“Good” and “Bad” of law
By Tommy Zhang(China IP)
Updated: 2012-10-30

One thousand people may have one thousand understandings of the same law. Some may call it a “good” law while others regard it as a “bad” one. The current Opinion Solicitation Version Draft Amendment to the Copyright Law (Draft) has made many modifications to the original law which are intended to promote economic development and cultural transmission. For example, it adds the droit de suite to fine art, and further clarifies the rights of performers and publishers. The changes to the Draft are regarded as adaptions to historical development and social progress. However, its chapters and articles in collective management and right limitation arouse many controversies and questions, which may even make it a “bad” law.

How should we evaluate the pros and cons of a law? Generally speaking, there are four standards: 1) its legal form; 2) the essence of the legislation; 3) the generation mechanism; and 4) the protection mechanism. A review of the second standard shows that the essence of legislation is to protect personal and property security, maintain equality, guarantee freedom and promote efficiency. The third and fourth standards reveal that China has a relatively complete legislative system and comprehensive generation and protection mechanisms. With these three standards satisfied, logically, the only remaining standard for evaluation of a specific law, such as the pros and cons of the Draft, should be based on the first standard, the legal form.

The form of a good law should have the following four characteristics. The first is universality, which means the legislation is not made for specific persons and groups. The second is clarity, which means that the law must clarify its legal rules and conditions, rights and obligations as well as breach and accountability, and state them in language or text with clear and fixed meaning. The third is integrity, which means the rules of a country’s law should be unified and consistent and should not conflict with each other. The last one is feasibility or practicality, which means that the requirements by legal rules or system must be achievable for citizens or organizations.

The above-mentioned four characteristics are the basic principles that must be reflected in the forms of the laws in a society. Consequently the Draft should also have these four characteristics. From the point of view of ordinary people, it is reasonable to assume that different feelings and conclusions will inevitably arise in evaluating each of these four characteristics. For professional legislators however, such differences are not reasonable. The slightest doubt should not exist, because the new amendment must be in line with all these four points.

The amendment to the Copyright Law touches the nerves of the general public. Moreover, the magnitude of the amendments is a big event. It will greatly impact China’s economic development and its cultural transmission and development; related authorities must think twice before doing anything rash.



The J-Innovation

Steve Jobs died the month that the latest Nobel Prize winners were announced. The coincidence lends itself to speculation about inevitability.

Volunteer team bails out busy court

Government supports unique intellectual property fund

IP service providers showcase products

Experts call for standardization of IP services

主站蜘蛛池模板: 日韩av无码成人精品国产| 精品久久久中文字幕一区| 国产精品麻豆入口| 久久久久久久999| 欧美国产在线看| 优优里番acg※里番acg绅士黑| 要灬要灬再深点受不了好舒服| 国内精品伊人久久久久777| 两只大乳奶充满奶汁| 日韩精品一区二区三区色欲av| 亚洲第一精品福利| 美国式禁忌在完整有限中字| 国产成人高清亚洲一区91| 91香蕉视频污在线观看| 思思久久99热只有精品| 久久亚洲精品无码aⅴ大香| 欧美乱子伦videos| 亚洲综合伊人制服丝袜美腿| 美国发布站精品视频| 国产在线五月综合婷婷| 在线a免费观看最新网站| 大乳丰满人妻中文字幕日本| 三年在线观看免费观看完整版中文| 日韩a级一片在线观看| 亚洲五月综合网色九月色| 波多野结衣制服诱惑| 午夜免费电影网| 蜜桃臀av高潮无码| 国产激情一区二区三区在线观看 | 欧美大片在线观看完整版| 伊人久久精品一区二区三区| 美女扒开尿口让男人操| 国产午夜精品一区二区| 三级视频在线播放| 国産精品久久久久久久| wwwfuqercom| 色综合色综合久久综合频道| 国产精品久久久久久久久齐齐| a级毛片毛片免费观看久潮| 成人影片麻豆国产影片免费观看| 久久天天躁狠狠躁夜夜网站 |