- My Tweets
Author Archives: Martin
European Policy for Intellectual Property (EPIP) is the leading scientific association for the economics and law of Intellectual Property. The EPIP 2018 conference was held in Berlin, 4-7 September 2018, where this statement was drafted. On Wednesday, 12 September 2018, the European Parliament will vote in plenary session on the heavily lobbied proposed Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market. On 5 July, a previous plenary vote rejected the report by Axel Voss MEP, the rapporteur for the legal affairs committee JURI. The main concerns related to the effects of Article 11 that introduces a new layer of licensing into the communication of news online, and of Article 13 that introduces new obligations on online platforms that are likely … Continue reading
A new CREATe Working Paper is being released today: IP & Collaborative Agreements in the Creative Industries. This is a CREATe report [by Martin Kretschmer, Bartolomeo Meletti & Sukhpreet Singh] released on the occasion of the launch of the AHRC’s Creative Industries Clusters R&D Programme 2018. Executive Summary The AHRC Creative Industries Clusters Programme (CICP) is a radical departure from traditional research funding. Research is understood in the context of R&D collaborations that are conceived to lead to new products and services, and ultimately to increased productivity and economic growth. These are ambitious, perhaps unprecedented goals for arts and humanities funding. The experimental nature of creative R&D collaborations between Universities and industry, the subject matter of this report, requires new and innovative … Continue reading
A new academic statement has been released today in anticipation of the plenary vote in the European Parliament on the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive, scheduled for 5 July, 12:00. More than 200 academics from over 25 research centres, including the leading European institutes, have signed open letters opposing Article 11 (new exclusive right for press publishers) and Article 13 (new obligation on platforms to obtain licences for content uploaded by users, or prevent the availability of such content by filtering). This latest statement attempts to address directly some of the misinformation that is circulating in a heavily lobbied environment. The statement rejects the following four claims as false: False: The proposals will increase legal certainty False: The … Continue reading
Copyright Reform. It’s a few votes away. The European Union may require those who share news to obtain licences first (permissions against payment). The European Union may require platforms to filter content uploaded by users (aimed at music files but also applying to new digital expressions such as memes and parodies). What is the evidence for such radical measures? CREATe is relaunching our copyright reform resource page today. We present a consolidated view of independent academic contributions to the most contested articles of the proposed Directive. We also offer a timeline of the policy making process and access to draft documents where they have become available (sometimes as leaks).
The Text and Data Mining exception in the Proposal for a Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market: Why it is not what EU copyright law needs
A summary of this post has been published in The Conversation on 24 May 2018: http://theconversation.com/data-mining-why-the-eus-proposed-copyright-measures-get-it-wrong-96743 An extended version has been accepted for presentation at the European Policy for Intellectual Property conference (EPIP 2018), taking place in Berlin on 5-7 September 2018. 1) Introduction The Proposal for a Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (the Proposal) contains a number of provisions intended to modernise EU copyright law and to make it “fit for the digital age”. Some of these provisions have been object of a lively scholarly debate in the light of their controversial nature (the proposed adjustment of intermediary liability for copyright purposes contained in Art. 13, see here at p. 7) or because they propose to … Continue reading
“The UK’s rational option is to develop a more open innovation system at home while encouraging the EU to pursue bad copyright policies. But this is unlikely to happen.” Martin Kretschmer reports on the Westminster Media Forum: On 22 June 2017, I spoke at the Westminster Media Forum on Brexit and the UK’s future approach to copyright: exceptions, originality thresholds and creator reward. I developed a simple argument for a panel chaired by Lord Clement-Jones. Other discussants included James Bennett (Head of Rights and Licensing, Copyright Licensing Agency), Imogen Heap (Recording Artist and Creative Executive Officer, Featured Artist Coalition), Ben White (Head of Intellectual Property, British Library) and Susie Winter (Director of Policy and Communications, The Publishers Association). Since the transcript … Continue reading
The European Copyright Society has published a consolidated Opinion on the EU Copyright Reform Package, currently making its way through the Committees of the European Parliament. The Opinion welcomes the broad policy objectives of the proposals but severely criticises the fragmented approach. The proposals do not achieve harmonisation, author and consumer interests are overlooked, private ordering may trump flexibilities, and the evidence base for the most serious interventions (Art. 11 Neighbouring right for publishers; Art. 13 Platform liability) is poor. The full opinion can be downloaded here, or from the website of the European Copyright Society.
CREATe is publishing today a new working paper by Dr Jeremy Silver, CREATe Industry Fellow and incoming CEO of the Digital Catapult. Blockchain or the Chaingang? Challenges, opportunities and hype: the music industry and blockchain technologies Music Ally is launching Jeremy’s report at an event in London, hosted by City firm ReedSmith (Thursday 12th May, 18:00-21:00): Blockchain: music without the middlemen? Paul Brindley (CEO and Co-founder, Music Ally) writes: This Music Ally event will serve as both the launchpad of the first in-depth report on what blockchain really means for the music industry and a forum to help build a practical consensus around the next steps to enable the industry to take full advantage of blockchain technologies.
Call for Papers, European Policy for Intellectual Property (EPIP 2016, University of Oxford, 3-5 September)
There are only two weeks left to submit abstracts, papers and panel proposals to EPIP 2016, the 11th Annual Conference of the European Policy for Intellectual Property Association hosted by the Oxford Intellectual Property Research Centre. Don’t miss the deadline for the leading interdisciplinary IP policy conference. The full call for papers is here: http://www.epip2016.org/ Conference dates: September 3rd (Saturday), 4th (Sunday) and 5th (Monday), 2016 Final paper submission deadline: 13 March 13th (Sunday), 2016
By Marcella Favale, CREATe Researcher, and Research Fellow, Bournemouth University
On 15 January, at a conference of ALAI Belgium (Association Littéraire et Artistique Internationale), Judge Jiří Malenovský of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) bravely faced a public of copyright scholars, many of whom had extensively raised concerns about decisions of the Court in their academic outputs. Malenovský is the Reporting Judge of a vast majority of copyright cases before the Court (analysed in CREATe’s study “Is there an EU Copyright Jurisprudence: An Empirical Analysis of the Workings of the European Court of Justice”). As far as European Copyright is concerned, he is The Copyright Judge.
This Annual Conference of ALAI Belgium focused on the principle of ‘communication to the public’, whose complexity was not only stated but also demonstrated by the delivered presentations. Crucially, these learned contributions did not hide their disappointment at the scarce enlightenment provided by the EU Court on the concept. Judge Malenovský’s talk, delivered in French, concluded the conference, and in his detailed defence of the Court, he set off to refute these criticisms, by explaining why and how the Court reached its conclusions.