法學(xué)專(zhuān)業(yè)外文翻譯--版權(quán)和民間文藝(編輯修改稿)
2025-06-25 22:28 本頁(yè)面
【文章內(nèi)容簡(jiǎn)介】 ut 20 South and Southeast Asian countries over the centuries. The result is that we have today hundreds of Raamaayanas which show so few mon features that it is doubtful whether these narratives stem from a mon root. Some scholars see here only parallel traditions, not derivations from one and the same story. To plicate the matter further, there are hundreds of antiRaamaayanas or local oral epics which reflect popular interpretations of some themes of the classical epic and shape their meaning to suit mainly local, social and munal ends. In other words, orality and literacy,folk literature and classical literature have been in a constant dialogue in the past and that dialogue still continues today. In the face of such cultural variety, which seems to question the true identity of the Raama story, it 5 may appear futile to ask questions of copyright. Who is the rightful owner of the Raama story, if it exists? I am a folklorist and humanist, not a copyright lawyer. Yet I was invited in 1982 and the following years to participate in several meetings organised by WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) and Unesco in Geneva and Paris. One product of these meetings was the Draft Treaty for the Protection of Expressions of Folklore Against Illicit Exploitation and Other Prejudicial Actions, formulated in 1983 but never formally adopted by Unesco. Another document pertaining to the application of copyright on folklore and produced by several Intergovernmental Expert Committees, in which I had the privilege of participating during 198289, was the Remendation on the Safeguarding of Traditional Culture and Folklore, adopted by Unesco39。s General Assembly in November 1989. I wrote two working documents
畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)相關(guān)推薦
鄂ICP備17016276號(hào)-1