Copyright and Digital Sovereignty

Digital transformation affects all social spheres bringing to life interactive technologies and virtual reality. Since the virtual (digital) space depends on the digital and creative solutions that form its technological base, insofar the legal regime of copying creative solutions affects both the freedom of creativity necessary for sustainable development and public control which is significant for maintaining the manageability of sovereign states and integrational unions.

Aim. Improving the legal regime for the protection of interactive works to create a universal and harmonious information space where the rights of authors and the economic interests of software developers are protected, as well as digital sovereignty is guaranteed.

Tasks. The concept development for legal protection of interactive works and the political and legal modeling of the digital (information) space presuppose the implementation of international agreements in the field of intellectual rights, as well as solution of several tasks to formalize the results of the creative activity that are perceived through digital technologies.

Methods. Political and legal modeling of the digital space is carried out by introducing terminological certainty and creating a system of the interactive works protection. Such legal construction should provide effective public control while preserving creative freedom in digital space.

Results. The protection of the copyright and moral rights of the authors of interactive works differs significantly from the legal protection of audiovisual artworks and literature. While the form of objective expression in computer programs may be similar to a literary artwork, their perception by the target audience is fundamentally different in that it models a virtual (digital) space, which the state administration seeks to control in recent years.

Conclusion. The state administration’s tendency to digital sovereignty makes sense only if the target audience demonstrates high demand for interactive artworks published under the state jurisdiction. Since the information space is universal, the digital sovereignty of the state is inextricably linked with participation in integration unions that ensure the p roper quality of the results of creative work and create the digital space that is necessary under digital transformation for the interactive art development and the prosperity of creative corporations.

1. Ageev A. I., Averyanov M. A., Yevtushenko S. N. [et al.] Digital Society: Architecture, Principles, Vision. Economic Strategies [Ekonomicheskie strategii]. 2017; 19 (1): 114–125. (In Rus.)

2. Alekseev G. V. Expansion of the Fields of Application of Information Technologies and Information Security of the State. Administrative Consulting [Upravlencheskoe konsul’tirovanie]. 2017; (5): 8–19. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.22394/1726-1139-2017-5-8-19

3. Arzamaskin N. N., Smirnov S. V. Some Features of the Sovereignty of the Modern State in the Information Space. The Rule-of-Law State: Theory and Practice [Pravovoe gosudarstvo: teoriya i praktika]. 2021; (1): 9–22. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.33184/pravgos-2021.1.1

4. Arkhipov V. V. Esports Law: Myth or Reality? Law [Zakon]. 2018; (5): 80–92. (In Rus.)

5. Arkhipov V. V. Characters (Avatars) in Multiplayer Computer Games: Questions of Legal Qualification in the Light of Interdisciplinary Research. Law [Zakon]. 2022; (3): 58–74. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.37239/0869-44002022-18-3-58-74

6. Bliznets I. A. Copyright in the Digital Environment. New challenges. The Role of Intellectual Property in the Breakthrough Scientific and Technological Development of Society. XXIII International Conference of Rospatent. Moscow, 2019: 35–38. (In Rus.)

7. Bliznets I. A., Vitko V. S. A Character as an Object of Copyright Protection in the Legislation of Russia. Moscow, 2022. (In Rus.)

8. Vasiliev A. A., Arkhipov V. V., Andreev N. Yu. [et al.] The Ontological Status of Computer Games in the Context of Legal Research. Altai Law Journal [Altaiskii yuridicheskii vestnik]. 2022; (4): 175–182. (In Rus.)  

9. Gribin N. P., Kohtyulina I. N., Sedunov D. I. [et al.] Information Sovereignty: Materials of Scientific Discussion. Russia and the World: Scientific Dialogue [Rossiya i mir: nauchnyi dialog]. 2022; (2): 100–131. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.53658/RW2022-2-2(4)-100-131

10. Grin E. S. Virtual Image as an Object of Legal Protection. Actual Problems of Russian Law [Aktual’nye problemy rossiiskogo prava]. 2020; 15 (6): 143–148. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.17803/19941471.2020.115.6.143-148

11. Grin E. S., Bogdanova E. E., Slavin O. A. [et al.] Intellectual Rights in the Field of Virtual and Augmented Reality Technologies. Moscow. 2023. (In Rus.)

12. Kefeli I. F., Malmberg S. A. The Information Potential of the State as the Basis of Information Sovereignty. Administrative Consulting [Upravlencheskoe konsul’tirovanie]. 2019; (1): 29–39. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.22394/1726-1139-2019-1-29-39

13. Kirilenko V. P., Alekseev G. V. International Legal Guarantees of Freedom of Expression. Administrative Consulting [Upravlencheskoe konsul’tirovanie]. 2014; (2): 116–123. (In Rus.)

14. Kirilenko V. P., Alekseev G. V. Right of Access to Information and Media Security. Theoretical and Applied Law [Teoreticheskaya i prikladnaya yurisprudentsiya]. 2019; (1): 39–49. (In Rus.)

15. Kirilenko V. P., Alekseev G. V. Promoting the Development of Science and Art as a Legal Guarantee of Information Security. Eurasian Law Journal [Evraziiskii yuridicheskii zhurnal]. 2020; (4): 71–80. (In Rus.)

16. Kirilenko V. P., Alekseev G. V., Patsek M. Natural Law and the Crisis of Liberal Law and Order. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Law [Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Pravo]. 2019; 10 (1): 38–54. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.21638/spbu14.2019.103

17. Couture S., Toupin S. What Does the Notion of “Sovereignty” Mean When Referring to the Digital? International Organisations Research Journal [Vestnik mezhdunarodnykh organizatsii: obrazovanie, nauka, novaya ekonomika]. 2020; 15 (4): 48–69. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.17323/1996-7845-2020-04-03

18. Kucheryavy M. M. State Policy of Information Sovereignty of Russia in the Conditions of the Modern Global World. Administrative Consulting [Upravlencheskoe konsul’tirovanie]. 2015; (2): 8–15. (In Rus.)

19. Lebed V. V. Multimedia Products in the Conditions of Adaptation of French Copyright Laws to Information Realities. State and Law [Gosudarstvo i pravo]. 2014; (5): 72–77. (In Rus.)

20. Lebed V. V. The Legal Regime of Audiovisual and Musical Works in France. State and Law [Gosudarstvo i pravo]. 2014; (2): 85–91. (In Rus.)

21. Merzlyakov S. S. Russian IT Specialist: Between the “Digital Concentration Camp” and “Technological Humanism”. Russian Journal of Innovation Economics [Voprosy innovatsionnoi ekonomiki]. 2021; 11 (4): 1543–1556. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.18334/vinec.11.4.113804.

22. Naumov V. B., Tytyuk E. V. On the Legal Status of the “Creativity” of Artificial Intelligence. Pravovedenie [Pravovedenie]. 2018; 62 (3): 531–540. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.21638/11701/spbu25.2018.307

23. Novoselova L. A., Grin O. S. Formation of Strategies for the Development of Intellectual Property in Order to Overcome Administrative Barriers. Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics [Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki]. 2020; (2): 4–27. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.17323/2072-8166.2020.2.4.27

24. Sergeev A. P. Application of the Rules of Section II “Property Rights and Other Property Rights” of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation to Intellectual Property Relations. Law [Zakon]. 2018; (12): 87–95. (In Rus.)

25. Sergeev A. P., Tereshchenko T. A. Big Data: In Search of a Place in the System of Civil Law. Law [Zakon]. 2018; (11): 106–123. (In Rus.)

26. Sukhodolov A. P., Rachkov M. P., Bychkova A. M. Prohibitive State Policy in the Field of Mass Media: Analysis of Legislation and Law Enforcement Practice. Moscow. 2018. (In Rus.)

27. Talapina E. V. Law and Digitalization: New Challenges and Prospects. Journal of Russian Law [Zhurnal rossijskogo prava]. 2018; (2): 5–17. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.12737/art_2018_2_1

28. Fomin A. A. Information Sovereignty as a Factor of Ensuring National Security. Modern Law [Sovremennoe pravo]. 2021; (4): 27–33. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.25799/NI.2021.59.73.004

29. Churilov A. Yu. Legal Regulation of Intellectual Property in the Gaming Industry. Intellectual Property. Copyright and related rights [Intellektual'naya sobstvennost'. Avtorskoe pravo i smezhnye prava]. 2017; (10): 59–68. (In Rus.)

30. Churilov A. Yu. Legal Regulation of Cloud Gaming. Actual Problems of Russian Law [Aktual’nye problemy rossiiskogo prava]. 2022; 17 (8): 83–92. (In Rus.) DOI: 10.17803/1994-1471.2022.141.8.083-092

31. Adler-Nissen R., Gammeltoft-Hansen T. Sovereignty Games. Instrumentalizing State Sovereignty in Europe and Beyond. New York : Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1057/9780230616936

32. Aplin T. Copyright Law in the Digital Society. The Challenges of Multimedia. Oxford : Bloomsbury Academic. 2011.

33. Aplin T. Reverse Engineering and Commercial Secrets. Current Legal Problems. 2013; 66 (1): 341–377. DOI: 10.1093/clp/cut004

34. Aplin T., Bently L. Global Mandatory Fair Use: The Nature and Scope of the Right to Quote Copyright Works. 2020.

35. Bartelson Jens. The Concept of Sovereignty Revisited. European Journal of International Law. 2006; 17 (2): 463–474. DOI: 10.1093/ejil/chl006

36. Bertol D., Foell D. Designing Digital Space: An Architect’s Guide to Virtual Reality. Wiley. 1997.

37. Brill J. Computer Programs as Literary Works and as Modes of Operation: A Case Comment on Lotus v. Borland. Chicago-Kent Law Review. 1998; 74 (1): 289–314.

38. Georgieva H. Video Games — Objects of Intellectual Property Law. Comparative Law Analysis. Proceedings of University of Ruse. 2016; 55.

39. Hillman J. E. The Digital Silk Road: China’s Quest to Wire the World and Win the Future. 2021.

40. Hobbs C. (Ed.). Europe’s Digital Sovereignty: From Rulemaker to Superpower in the Age of US-China Rivalry. European Council on Foreign Relations. 2020.

41. Hu. Tung-hui. A Prehistory of the Cloud. Cambridge, MA : The MIT Press. 2015.

42. Hu. Tung-hui. Digital Lethargy. Dispatches from an Age of Disconnection. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 2022.

43. Kelton M., Sullivan M., Rogers Z. [et al.] Virtual Sovereignty? Private Internet Capital, Digital Platforms and Infrastructural Power in the United States. International Affairs. 2022; 98 (6): 1977–1999. DOI: 10.1093/ia/iiac226

44. Kirby J. Digital Space and Embodiment in Contemporary Cinema: Screening Composite Spaces. Taylor & Francis. 2022. DOI: 10.4324/9781003222262

45. Lastowka G. Virtual Justice: The New Laws of Online Worlds. Yale University Press. 2010.

46. Lessig L. Free Culture. The Penguin Press. New York. 2004.

47. Menell P. S. An Analysis of the Scope of Copyright Protection for Application Programs. Stanford Law Review. 1989; 45: 1045.

48. Moon K. Another Nail in the Coffin for non-Literal Software Copyright Infringement? Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice. 2015; 10 (12): 921–930. DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpv173

49. Ramos A., López L., Rodríguez A. [et al.] The Legal Status of Video Games: Comparative Analysis in National Approaches. Geneva. WIPO. 2013. 98 p.

50. Rothstein J. K. Unilateral Settlements and Retroactive Transfers: A Problem of Copyright Co-Ownership. University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 2009; 157 (3): 881–921.

51. Samuelson P. Functionality and Expression in Computer Programs: Refining the Tests for Software Copyright Infringement. Berkeley Technology Law Journal. 2016; 31 (2): 1215–1300. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2667740

52. Schell J. N. The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses. CRC Press. 3rd Edition. 2019. 653 p.

53. Stettner D. C., Lawson M. S. Top Issues in 2020: Digital Technology. USA. 2020.

54. Tai K., Yuan Yi Zhu. A Historical Explanation of Chinese Cybersovereignty. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific. 2022; 22 (3): 469–499. DOI: 10.1093/irap/lcab009

55. Walker N. Sovereignty in Transition. Hart Publishing 2003. 572 p.

56. Widła B. More than a Game: Did Nintendo v. PC Box Give Manufacturers More Control over the Use of Hardware? Computer Law & Security Review. 2016; 33. DOI: 10.1016/j.clsr.2016.11.013

57. Xinbao Z. China’s Strategy for International Cooperation on Cyberspace. Chinese Journal of International Law. 2017; 16 (3): 377–386. DOI: 10.1093/chinesejil/jmx026

58. Zhu C. W. A Regime of Droit Moral Detached from Software Copyright? – the undeath of the ‘author’ in free and open source software licensing. International Journal of Law and Information Technology. 2014; 22 (4): 367–392. DOI: 10.1093/ijlit/eau004