The Legal Protection Of Folklore

During the international economic transactions, folklore has been more and more important. Accompany with these changes, more and more countrise and international orgnizations realize that it is necessary for them to protect folklore. What's more , people have come into a common sence to take legal actions. There are some quesetions which are need to be answered, such as : what kind of legislation model is suitable, how to design the institutionalization. In additon, there are some mistakes in realization, such as : what's the object to be protected; what's the difference between works and expressions.This dissertation studies the following sentences: folklore, expressions of folklore, works of folklore. The word "folklore" has different meanings, one is broad ,the other is narrow. In this dissertation, when we use it as a legal word ,it just refers to the meaning which has relationship with art .Expressions and works are not absolutely contradictory. Expressions emphasize the course; works emphasize the result. If the expressions can lead to a result that can be fixed or copied ,the works be formed; on the contrary, just the expressions. Both expressions of folklore and works of folklore are material intelligence product. Traditional knowledge of folklore is immaterial intelligence product and it is just the emphsis.The paper demonstrates that folklore is the dyad consisting of characteristic elements of folklore (CEoF) and expression of folklore (EoF) by analyzing the creative principals of folklore. The private system for protecting folklore should give top priority over intellectual property rights (IPRs), which could protect all the intangible intellectual fruits divided between CEoF and EoF. Subsequent to review international practices and domestic status for protecting folklore, the paper tries to construct a suit systems of protection of folklore. The entitlement vested in community in order to protecting CEoF is actually the ownership of culture property for protecting those formulaic information created and maintained, by a specific collective, which could be covered in wider range of traditional knowledge rights (TKRs); whereas the entitlement vested in individual in order to protecting EoF could be regarded as neighboring rights of collective culture property rights, among which could be still protected by copyright where it is work.Through a series of analysis and conparison, in the and this legislation structure is choosen: make the traditional knowledge rights (TKRs) as a branch of the intellectual property rights (IPRs). Use tional knowledge rights but not author's right to protect folklore. Traditional knowledge rights (TKRs) include ecnomic right and spirit right. Take account of the feature of folklore ,there are some which are different with existing intellectual property rights.