Territoriality and the Quest for a Unitary Copyright Title external link

IIC, 2024

Abstract

After 30 years of harmonization at EU level, copyright and related rights remain decidedly territorial in scope. This is despite the continuous quest for an internal market and the profound impact on cross-border creation, dissemination and use of cultural content. This contribution recounts the outcome of research done on territoriality in the context of the ReCreating Europe project. It discusses why national territorial rights persist, what type of legal mechanisms the EU legislature employs to address the adverse effects of territoriality, and sketches a number of models for a unitary title based on Art. 118 TFEU which could be explored going forward.

Art. 118 TFEU, Copyright, EU, territoriality, unitary title

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Territoriality and the Quest for a Unitary Copyright Title}, author = {van Eechoud, M.}, url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40319-023-01412-w}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01412-w}, year = {2024}, date = {2024-02-01}, journal = {IIC}, abstract = {After 30 years of harmonization at EU level, copyright and related rights remain decidedly territorial in scope. This is despite the continuous quest for an internal market and the profound impact on cross-border creation, dissemination and use of cultural content. This contribution recounts the outcome of research done on territoriality in the context of the ReCreating Europe project. It discusses why national territorial rights persist, what type of legal mechanisms the EU legislature employs to address the adverse effects of territoriality, and sketches a number of models for a unitary title based on Art. 118 TFEU which could be explored going forward.}, keywords = {Art. 118 TFEU, Copyright, EU, territoriality, unitary title}, }

EU copyright law round up – fourth trimester of 2023 external link

Trapova, A. & Quintais, J.
Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2024

Artificial intelligence, Copyright, EU

Bibtex

Online publication{nokey, title = {EU copyright law round up – fourth trimester of 2023}, author = {Trapova, A. and Quintais, J.}, url = {https://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2024/01/04/eu-copyright-law-round-up-fourth-trimester-of-2023/}, year = {2024}, date = {2024-01-04}, journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog}, keywords = {Artificial intelligence, Copyright, EU}, }

AI Music Outputs: Challenges to the Copyright Legal Framework download

2022

Abstract

This report examines the application of EU copyright and related rights law to outputs generated by or with the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) systems, tools or techniques (AI outputs), with a focus on outputs in the musical domain. The Report examines the question: How can and should EU copyright and related rights law protect AI musical outputs? The interdisciplinary (legal and empirical) research involves: (i) analyzing of the protection of AI outputs under EU copyright and related rights law; (ii) examining the attribution of authorship and ownership to (natural and legal) persons involved in the creation or production of AI outputs; (iii) proposing interpretative guidelines and policy recommendations on increasing legal certainty regarding the protection, authorship, and ownership of copyright and related rights over AI outputs, especially music outputs.

Artificial intelligence, computer-generated works, Copyright, EU, Intellectual property, music, originality, related rights

Bibtex

Report{nokey, title = {AI Music Outputs: Challenges to the Copyright Legal Framework}, author = {Bulayenko, O. and Quintais, J. and Gervais, D.J. and Poort, J.}, url = {https://dev.ivir.nl/publications/ai-music-outputs-challenges-to-the-copyright-legal-framework/870626_d3-5-final-report-on-the-impact-of-ia-authorship_formatted-1/}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6405796}, year = {2022}, date = {2022-04-01}, abstract = {This report examines the application of EU copyright and related rights law to outputs generated by or with the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) systems, tools or techniques (AI outputs), with a focus on outputs in the musical domain. The Report examines the question: How can and should EU copyright and related rights law protect AI musical outputs? The interdisciplinary (legal and empirical) research involves: (i) analyzing of the protection of AI outputs under EU copyright and related rights law; (ii) examining the attribution of authorship and ownership to (natural and legal) persons involved in the creation or production of AI outputs; (iii) proposing interpretative guidelines and policy recommendations on increasing legal certainty regarding the protection, authorship, and ownership of copyright and related rights over AI outputs, especially music outputs.}, keywords = {Artificial intelligence, computer-generated works, Copyright, EU, Intellectual property, music, originality, related rights}, }

The new rules for export control of cyber-surveillance items in the EU external link

EU, Informatierecht, Internet, Surveillance

Bibtex

Report{Daalen2021, title = {The new rules for export control of cyber-surveillance items in the EU}, author = {van Daalen, O. and van Hoboken, J. and Koot, M. and Rucz, M.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Report-on-cybersurveillance-items.pdf}, year = {0617}, date = {2021-06-17}, keywords = {EU, Informatierecht, Internet, Surveillance}, }

EU copyright law round up – fourth trimester of 2021 external link

Trapova, A. & Quintais, J.
Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2021

Auteursrecht, EU, frontpage

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {EU copyright law round up – fourth trimester of 2021}, author = {Trapova, A. and Quintais, J.}, url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/12/27/eu-copyright-law-round-up-fourth-trimester-of-2021/}, year = {1227}, date = {2021-12-27}, journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, EU, frontpage}, }

What Member States can learn from the AG opinion on Article 17 external link

Reda, J. & Keller, P.
Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2021

Article 17, Auteursrecht, EU, frontpage

Bibtex

Article{Reda2021b, title = {What Member States can learn from the AG opinion on Article 17}, author = {Reda, J. and Keller, P.}, url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/07/26/what-member-states-can-learn-from-the-ag-opinion-on-article-17/}, year = {0727}, date = {2021-07-27}, journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog}, keywords = {Article 17, Auteursrecht, EU, frontpage}, }

EU copyright law round up – first trimester of 2021 external link

Trapova, A. & Quintais, J.
Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2021

Auteursrecht, EU, frontpage

Bibtex

Article{Trapova2021b, title = {EU copyright law round up – first trimester of 2021}, author = {Trapova, A. and Quintais, J.}, url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/04/06/eu-copyright-law-round-up-first-trimester-of-2021/}, year = {0407}, date = {2021-04-07}, journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, EU, frontpage}, }

Privacy and Data Protection in the EU- and US-led Post- WTO Free Trade Agreements external link

1008, Series: European Yearbook of International Economic Law, pp: 95-115

Abstract

The chapter addresses privacy and data protection in FTAs. It takes stock of the evolution of provisions on privacy and data protection in the post-WTO FTAs and FTAs currently under negotiation relying on EU- and US-led FTAs as an empirical basis. The chapter evaluates the trends and patterns of the development of these provisions and provides an outlook for the upcoming negotiations on electronic commerce at the WTO. It highlights the evolution of provisions on privacy and personal data protection in general exceptions, financial and telecommunications chapters, chapters on electronic commerce and digital trade. After identifying trends in the design and wording of these provisions in the EU- and US-led FTAs the chapter concludes that both trading partners tend to prefer their own template for regional FTAs.

EU, frontpage, gegevensbescherming, Privacy, usa, WTO

Bibtex

Chapter{Yakovleva2020e, title = {Privacy and Data Protection in the EU- and US-led Post- WTO Free Trade Agreements}, author = {Yakovleva, S.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Yearbook_International_Economic_Law.pdf}, doi = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46955-9_5}, year = {1008}, date = {2020-10-08}, abstract = {The chapter addresses privacy and data protection in FTAs. It takes stock of the evolution of provisions on privacy and data protection in the post-WTO FTAs and FTAs currently under negotiation relying on EU- and US-led FTAs as an empirical basis. The chapter evaluates the trends and patterns of the development of these provisions and provides an outlook for the upcoming negotiations on electronic commerce at the WTO. It highlights the evolution of provisions on privacy and personal data protection in general exceptions, financial and telecommunications chapters, chapters on electronic commerce and digital trade. After identifying trends in the design and wording of these provisions in the EU- and US-led FTAs the chapter concludes that both trading partners tend to prefer their own template for regional FTAs.}, keywords = {EU, frontpage, gegevensbescherming, Privacy, usa, WTO}, }

Personal Data Transfers in International Trade and EU Law: A Tale of Two ‘Necessities’ external link

The Journal of World Investment & Trade, pp: 1-39, 2020

Abstract

Cross-border flows of personal data have become essential for international trade. EU law restricts transfers of personal data to a degree that is arguably beyond what is permitted under the EU’s WTO commitments. These restrictions may be justified under trade law’s ‘necessity test.’ The article suggests that they may not pass this test. Yet, from an EU law perspective, the right to the protection of personal data is a fundamental right. An international transfer of personal data constitutes a derogation from this right and, therefore, must be consistent with another necessity test, the ‘strict necessity’ test of the derogation clause of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. This article shows how a simultaneous application of the trade law and EU Charter ‘necessities’ to EU restrictions on transfers of personal data creates a Catch-22 situation and sketches the ways out of this compliance deadlock.

EU, frontpage, handel, Persoonsgegevens, Privacy

Bibtex

Article{Yakovleva2020d, title = {Personal Data Transfers in International Trade and EU Law: A Tale of Two ‘Necessities’}, author = {Yakovleva, S.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/JWIT_2020.pdf}, year = {1002}, date = {2020-10-02}, journal = {The Journal of World Investment & Trade}, abstract = {Cross-border flows of personal data have become essential for international trade. EU law restricts transfers of personal data to a degree that is arguably beyond what is permitted under the EU’s WTO commitments. These restrictions may be justified under trade law’s ‘necessity test.’ The article suggests that they may not pass this test. Yet, from an EU law perspective, the right to the protection of personal data is a fundamental right. An international transfer of personal data constitutes a derogation from this right and, therefore, must be consistent with another necessity test, the ‘strict necessity’ test of the derogation clause of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. This article shows how a simultaneous application of the trade law and EU Charter ‘necessities’ to EU restrictions on transfers of personal data creates a Catch-22 situation and sketches the ways out of this compliance deadlock.}, keywords = {EU, frontpage, handel, Persoonsgegevens, Privacy}, }

Institutionalized Algorithmic Enforcement – The Pros and Cons of the EU Approach to UGC Platform Liability external link

Florida International University Law Review, vol. 14, num: 2, pp: 299-328, 2020

Abstract

Algorithmic copyright enforcement – the use of automated filtering tools to detect infringing content before it appears on the internet – has a deep impact on the freedom of users to upload and share information. Instead of presuming that user-generated content ("UGC") does not amount to infringement unless copyright owners take action and provide proof, the default position of automated filtering systems is that every upload is suspicious and that copyright owners are entitled to ex ante control over the sharing of information online. If platform providers voluntarily introduce algorithmic enforcement measures, this may be seen as a private decision following from the freedom of companies to run their business as they wish. If, however, copyright legislation institutionalizes algorithmic enforcement and imposes a legal obligation on platform providers to employ automated filtering tools, the law itself transforms copyright into a censorship and filtering instrument. Nonetheless, the new EU Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (“DSM Directive”) follows this path and requires the employment of automated filtering tools to ensure that unauthorized protected content does not populate UGC platforms. The new EU rules on UGC licensing and screening will inevitably lead to the adoption of algorithmic enforcement measures in practice. Without automated content control, UGC platforms will be unable to escape liability for infringing user uploads. To provide a complete picture, however, it is important to also shed light on counterbalances which may distinguish this new, institutionalized form of algorithmic enforcement from known content filtering tools that have evolved as voluntary measures in the private sector. The DSM Directive underlines the necessity to safeguard user freedoms that support transformative, creative remixes and mash-ups of pre-existing content. This feature of the new legislation may offer important incentives to develop algorithmic tools that go beyond the mere identification of unauthorized takings from protected works. It has the potential to encourage content assessment mechanisms that factor the degree of transformative effort and user creativity into the equation. As a result, more balanced content filtering tools may emerge in the EU. Against this background, the analysis shows that the new EU legislation not only escalates the use of algorithmic enforcement measures that already commenced in the private sector years ago. If rightly implemented, it may also add an important nuance to existing content identification tools and alleviate the problems arising from reliance on automated filtering mechanisms.

aansprakelijkheid, Auteursrecht, censuur, EU, frontpage, Platforms, user-generated content, Vrijheid van meningsuiting

Bibtex

Article{Senftleben2020, title = {Institutionalized Algorithmic Enforcement – The Pros and Cons of the EU Approach to UGC Platform Liability}, author = {Senftleben, M.}, url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3565175 https://ecollections.law.fiu.edu/lawreview/vol14/iss2/11/}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.25148/lawrev.14.2.11}, year = {1020}, date = {2020-10-20}, journal = {Florida International University Law Review}, volume = {14}, number = {2}, pages = {299-328}, abstract = {Algorithmic copyright enforcement – the use of automated filtering tools to detect infringing content before it appears on the internet – has a deep impact on the freedom of users to upload and share information. Instead of presuming that user-generated content ("UGC") does not amount to infringement unless copyright owners take action and provide proof, the default position of automated filtering systems is that every upload is suspicious and that copyright owners are entitled to ex ante control over the sharing of information online. If platform providers voluntarily introduce algorithmic enforcement measures, this may be seen as a private decision following from the freedom of companies to run their business as they wish. If, however, copyright legislation institutionalizes algorithmic enforcement and imposes a legal obligation on platform providers to employ automated filtering tools, the law itself transforms copyright into a censorship and filtering instrument. Nonetheless, the new EU Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (“DSM Directive”) follows this path and requires the employment of automated filtering tools to ensure that unauthorized protected content does not populate UGC platforms. The new EU rules on UGC licensing and screening will inevitably lead to the adoption of algorithmic enforcement measures in practice. Without automated content control, UGC platforms will be unable to escape liability for infringing user uploads. To provide a complete picture, however, it is important to also shed light on counterbalances which may distinguish this new, institutionalized form of algorithmic enforcement from known content filtering tools that have evolved as voluntary measures in the private sector. The DSM Directive underlines the necessity to safeguard user freedoms that support transformative, creative remixes and mash-ups of pre-existing content. This feature of the new legislation may offer important incentives to develop algorithmic tools that go beyond the mere identification of unauthorized takings from protected works. It has the potential to encourage content assessment mechanisms that factor the degree of transformative effort and user creativity into the equation. As a result, more balanced content filtering tools may emerge in the EU. Against this background, the analysis shows that the new EU legislation not only escalates the use of algorithmic enforcement measures that already commenced in the private sector years ago. If rightly implemented, it may also add an important nuance to existing content identification tools and alleviate the problems arising from reliance on automated filtering mechanisms.}, keywords = {aansprakelijkheid, Auteursrecht, censuur, EU, frontpage, Platforms, user-generated content, Vrijheid van meningsuiting}, }