These journalists published the back seat conversations in a book with the name “The Endstra-Tapes” omitting only fillers such as “um” and. Commentaar op de Endstra-Tapes zaak over de vraag of op de ‘ achterbankgesprekken’ auteursrecht rust. De auteur meent van wel en bekritiseert de uitspraak. These journalists published these conversations in a book with the name ‘the Endstra-tapes’ only omitting too many ‘ers’, dots and certain.
|Published (Last):||24 April 2012|
|PDF File Size:||7.99 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.49 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
A few days later, Tapfs Holleeder and his associates were arrested for the extortion of Willem Endstra and other real estate entrepreneurs.
Kristof Langens rated it liked it Jun 09, Also conversations and interviews can be regarded as copyrighted works. Share Facebook Twitter Linked In.
Enkele van deze publicaties zijn op deze website terug te vinden. An author must intentionally want to make an intellectual creation, as the Court of Appeal told.
Hierbij moet altijd Bart Beuving als auteur en de domeinnaam www. Duidelijk een oppertunistisch boekje voor het moment, heel even een geldmakertjie. Preview — De Endstra-tapes by Bart Middelburg. In other words, the work must be original.
Netherlands : No Copyright in Recorded Conversations with Extortion Victim
Nathalie Den Boer is currently reading it Jul 08, Bert rated it did not like it Oct 03, Beautiful or ugly, good or tapess, little effort or years of work, this is all irrelevant in the judgment whether something is copyrighted: The recordings of the conversations were handed over to the Nationale Recherche National Investigation Bureau. He was not writing crime fiction and therefore did not deserve copyright protection according to the Court of Appeal.
He also accused the Holleeder-organisation of endtsra large number of murders.
It can in any case not be asked of Mr Endstra anymore. Back to the Endstra-tapes. Amsterdam Court of Appeal, 16 Juli Endstra heirs vs. Actually, the Court of Appeal says here that if someone does not intend to make a copyrighted work, no copyrighted work is created.
Endstra’s final work? Dutch copyright: scope of protection remains very wide – Lexology
Integrale weergave van de gesprekken die de Amsterdamse vastgoedmakelaar vermoord in hield met de Criminele Inlichtingendienst van de Amsterdamse politie over zijn contacten met de onderwereld. Germain endtsra it Aug 28, This book is not yet featured on Listopia. My saved default Read later Folders shared with you.
They argued that the conversations are interviews, and are therefore protected by copyright. This entry was posted endtra Wednesday, September 10th, at 1: Both the District Court Amsterdam and the Court of Appeal Amsterdam did not find that these conversations are copyrighted. Erik De paauw added it Dec 25, You taeps follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2. The recordings are an important public topic and they provide useful insight into the way the CIE handled the Endstra case.
On 30 Maythe Supreme Court in The Netherlands decided in a dispute between the sons of the real estate broker Endstra and two journalists that for the creation of a copyright work it is not required that the author intended to make a creation. Email required Address never made public. A second demarcation line is the fine line between private copyright and the free flow of information in public domain. Leonora added it Sep 24, Emma Wijninga rated it really liked it May 07, The judge finds it implausible that the heirs of the victim should be endangered as a result of the publication of the book.
Although Endstra undoubtedly thought about what he wanted and did not want to release to the detectives and therefore applied a certain selection, he did not intentionally couch his story in this design, which means that there is no copyrighted work.