Keyword: collective rights management

Generative AI and Author Remuneration

Senftleben, M.
IIC, vol. 54, pp: 1535-1560, 2023

Abstract

With the evolution of generative AI systems, machine-made productions in the literary and artistic field have reached a level of refinement that allows them to replace human creations. The increasing sophistication of AI systems will inevitably disrupt the market for human literary and artistic works. Generative AI systems provide literary and artistic output much faster and cheaper. It is therefore foreseeable that human authors will be exposed to substitution effects. They may lose income as they are replaced by machines in sectors ranging from journalism and writing to music and visual arts. Considering this trend, the question arises whether it is advisable to take measures to compensate human authors for the reduction in their market share and income. Copyright law could serve as a tool to introduce an AI levy system and ensure the payment of equitable remuneration. In combination with mandatory collective rights management, the new revenue stream could be used to finance social and cultural funds that improve the working and living conditions of flesh-and-blood authors.

collective rights management, Copyright, Freedom of expression, text and data mining, three-step test

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Generative AI and Author Remuneration}, author = {Senftleben, M.}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01399-4}, year = {2023}, date = {2023-11-07}, journal = {IIC}, volume = {54}, pages = {1535-1560}, abstract = {With the evolution of generative AI systems, machine-made productions in the literary and artistic field have reached a level of refinement that allows them to replace human creations. The increasing sophistication of AI systems will inevitably disrupt the market for human literary and artistic works. Generative AI systems provide literary and artistic output much faster and cheaper. It is therefore foreseeable that human authors will be exposed to substitution effects. They may lose income as they are replaced by machines in sectors ranging from journalism and writing to music and visual arts. Considering this trend, the question arises whether it is advisable to take measures to compensate human authors for the reduction in their market share and income. Copyright law could serve as a tool to introduce an AI levy system and ensure the payment of equitable remuneration. In combination with mandatory collective rights management, the new revenue stream could be used to finance social and cultural funds that improve the working and living conditions of flesh-and-blood authors.}, keywords = {collective rights management, Copyright, Freedom of expression, text and data mining, three-step test}, }

Copyright in the Age of Online Access: Alternative Compensation Systems in EU Law external link

Quintais, J.
Kluwer Law International, 2017, Series: Information Law Series, ISBN: 9789041186676

Abstract

This book examines pragmatic legal solutions that enable Internet users to access works in the digital environment by exploring the flexibilities in EU copyright law in search of a consistent regulation of non-commercial online use. In addition to proving virtually impossible, online enforcement of copyright may be undesirable because it risks encroaching upon fundamental rights and freedoms. However, the problem remains that creators are often not fairly remunerated for the online use of their works. This book addresses the need for legalisation schemes that favour remunerated access over exclusivity and enforcement for large-scale online use by individuals, while assuring remuneration to rights holders and promoting the development of the information society.

academic research, Berne Convention, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, CJEU, collective rights management, communication to the public right, compensation systems, Copyright, Digital Single Market, EU copyright law, exceptions and limitations, fair balance, fair compensation, frontpage, Internet, Kluwer Information Law Series, online intermediaries

Bibtex

Book{Quintais2017, title = {Copyright in the Age of Online Access: Alternative Compensation Systems in EU Law}, author = {Quintais, J.}, url = {https://lrus.wolterskluwer.com/store/products/copyright-age-online-access-alternative-compensation-systems-eu-law-prod-9041186670/hardcover-item-1-9041186670#details}, year = {2017}, date = {2017-05-29}, volume = {40}, pages = {}, abstract = {This book examines pragmatic legal solutions that enable Internet users to access works in the digital environment by exploring the flexibilities in EU copyright law in search of a consistent regulation of non-commercial online use. In addition to proving virtually impossible, online enforcement of copyright may be undesirable because it risks encroaching upon fundamental rights and freedoms. However, the problem remains that creators are often not fairly remunerated for the online use of their works. This book addresses the need for legalisation schemes that favour remunerated access over exclusivity and enforcement for large-scale online use by individuals, while assuring remuneration to rights holders and promoting the development of the information society.}, keywords = {academic research, Berne Convention, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, CJEU, collective rights management, communication to the public right, compensation systems, Copyright, Digital Single Market, EU copyright law, exceptions and limitations, fair balance, fair compensation, frontpage, Internet, Kluwer Information Law Series, online intermediaries}, }

Alternative compensation models for large-scale non-commercial online use of works external link

Quintais, J.
pp: pp. 298-306, 2016

Abstract

This paper briefly discusses an alternative legal model to assure remuneration for non-commercial mass online uses by individuals, covered by the exclusive rights of reproduction and communication/making available to the public in Directive 2001/29/EC. Alternative compensation systems (ACS) are legal mechanisms that forsake the need for direct authorization of end-user acts under the aforementioned rights – downloading, uploading, sharing, modifying –, while simultaneously ensuring compensation to creators (i.e. authors and performers) or all rights holders of works included in the scheme. After providing some background, the paper explains the concept of ACS, outlines the legal models and challenges to its implementation and reports on the results of an ongoing interdisciplinary research project on the legal and socioeconomic feasibility of such systems carried out by the Institute for Information Law (IViR), University of Amsterdam. Chief among the findings are the willingness of users to pay for and participate in an ACS, its quantification and, using the case-study of recorded music, the realization that such a model holds the promise of being welfare increasing.

ACI ADAM, alternative compensation systems, Auteursrecht, collective rights management, content flat-rate, Copydan, Copyright, exceptions and limitations, Infosoc Directive, Intellectuele eigendom, levies, private copy

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Alternative compensation models for large-scale non-commercial online use of works}, author = {Quintais, J.}, url = {https://ssrn.com/abstract=2625492}, doi = {https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110478198}, year = {1201}, date = {2016-12-01}, abstract = {This paper briefly discusses an alternative legal model to assure remuneration for non-commercial mass online uses by individuals, covered by the exclusive rights of reproduction and communication/making available to the public in Directive 2001/29/EC. Alternative compensation systems (ACS) are legal mechanisms that forsake the need for direct authorization of end-user acts under the aforementioned rights – downloading, uploading, sharing, modifying –, while simultaneously ensuring compensation to creators (i.e. authors and performers) or all rights holders of works included in the scheme. After providing some background, the paper explains the concept of ACS, outlines the legal models and challenges to its implementation and reports on the results of an ongoing interdisciplinary research project on the legal and socioeconomic feasibility of such systems carried out by the Institute for Information Law (IViR), University of Amsterdam. Chief among the findings are the willingness of users to pay for and participate in an ACS, its quantification and, using the case-study of recorded music, the realization that such a model holds the promise of being welfare increasing.}, keywords = {ACI ADAM, alternative compensation systems, Auteursrecht, collective rights management, content flat-rate, Copydan, Copyright, exceptions and limitations, Infosoc Directive, Intellectuele eigendom, levies, private copy}, }

Going means trouble and staying makes it double: the value of licensing recorded music online external link

Handke, C.W., Bodó, B. & Vallbé, J.
Journal of Cultural Economics, 2015

Abstract

This paper discusses whether a copyright compensation system (CCS) for recorded music—endowing private Internet subscribers with the right to download and use works in return for a fee—would be welfare increasing. It reports on the results of a discrete choice experiment conducted with a representative sample of the Dutch population consisting of 4986 participants. Under some conservative assumptions, we find that applied only to recorded music, a mandatory CCS could increase the welfare of rights holders and users in the Netherlands by over €600 million per year (over €35 per capita). This far exceeds current rights holder revenues from the market of recorded music of ca. €144 million per year. A monthly CCS fee of ca. €1.74 as a surcharge on Dutch Internet subscriptions would raise the same amount of revenues to rights holders as the current market for recorded music. With a voluntary CCS, the estimated welfare gains to users and rights holders are even greater for CCS fees below €20 on the user side. A voluntary CCS would also perform better in the long run, as it could retain a greater extent of market coordination. The results of our choice experiment indicate that a well-designed CCS for recorded music would simultaneously make users and rights holders better off. This result holds even if we correct for frequently observed rates of overestimation in contingent valuation studies.

Auteursrecht, collective rights management, compensation systems, Contingent valuation, Copyright, Intellectuele eigendom, Internet, Recorded music

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Going means trouble and staying makes it double: the value of licensing recorded music online}, author = {Handke, C.W. and Bodó, B. and Vallbé, J.}, url = {http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10824-015-9251-8}, year = {2015}, date = {2015-06-11}, journal = {Journal of Cultural Economics}, abstract = {This paper discusses whether a copyright compensation system (CCS) for recorded music—endowing private Internet subscribers with the right to download and use works in return for a fee—would be welfare increasing. It reports on the results of a discrete choice experiment conducted with a representative sample of the Dutch population consisting of 4986 participants. Under some conservative assumptions, we find that applied only to recorded music, a mandatory CCS could increase the welfare of rights holders and users in the Netherlands by over €600 million per year (over €35 per capita). This far exceeds current rights holder revenues from the market of recorded music of ca. €144 million per year. A monthly CCS fee of ca. €1.74 as a surcharge on Dutch Internet subscriptions would raise the same amount of revenues to rights holders as the current market for recorded music. With a voluntary CCS, the estimated welfare gains to users and rights holders are even greater for CCS fees below €20 on the user side. A voluntary CCS would also perform better in the long run, as it could retain a greater extent of market coordination. The results of our choice experiment indicate that a well-designed CCS for recorded music would simultaneously make users and rights holders better off. This result holds even if we correct for frequently observed rates of overestimation in contingent valuation studies.}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, collective rights management, compensation systems, Contingent valuation, Copyright, Intellectuele eigendom, Internet, Recorded music}, }

Private Copying and Downloading from Unlawful Sources external link

Quintais, J.
IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, vol. 46, num: 1, pp: 66-92, 2014

Abstract

Private copying is one of the most contested areas of EU copyright law. This paper surveys that nebulous area and examines the issue of copies made from unlawful sources in light of the ECJ’s ACI Adam decision. After describing the legal background of copyright levies and the facts of the litigation, the paper scrutinizes the Advocate General’s Opinion and the Court’s decision. The latter is analyzed against the history of copyright levies, the ECJ’s extensive case-law on the private copying limitation and Member States’ regulation of unlawful sources. This paper further reflects on the decision’s implications for end-users, rights holders, collective management organizations and manufacturers/importers of levied goods. It concludes that, from a legal and economic standpoint, the decision not only fails to be properly justified, but its consequences will likely diverge from those anticipated by the Court. Most worrisome is the Court’s stance on the three-step test, which it views as a restrictive, rather than enabling, clause. In its interpretation of the test, the decision fails to strike the necessary balance between competing rights and interests. This is due to multiple factors: overreliance on the principle of strict interpretation; failure to consider the fundamental right of privacy; lack of justification of the normative and empirical elements of the test’s second condition; and a disregard for the remuneration element in connection with the test’s third condition. To the contrary, it is argued that a flexible construction of the three-step test is more suited to the Infosoc Directive’s balancing aims.

ACI ADAM, alternative compensation systems, Auteursrecht, collective rights management, content flat-rate, Copyright, exceptions and limitations, Information Influx Conference, Infosoc Directive, Intellectuele eigendom, IViR, levies, private copy

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Private Copying and Downloading from Unlawful Sources}, author = {Quintais, J.}, url = {http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40319-014-0295-7}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-014-0295-7}, year = {2014}, date = {2014-10-29}, journal = {IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law}, volume = {46}, number = {1}, pages = {66-92}, abstract = {Private copying is one of the most contested areas of EU copyright law. This paper surveys that nebulous area and examines the issue of copies made from unlawful sources in light of the ECJ’s ACI Adam decision. After describing the legal background of copyright levies and the facts of the litigation, the paper scrutinizes the Advocate General’s Opinion and the Court’s decision. The latter is analyzed against the history of copyright levies, the ECJ’s extensive case-law on the private copying limitation and Member States’ regulation of unlawful sources. This paper further reflects on the decision’s implications for end-users, rights holders, collective management organizations and manufacturers/importers of levied goods. It concludes that, from a legal and economic standpoint, the decision not only fails to be properly justified, but its consequences will likely diverge from those anticipated by the Court. Most worrisome is the Court’s stance on the three-step test, which it views as a restrictive, rather than enabling, clause. In its interpretation of the test, the decision fails to strike the necessary balance between competing rights and interests. This is due to multiple factors: overreliance on the principle of strict interpretation; failure to consider the fundamental right of privacy; lack of justification of the normative and empirical elements of the test’s second condition; and a disregard for the remuneration element in connection with the test’s third condition. To the contrary, it is argued that a flexible construction of the three-step test is more suited to the Infosoc Directive’s balancing aims.}, keywords = {ACI ADAM, alternative compensation systems, Auteursrecht, collective rights management, content flat-rate, Copyright, exceptions and limitations, Information Influx Conference, Infosoc Directive, Intellectuele eigendom, IViR, levies, private copy}, }

Legalizing File-Sharing: An Idea Whose Time Has Come – Or Gone? Report from the Information Influx Conference 2014 external link

Quintais, J.
2014

Abstract

On 2-4 July 2014 Information Influx, the 25th anniversary conference of the Institute for Information Law (IViR) was held in Amsterdam. Integrated in the conference, on Friday, 4 July a panel entitled “Legalizing file-sharing: an idea whose time has come – or gone?” met.<br /> The panel’s moderator was Professor Bernt Hugenholtz (University of Amsterdam, IViR) and the panelists were scholars with groundbreaking research on the topic for the past decade: Professor Neil Netanel (University of California, Los Angeles), Professor Alexander Peukert (University of Frankfurt), Dr. Philippe Aigrain (La Quadrature du Net), Professor Séverine Dusollier (SciencesPo./École de droit).<br /> The panel was divided into four parts, which this report reflects. First, the moderator introduced the topic and the panelists. Second, IViR member Mr. Balázs Bodó offered a short presentation of an ongoing research project on the topic of debate. Third, each panelist commented on the topic from different perspectives. The panel discussion was then opened for comments from the audience and responses from the panel.

ACI ADAM, alternative compensation systems, Auteursrecht, collective rights management, content flat-rate, Copyright, exceptions and limitations, Information Influx Conference, Infosoc Directive, Intellectuele eigendom, IViR, levies, private copy

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Legalizing File-Sharing: An Idea Whose Time Has Come – Or Gone? Report from the Information Influx Conference 2014}, author = {Quintais, J.}, url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2510545}, year = {2014}, date = {2014-10-24}, abstract = {On 2-4 July 2014 Information Influx, the 25th anniversary conference of the Institute for Information Law (IViR) was held in Amsterdam. Integrated in the conference, on Friday, 4 July a panel entitled “Legalizing file-sharing: an idea whose time has come – or gone?” met.<br /> The panel’s moderator was Professor Bernt Hugenholtz (University of Amsterdam, IViR) and the panelists were scholars with groundbreaking research on the topic for the past decade: Professor Neil Netanel (University of California, Los Angeles), Professor Alexander Peukert (University of Frankfurt), Dr. Philippe Aigrain (La Quadrature du Net), Professor Séverine Dusollier (SciencesPo./École de droit).<br /> The panel was divided into four parts, which this report reflects. First, the moderator introduced the topic and the panelists. Second, IViR member Mr. Balázs Bodó offered a short presentation of an ongoing research project on the topic of debate. Third, each panelist commented on the topic from different perspectives. The panel discussion was then opened for comments from the audience and responses from the panel.}, keywords = {ACI ADAM, alternative compensation systems, Auteursrecht, collective rights management, content flat-rate, Copyright, exceptions and limitations, Information Influx Conference, Infosoc Directive, Intellectuele eigendom, IViR, levies, private copy}, }