Knocking on Heaven’s Door: User preferences on digital cultural distribution external link

Internet Policy Review, vol. 8, num: 2, 2019

Abstract

This paper explores the social, demographic and attitudinal basis of consumer support of a Copyright Compensation System (CCS), which, for a small monthly fee would legalise currently infringing online social practices such as private copying from illegal sources and online sharing of copyrighted works. We do this by first identifying how different online and offline, legal and illegal, free and paying content acquisition channels are used in the media market using a cluster-based classification of respondents. Second, we assess the effect of cultural consumption on the support for a shift from the status quo towards alternative, CCS-based forms of digital cultural content distribution. Finally, we link these two analyses to identify the factors that drive the dynamics of change in digital cultural consumption habits. Our study shows significant support to a CCS compared to the status quo by both occasional and frequent buyers of cultural goods, despite the widespread adoption of legal free and paying online services by consumers. The nature of these preferences are also explored with the inclusion of consumer preference intensities regarding certain CCS attributes. Our results have relevant policy implications, for they outline CCS as a reform option. In particular, they point evidence-based copyright reform away from its current direction in the EU of stronger enforcement measures, additional exclusive rights, and increased liability and duties of care for online platforms. This work shows that CCS may be an apt policy tool to hinder piracy and potentially increase right holder revenues, while respecting fundamental rights and promoting technological development.

Auteursrecht, frontpage

Bibtex

Article{Vallbé2019, title = {Knocking on Heaven’s Door: User preferences on digital cultural distribution}, author = {Vallbé, J. and Bodó, B. and Quintais, J. and Handke, C.W.}, url = {https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/knocking-heavens-door-user-preferences-digital-cultural-distribution}, year = {0620}, date = {2019-06-20}, journal = {Internet Policy Review}, volume = {8}, number = {2}, pages = {}, abstract = {This paper explores the social, demographic and attitudinal basis of consumer support of a Copyright Compensation System (CCS), which, for a small monthly fee would legalise currently infringing online social practices such as private copying from illegal sources and online sharing of copyrighted works. We do this by first identifying how different online and offline, legal and illegal, free and paying content acquisition channels are used in the media market using a cluster-based classification of respondents. Second, we assess the effect of cultural consumption on the support for a shift from the status quo towards alternative, CCS-based forms of digital cultural content distribution. Finally, we link these two analyses to identify the factors that drive the dynamics of change in digital cultural consumption habits. Our study shows significant support to a CCS compared to the status quo by both occasional and frequent buyers of cultural goods, despite the widespread adoption of legal free and paying online services by consumers. The nature of these preferences are also explored with the inclusion of consumer preference intensities regarding certain CCS attributes. Our results have relevant policy implications, for they outline CCS as a reform option. In particular, they point evidence-based copyright reform away from its current direction in the EU of stronger enforcement measures, additional exclusive rights, and increased liability and duties of care for online platforms. This work shows that CCS may be an apt policy tool to hinder piracy and potentially increase right holder revenues, while respecting fundamental rights and promoting technological development.}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, frontpage}, }

The New Copyright Directive: A tour d’horizon – Part II (of press publishers, upload filters and the real value gap) external link

Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2019

Auteursrecht, frontpage

Bibtex

Article{Quintais2019d, title = {The New Copyright Directive: A tour d’horizon – Part II (of press publishers, upload filters and the real value gap)}, author = {Quintais, J.}, url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2019/06/17/the-new-copyright-directive-a-tour-dhorizon-part-ii-of-press-publishers-upload-filters-and-the-real-value-gap/}, year = {0618}, date = {2019-06-18}, journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, frontpage}, }

The New Copyright Directive: A tour d’horizon – Part I external link

Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2019

Auteursrecht, frontpage

Bibtex

Article{Quintais2019c, title = {The New Copyright Directive: A tour d’horizon – Part I}, author = {Quintais, J.}, url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2019/06/07/the-new-copyright-directive-a-tour-dhorizon-part-i/}, year = {0607}, date = {2019-06-07}, journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, frontpage}, }

Annotatie bij Hoge Raad 6 oktober 2017 (Imation / Thuiskopie en Staat) external link

Nederlandse Jurisprudentie, vol. 2019, num: 21/22, pp: 3068-3070, 2019

Annotaties, Auteursrecht, frontpage, thuiskopie, vergoedingen

Bibtex

Article{Hugenholtz2019d, title = {Annotatie bij Hoge Raad 6 oktober 2017 (Imation / Thuiskopie en Staat)}, author = {Hugenholtz, P.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2019_182.pdf}, year = {0604}, date = {2019-06-04}, journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie}, volume = {2019}, number = {21/22}, pages = {3068-3070}, keywords = {Annotaties, Auteursrecht, frontpage, thuiskopie, vergoedingen}, }

The science of piracy, the piracy of science. Who are the science pirates and where do they come from: Part 2 external link

Kluwer Copyright Blog, vol. 2019, 2019

Auteursrecht, piraterij, wetenschap

Bibtex

Article{Bodó2019c, title = {The science of piracy, the piracy of science. Who are the science pirates and where do they come from: Part 2}, author = {Bodó, B.}, url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2019/03/21/the-science-of-piracy-the-piracy-of-science-who-are-the-science-pirates-and-where-do-they-come-from-part-2/}, year = {0321}, date = {2019-03-21}, journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog}, volume = {2019}, pages = {}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, piraterij, wetenschap}, }

Annotatie bij Hof Amsterdam 27 november 2018 (Nomenta / Nikki) external link

AMI, vol. 2019, num: 2, pp: 72, 2019

Annotaties, Auteursrecht, frontpage, inbreuk, namaak

Bibtex

Article{Kabel2019, title = {Annotatie bij Hof Amsterdam 27 november 2018 (Nomenta / Nikki)}, author = {Kabel, J.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_AMI_2019_2.pdf}, year = {0524}, date = {2019-05-24}, journal = {AMI}, volume = {2019}, number = {2}, pages = {72}, keywords = {Annotaties, Auteursrecht, frontpage, inbreuk, namaak}, }

The WIPO Broadcasting Treaty. A Conceptual Conundrum external link

European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 2019, num: 4, pp: 199-202, 2019

Abstract

The Broadcasting Treaty that has been discussed at WIPO for over twenty years, seems to be reaching a dead end. The Treaty that aims at extending the legal protection of broadcasters to the digital realm, suffers from three serious flaws: one economic, one conceptual and one pragmatic. Due to the decreasing technical costs of broadcasting, the economic case for granting special rights to broadcasters is weakening. Moreover, properly defining the act of ‘broadcasting’ that would give rise to legal protection, is highly problematic. Finally, no real and urgent need for a new right seems to exist, in light of current legal regimes that broadcasters already rely on under national law. Perhaps the time has come to abandon work on the WIPO Broadcasting Treaty, and move on.

Auteursrecht, frontpage, WIPO, WIPO broadcasting treaty

Bibtex

Article{Hugenholtz2019c, title = {The WIPO Broadcasting Treaty. A Conceptual Conundrum}, author = {Hugenholtz, P.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/EIPR_2019_4.pdf}, year = {0404}, date = {2019-04-04}, journal = {European Intellectual Property Review}, volume = {2019}, number = {4}, pages = {199-202}, abstract = {The Broadcasting Treaty that has been discussed at WIPO for over twenty years, seems to be reaching a dead end. The Treaty that aims at extending the legal protection of broadcasters to the digital realm, suffers from three serious flaws: one economic, one conceptual and one pragmatic. Due to the decreasing technical costs of broadcasting, the economic case for granting special rights to broadcasters is weakening. Moreover, properly defining the act of ‘broadcasting’ that would give rise to legal protection, is highly problematic. Finally, no real and urgent need for a new right seems to exist, in light of current legal regimes that broadcasters already rely on under national law. Perhaps the time has come to abandon work on the WIPO Broadcasting Treaty, and move on.}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, frontpage, WIPO, WIPO broadcasting treaty}, }

Heks’nkaas or the "Fifty Shades of Taste" Explained by the CJEU through EU Copyright Law external link

European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 2019, num: 3, pp: 173-180, 2019

Abstract

If the CJEU were to grant a prize to the 2018 most "original" copyright dispute, Levola Hengola v Smilde Foods (C-310/17) (the Heks’nkaas case) would undoubtedly stand among the nominees. The main reason why this case hit the spotlight is most probably because it touched upon the fundamentals of EU copyright law, namely its protectable subject-matter. Intriguingly, the complexities of copyright were unveiled by the following question: "Does Union law preclude the taste of food—as the author’s own intellectual creation—from being protected by copyright?" Notwithstanding the court’s dissenting answer, which clarified the scope of EU copyright law, it is of paramount importance to also discuss and unravel the ruling’s preceding procedure, including the Opinion by the Advocate General, as it shed light on the many existing controversies within copyright law.

Auteursrecht, Europees recht, frontpage, kaas

Bibtex

Article{Coche2019b, title = {Heks’nkaas or the "Fifty Shades of Taste" Explained by the CJEU through EU Copyright Law}, author = {Coche, E.}, url = {http://uba-sfx.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/uva-linker?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/sfxit.com:azlist&sfx.ignore_date_threshold=1&rft.object_id=110978977740233&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off;}, year = {0312}, date = {2019-03-12}, journal = {European Intellectual Property Review}, volume = {2019}, number = {3}, pages = {173-180}, abstract = {If the CJEU were to grant a prize to the 2018 most "original" copyright dispute, Levola Hengola v Smilde Foods (C-310/17) (the Heks’nkaas case) would undoubtedly stand among the nominees. The main reason why this case hit the spotlight is most probably because it touched upon the fundamentals of EU copyright law, namely its protectable subject-matter. Intriguingly, the complexities of copyright were unveiled by the following question: "Does Union law preclude the taste of food—as the author’s own intellectual creation—from being protected by copyright?" Notwithstanding the court’s dissenting answer, which clarified the scope of EU copyright law, it is of paramount importance to also discuss and unravel the ruling’s preceding procedure, including the Opinion by the Advocate General, as it shed light on the many existing controversies within copyright law.}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, Europees recht, frontpage, kaas}, }

The science of piracy, the piracy of science. Who are the science pirates and where do they come from: Part 1 external link

Kluwer Copyright Blog, vol. 2019, 2019

Auteursrecht, frontpage, piraterij

Bibtex

Article{Bodó2019b, title = {The science of piracy, the piracy of science. Who are the science pirates and where do they come from: Part 1}, author = {Bodó, B.}, url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2019/03/06/the-science-of-piracy-the-piracy-of-science-who-are-the-science-pirates-and-where-do-they-come-from-part-1/}, year = {0307}, date = {2019-03-07}, journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog}, volume = {2019}, pages = {}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, frontpage, piraterij}, }