in deciding whether the work is created under an agency contract:
1. If the book is of the type for which the employee was employed
2. If the creation of the book was accomplished within the authorized time and spatial limits permitted by the employee’s work, and if the employee is guided by the intention to serve the employer.
3. However, when the first condition is met, even if the employee has done work at home outside of working hours, US courts have tended not to make the employee the copyright owner.
According to the Albanian Copyright Law, the work must have been created “by employment contract” and “during employment.” The employment contract is an agreement between the employee and the employer, which regulates the employment relationship and contains the parties’ rights and obligations. In the employment contract, the employee undertakes to offer his work or service for a fixed or indefinite period, in the framework of the employer’s organization and orders, who undertakes to pay a remuneration.
If the offense were created “during employment,” this would need the court’s interpretation. Will the ASP call the court that the crime was committed during “employment time” when prepared at home, outside of working hours, albeit within the contract term?
More complicated is the issue of determining who owns the copyright in the joint and collective works. Initially, it is important to distinguish between these works.
Copyright law for copyrighted works. He defines them as works created with the contribution of more than one author. The law does not distinguish between those works where each co-author’s gift is so mixed with the other co-authors’ assistance that it has now become indefinable and indivisible, and those works where each co-author’s contribution is determinable and separable from the contribution of other co-authors.
In other countries, the authors of the first type of work are called “joint authors,” and the book is called joint work.
1. The contributions of these authors are impossible to use separately.
2. The copyright of such work is held jointly by all co-authors.
3. The exploration of such a job, as well as the exploration of any other common property, requires the consent of all co-authors.
4. The proceeds resulting from in-depth exploration shall be divided among the co-authors according to each contribution to work. Each of the co-authors retains the right to sue for copyright in court.
Works of the second kind, where each author’s contribution is well-defined and separable from the assistance of other authors, are called “collective works.” The term “collective offense” by law does not clearly define who the author of the offense is and why it is a collective offense.
Is it called a collective work because one is in the creator’s positions and the other in the initiator and leader of the creation?
It is also unclear what kind of initiative and work direction it is about. At first glance, it looks like deeds, created by an employment relationship, where the employer has taken the initiative and directed the process of creating the act. It is known that the work that is designed for the employer during the employment contract is initiated by him, and very often directed by him. But if we accept that the owner of such a work is the one who started and ran the book, then the employer would become the owner of a work created based on a work contract, the author of the work himself. This interpretation runs counter to the law.
Therefore, in my opinion, collective work, collective work can be nothing but a work created by some co-authors, such as a periodical (newspaper, magazine), an encyclopedia, etc., where each one’s contribution is well-defined and separable from the assistance of other co-authors. In this case, each of these contributions is a separate work, while magazines, newspapers, etc. can be considered as a collection of books according to which:
1. Copyright in a collective work belongs to a natural or legal person under the initiative, under whose direction and under whose name it emerged. It does not retain the copyright in the individual contributions, but only in the selection and the organization of these contributions.
2. In the case of a magazine or newspaper, the authors of the articles themselves hold the copyright in these articles. In contrast, the newspaper owner has copyright throughout the newspaper but extends this right only to the items’ organization. And not to the articles themselves.
3. If the authors of the articles have passed the copyright on their writings to the newspaper owner, this is another matter.
4. In this case, the newspaper owner could carry out all the economic actions provided for the copyright’s economic rights.
Of course, if the authors themselves are the ones who have organized their contributions to a collective work, then the copyright in the collaborative work belongs to all authors jointly. Also, each co-author will continue to hold independently of the other authors and the copyright on its part. This means that it intends to administer and protect this section alone of other co-authors.