Copyright protection of improvised music

Magistrsko delo celovito obravnava avtorskopravni položaj improvizirane glasbe ter izpostavi ključne razlike v razmerju do neimproviziranih in bolj konvencionalnih glasbenih praks. Po kratkem teoretičnem in zgodovinskem uvodu najprej oriše njen položaj v pravnih sistemih droit d\u27auteur in copyright, nato pa podrobneje opiše nekatere okoliščine nastanka samega avtorskega dela: individualnost ter posledice, ki jih v praksi prinese bodisi zahteva po izraženosti bodisi zahteva po fiksaciji dela na materialnem nosilcu. Prav slednja, ki je značilna za copyright sisteme, je bila do improvizatorjev še do nedavnega izrazito diskriminatorna, zaradi česar je na tem mestu dan poseben poudarek ameriški avtorskopravni ureditvi. Prav tako je bilo tudi sklicevanje na njihove odmevne primere zaradi pomanjkanja domače sodne prakse povečini neizogibno. Delitvi glasbe na različne stopnje improviziranosti sledi pregled varstva improvizirane glasbe po trenutno veljavni zakonodaji v Sloveniji: najprej ureditev avtorskih pravic na živi izvedbi, nato na fonogramih z izpostavitvijo problematike njihove improvizirane manipulacije in na koncu ureditev avtorskih pravic v vseh primerih trenutno zelo aktualnega streaminga. Pri vsakem od naštetih vidikov je posebej razdelano in skozi konkretne primere karseda plastično prikazano še vprašanje kolektivnega upravljanja avtorskih pravic, ki v praksi povzroča največ težav.The master\u27s thesis comprehensively addresses the copyright status of improvised music and highlights the key differences in relation to non-improvised and more conventional music practices. A brief theoretical and historical introduction is followed by an outline of its status in the droit d\u27auteur and the copyright legal system, and a more detailed description of the specific circumstances related to the creation of the work itself: the individuality and the consequences arising either from the requirement that the work be expressed or the requirement for the work to be fixed in a tangible medium of expression. The latter, specific to copyright systems, had been especially discriminatory against improvisers until recently, which is why a particular emphasis is dedicated to US copyright law. Likewise, the reference to high-profile US cases was largely inevitable due to the lack of the relevant domestic case law. The classification of music based on different levels of improvisation is followed by a review of the protection of improvised music according to the current legislation in Slovenia: firstly, the copyright protection for live performances, then phonograms, including the issue of their improvised manipulation, and finally, the copyright law related to the very topical streaming. Being the key problem in practice, the collective management of copyright is individually discussed and illustrated as clearly as possible through concrete examples for each of the above aspects