data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3d1df/3d1df87961ba2fa08b6694fa30be60a829db216d" alt=""
Vacature: Onderzoeker bij het IViR |
14 Februari Save the date! Symposium Mediaforum studenteneditie |
10-11 April AlgoSoc International Conference 2025 |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3d1df/3d1df87961ba2fa08b6694fa30be60a829db216d" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3d1df/3d1df87961ba2fa08b6694fa30be60a829db216d" alt=""
Vacature: Onderzoeker bij het IViR |
14 Februari Save the date! Symposium Mediaforum studenteneditie |
10-11 April AlgoSoc International Conference 2025 |
IViR is pleased and proud to announce that Balázs Bodó has been appointed, per 1 January 2025, as a full professor at IViR, to the chair ‘Information Law and Policy, with special emphasis on Technology Governance’.
The University of Amsterdam is providing funding and support for new or early-stage creative media projects that unearth, explore, and critique the digital economy in India from the perspectives of the labour that supports and sustains it.
Following the successful launch of the Information Law Series Archive in September 2024, ten more volumes have now been made freely available online on the IViR website.
Article{nokey,
title = {Co-creating research at The AI, media, and democracy lab: Reflections on the role of academia in collaborations with media partners},
author = {Cools, H. and Helberger, N. and Vreese, C.H. de},
url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14648849251318622},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849251318622},
year = {2025},
date = {2025-02-04},
journal = {Journalism},
abstract = {This commentary explores academia’s role in co-creating research with media partners, focusing on the distinct roles and challenges that each stakeholder brings to such partnerships. Starting from the perspective of the AI, Media, and Democracy Lab, and building on the Ethical, Legal, and Societal Aspects (ELSA) approach, we share key learnings from 3 years of collaborations with (media) partners. We conclude that navigating dual roles, expectations, output alignment, and a process of knowledge sharing are important requirements for academics and (media) partners to adequately co-create research and insights. We also argue that these key lessons do not always square with how academic research is organized and funded. We underscore that changes in funding structures and the way academic research is assessed can further facilitate the co-creation of research between academic research and projects in the media sector.},
}
Copyright, open science, research exceptions, right to research, technological protection measures, text and data mining, three-step test
Online publication{nokey,
title = {Towards a European Research Freedom Act: A Reform Agenda for Research Exceptions in the EU Copyright Acquis},
author = {Senftleben, M. and Szkalej, K. and Sganga, C. and Margoni, T.},
url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5130069},
year = {2025},
date = {2025-02-11},
abstract = {This article explores the impact of EU copyright law on the use of protected knowledge resources in scientific research contexts. Surveying the current copyright/research interface, it becomes apparent that the existing legal framework fails to offer adequate balancing tools for the reconciliation of divergent interests of copyright holders and researchers. The analysis identifies structural deficiencies, such as fragmented and overly restrictive research exceptions, opaque lawful access provisions, outdated non-commercial use requirements, legal uncertainty arising from the three-step test in the EU copyright acquis, obstacles posed by the protection of paywalls and other technological measures, and exposure to contracts that override statutory research freedoms. Empirical data confirm that access barriers, use restrictions and the absence of harmonised rules for transnational research collaborations impede the work of researchers. Against this background, we advance proposals for legislative reform, in particular the introduction of a mandatory, open-ended research exemption that offers reliable breathing space for scientific research across EU Member States, the clarification of lawful access criteria, a more flexible approach to public-private partnerships, and additional rules that support modern research methods, such as text and data mining.},
keywords = {Copyright, open science, research exceptions, right to research, technological protection measures, text and data mining, three-step test},
}
Copyright, Generative AI
Online publication{nokey,
title = {European Copyright Society Opinion on Copyright and Generative AI},
author = {Dusollier, S. and Kretschmer, M. and Margoni, T. and Mezei, P. and Quintais, J. and Rognstad, O.A.},
url = {https://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2025/02/07/european-copyright-society-opinion-on-copyright-and-generative-ai/},
year = {2025},
date = {2025-02-07},
journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},
keywords = {Copyright, Generative AI},
}
individual rights, judicial automation, judicial capacity, right to explanation
Online publication{nokey,
title = {Judicial Automation: Balancing Rights Protection and Capacity-Building},
author = {Qiao, C. and Metikoš, L.},
url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5125645},
year = {2025},
date = {2025-02-11},
abstract = {This entry explores the global rise of judicial automation and its implications through two dominant frameworks: rights protection and capacity-building. The rights protection framework aims to safeguard individual rights against opaque judicial automation by advocating for the use of explainable and contestable AI tools in courts. In contrast, the capacity-building framework prioritises judicial efficiency and consistency by automating court proceedings. Although these frameworks offer contrasting approaches, they are not mutually exclusive. A balance needs to be struck, where judicial automation enhances judicial capacities while maintaining transparency and accountability.},
keywords = {individual rights, judicial automation, judicial capacity, right to explanation},
}
Copyright
Report{nokey,
title = {Copyright and Generative AI: Opinion of the European Copyright Society},
author = {Dusollier, S. and Kretschmer, M. and Margoni, T. and Mezei, P. and Quintais, J. and Rognstad, O.A.},
url = {https://europeancopyrightsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/ecs_opinion_genai_january2025.pdf},
year = {2025},
date = {2025-02-07},
keywords = {Copyright},
}