The process of reforming copyright in the European Union did not finish with the adoption of Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (CDSM) in April 2019. The CDSM Directive now has to become a part of national laws of all Member States (and EEA countries). They have until 7 June 2021 to transpose the Directive’s provisions.
CREATe presents the second entry in our series of working papers released in 2020: “The Fundamental Right to Property and the Protection of Investment: How Difficult is it to Repeal New Intellectual Property Rights?”.
How does intellectual property impact the creativity and research outputs of doctoral researchers? CREATe team member, Amy Thomas (RTA, Copyright Evidence Wiki Sub-Editor), explored this question in a webinar supported by Vitae and IPO, and in collaboration with the Scottish Graduate School of Arts and Humanities (SGSAH) on 23 March 2020. The webinar considered two main facets of intellectual property: first, how the law recognises and protects creativity, and; secondly, how researchers can exploit that creativity effectively.
The webinar began with a presentation by Mario Moustras (Leadership & Talent Development Coach), who provided an overview of the main types of intellectual property, whilst delving deeper into particular concerns about copyright protection of creative products and research outputs. Mario’s presentation was followed by applied case studies by Claire Squires (Director, SGSAH), Amy Thomas (CREATe) and Colin Kirkpatrick (Senior Knowledge Exchange Manager, Glasgow School of Art) to demonstrate how copyright can be used in context. Claire provided valuable knowledge on publishing concerns for researchers, whilst Amy and Colin illustrated more specific case examples of Arts & Humanities students exploiting their creative outputs ‘in real life’. Continue reading →
Posted inCREATe Blog|Comments Off on Webinar Report: Intellectual Property for Research (SGSAH)
CREATe presents the first entry in our series of working papers released in 2020: “Text and Data Mining in Intellectual Property Law: Towards an Autonomous Classification of Computational Legal Methods” by Thomas Margoni (CREATe Co-Director, Senior Lecturer in Intellectual Property and Internet Law).
The paper is part of CREATe’s research developed within the project reCreating Europe: Rethinking digital copyright law for a culturally diverse, accessible, creative Europe founded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant no 870626).
The paper is forthcoming in Irene Calboli and Maria Lilla’ Montagnani (eds), Handbook on Intellectual Property Research (Oxford University Press 2020).
The European Copyright Society (ECS), a group of prominent European scholars, has published two opinions on the implementation of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market into national law: the Opinion on Implementation of Article 14 and the Opinion Addressing Selected Aspects of Implementing Article 17.
Member States have till 7 June 2021 to transpose the Copyright Directive into their national laws. Article 17 is among the most controversial and most complex provisions of the Copyright Directive. To date, none of the Member States implemented this provision. You can check the current state of the Copyright Directive implementation on the CREATe’s resource page available here, and read our previous blog post on the transposition of article 15 here.
In its opinion, the ECS calls article 14 “a remarkable provision which, for the first time in the EU, grants a positive status to works belonging to the public domain, by prohibiting any regaining of exclusivity therein”. The opinion considers objects covered by article 14 (works of visual art), rights which the provision cuts back on (with emphasis on related rights), non-original reproductions (reproducing the original faithfully), as well as the temporal dimension of the provision. Several CREATe academics and fellows signed the Opinion.
The core aspects of article 17 discussed in the ECS’ opinion include: the definition of the online content-sharing service providers (OCSSPs); licensing and moderation duties of the OCSSPs; copyright limitations supporting the transformative and user-generated content; configuration of complaint and redress mechanism; the possibility of implementing direct remuneration claims for authors and performers; and the private international law aspect of applicable law.
The full text of both opinions is available here on the European Copyright Society’s website.
What impact do streaming services have on piracy? Two new studies offer some insights. Nhan, Bowen and Bartula’s (2019) survey of university students finds that streaming services are now students’ primary means of movie consumption. As a result, more than half of the students surveyed report that they’ve stopped pirating movies due to access to these services. Further evidence from a study by Sardanelli et al. (2019) finds that external motivations (such as the category of movie) are most influential when determining whether a user will opt for a paid streaming service. The study suggests that coercion and threats of legal action are not effective in deterring piracy and re-aligning users to paid services; instead, streaming services should focus on improving the quality of their content by offering e.g. exclusive micro-series or sub-genres, which is a more effective motivator. Continue reading →
Posted inWiki|Comments Off on Copyright Evidence Wiki April 2020 Round-Up
The COVID-19 pandemic has changed our way of living and working. We want to remind everyone who is adapting to online working – including teachers and students, creators, cultural heritage practitioners, and other ‘copyright users’ – that all the resources available on CopyrightUser.org are distributed under a Creative Commons-Attribution licence. This means that you are free to use all the original materials you find on the website, such as texts, videos, animations and illustrations, for any purpose, under the only condition of crediting the author of the work.
The implementation clock is ticking. The new directive on copyright in the digital single market entered into force on 7 June 2019, giving the Member States two years to implement its provisions. Nine months have already passed, but most of the MS are still at the very beginning of the implementation process. Only one, France, introduced some of the directive’s provisions to its national law.
Those of the MS which commenced the implementation, seem open to hearing stakeholders’ opinions. The Netherlands published a draft implementation bill and opened a public consultation in July 2019. Ireland produced four consultation papers between September and December 2019, each concerning a different part of the CDSM Directive. In January 2020, Slovakia called upon the interested parties to submit the written opinions on the directive. In case of Sweden, opinions of selected stakeholders are taken under consideration, those partaking in a reference group created by the Swedish Ministry of Justice.
Report by Kenny Barr (Research Associate in School of Culture and Creative Arts, University of Glasgow)
On 5th February, Dr Christian Peukert (Católica-Lisbon/ETH Zurich) gave a CREATe Public Lecture on the effects of digitalisation in the book publishing industry. This was part of the work stream on Intellectual Property and Business Models of the AHRC Creative Industries Policy & Evidence Centre (PEC).
A CREATe Fellow from a disciplinary background of applied economics, Christian is interested in questions related to how digital technologies affect firms, consumers and markets, particularly from an innovation perspective. In tackling some of these issues in the contemporary book publishing realm, the talk touched on many themes that permeate the discourse around creative production and copyright markets including: primary creators operating on the margins of the mainstream industries; barriers to entry; the role of gatekeepers; and democratisation.