Copyright and Generative AI: Opinion external link

Dusollier, S., Kretschmer, M., Margoni, T., Mezei, P., Quintais, J. & Rognstad, O.A.
JIPITEC, vol. 16, iss. : 1, 2025

Abstract

The ECS considers that the current development of generative artificial intelligence (AI), under the regulatory framework set up by the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (CDSM) of 2019 and the AI Act of 2024 (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689), leaves legal uncertainties and several open questions. The following issues require, in the view of the ECS, urgent consideration by the European Union.

Copyright

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Copyright and Generative AI: Opinion}, author = {Dusollier, S. and Kretschmer, M. and Margoni, T. and Mezei, P. and Quintais, J. and Rognstad, O.A.}, url = {https://www.jipitec.eu/jipitec/article/view/424}, year = {2025}, date = {2025-03-26}, journal = {JIPITEC}, volume = {16}, issue = {1}, pages = {}, abstract = {The ECS considers that the current development of generative artificial intelligence (AI), under the regulatory framework set up by the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (CDSM) of 2019 and the AI Act of 2024 (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689), leaves legal uncertainties and several open questions. The following issues require, in the view of the ECS, urgent consideration by the European Union.}, keywords = {Copyright}, }

Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights external link

Kluwer Law International, 2025, ISBN: 9789403546469

Abstract

Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights, currently in its fourth edition, provides an exhaustive analysis of the various operational collective management organization (CMO) models, their rights and obligations vis-à-vis authors, other rightholders and users, the acquisition of the legal authority to license and (most importantly) the rights to license digital uses of protected material, and the creation (or improvement) of information systems to deal with the increasingly complex tasks of rights management and licensing. Over the past three decades, CMOs have become the nerve centres of copyright licensing in virtually every country. Their expertise and knowledge of copyright law and management have proven essential to making copyright work in the digital age. However, they have also been at the centre of debates about their effectiveness, transparency and governance.

collective management, Copyright, related rights

Bibtex

Book{nokey, title = {Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights}, author = {Gervais, D.J. and Quintais, J.}, url = {https://law-store.wolterskluwer.com/s/product/collective-management-of-copyright-and-related-rights-fourth-edition/01tPg000006iiv2IAA?srsltid=AfmBOooWYO56ciMtsjww-gnbbrR9KElXzaIVDAqPrhAEYLi2knnuAAZD}, year = {2025}, date = {2025-03-17}, abstract = {Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights, currently in its fourth edition, provides an exhaustive analysis of the various operational collective management organization (CMO) models, their rights and obligations vis-à-vis authors, other rightholders and users, the acquisition of the legal authority to license and (most importantly) the rights to license digital uses of protected material, and the creation (or improvement) of information systems to deal with the increasingly complex tasks of rights management and licensing. Over the past three decades, CMOs have become the nerve centres of copyright licensing in virtually every country. Their expertise and knowledge of copyright law and management have proven essential to making copyright work in the digital age. However, they have also been at the centre of debates about their effectiveness, transparency and governance.}, keywords = {collective management, Copyright, related rights}, }

What Is a ‘Research Organisation’ and Why It Matters: From Text and Data Mining to AI Research

GRUR International, 2025

Copyright, text and data mining

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {What Is a ‘Research Organisation’ and Why It Matters: From Text and Data Mining to AI Research}, author = {Quintais, J.}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikaf030}, year = {2025}, date = {2025-03-19}, journal = {GRUR International}, keywords = {Copyright, text and data mining}, }

Towards a European Research Freedom Act: A Reform Agenda for Research Exceptions in the EU Copyright Acquis external link

2025

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.

Copyright, open science, research exceptions, right to research, technological protection measures, text and data mining, three-step test

Bibtex

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}, }

European Copyright Society Opinion on Copyright and Generative AI external link

Dusollier, S., Kretschmer, M., Margoni, T., Mezei, P., Quintais, J. & Rognstad, O.A.
Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2025

Copyright, Generative AI

Bibtex

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}, }

Copyright and Generative AI: Opinion of the European Copyright Society external link

Dusollier, S., Kretschmer, M., Margoni, T., Mezei, P., Quintais, J. & Rognstad, O.A.
2025

Copyright

Bibtex

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}, }

Copyright Liability and Generative AI: What’s the Way Forward? external link

Abstract

This paper examines the intricate relationship between copyright liability and generative AI, focusing on legal challenges at the output stage of AI content generation. As AI technology advances, questions regarding copyright infringement and attribution of liability have become increasingly pressing and complex, requiring a revision of existing rules and theories. The paper navigates the European copyright framework and offers insights from Swedish copyright law on unharmonized aspects of liability, reviewing key case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union and Swedish courts. Considering the liability of AI users first, the paper emphasizes that while copyright exceptions are relevant in the discussion, national liability rules nuance a liability risk assessment above and beyond the potential applicability of a copyright exception. The analysis centers in particular on the reversed burden of proof introduced by the Swedish Supreme Court in NJA 1994 s 74 (Smultronmålet / Wild strawberries case) and the parameters of permissible transformative or derivative use (adaptations of all sorts), especially the level of similarity allowed between a pre-existing and transformative work, examining in particular NJA 2017 s 75 (Svenska syndabockar / Swedish scapegoats). Moreover, the paper engages in a discussion over the harmonization of transformative use and the exclusive right of adaptation through the right of reproduction in Article 2 InfoSoc Directive. Secondly, the paper examines copyright liability of AI system providers when their technology is used to generate infringing content. While secondary liability remains unharmonized in the EU, thus requiring consideration of national conceptions of such liability and available defences, expansive interpretations of primary liability by the Court of Justice in cases like C-160/15 GS Media, C-527/15 Filmspeler, or C-610/15 Ziggo require a consideration of the question whether AI providers indeed could also be held primarily liable for what users do. In this respect, the analysis considers both the right of communication to the public as well as the right of reproduction. The paper concludes with a forward-looking perspective, arguing in light of available litigation tactics that clarity must emerge through litigation rather than premature legislative reform. It will provide an opportunity for courts to systematize existing rules and liability theories and provide essential guidance for balancing copyright protection with innovation.

Artificial intelligence, Copyright, liability

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Copyright Liability and Generative AI: What’s the Way Forward?}, author = {Szkalej, K.}, url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5117603}, year = {2025}, date = {2025-01-10}, abstract = {This paper examines the intricate relationship between copyright liability and generative AI, focusing on legal challenges at the output stage of AI content generation. As AI technology advances, questions regarding copyright infringement and attribution of liability have become increasingly pressing and complex, requiring a revision of existing rules and theories. The paper navigates the European copyright framework and offers insights from Swedish copyright law on unharmonized aspects of liability, reviewing key case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union and Swedish courts. Considering the liability of AI users first, the paper emphasizes that while copyright exceptions are relevant in the discussion, national liability rules nuance a liability risk assessment above and beyond the potential applicability of a copyright exception. The analysis centers in particular on the reversed burden of proof introduced by the Swedish Supreme Court in NJA 1994 s 74 (Smultronmålet / Wild strawberries case) and the parameters of permissible transformative or derivative use (adaptations of all sorts), especially the level of similarity allowed between a pre-existing and transformative work, examining in particular NJA 2017 s 75 (Svenska syndabockar / Swedish scapegoats). Moreover, the paper engages in a discussion over the harmonization of transformative use and the exclusive right of adaptation through the right of reproduction in Article 2 InfoSoc Directive. Secondly, the paper examines copyright liability of AI system providers when their technology is used to generate infringing content. While secondary liability remains unharmonized in the EU, thus requiring consideration of national conceptions of such liability and available defences, expansive interpretations of primary liability by the Court of Justice in cases like C-160/15 GS Media, C-527/15 Filmspeler, or C-610/15 Ziggo require a consideration of the question whether AI providers indeed could also be held primarily liable for what users do. In this respect, the analysis considers both the right of communication to the public as well as the right of reproduction. The paper concludes with a forward-looking perspective, arguing in light of available litigation tactics that clarity must emerge through litigation rather than premature legislative reform. It will provide an opportunity for courts to systematize existing rules and liability theories and provide essential guidance for balancing copyright protection with innovation.}, keywords = {Artificial intelligence, Copyright, liability}, }

Generative AI, Copyright and the AI Act external link

Computer Law & Security Review, vol. 56, num: 106107, 2025

Abstract

This paper provides a critical analysis of the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act's implications for the European Union (EU) copyright acquis, aiming to clarify the complex relationship between AI regulation and copyright law while identifying areas of legal ambiguity and gaps that may influence future policymaking. The discussion begins with an overview of fundamental copyright concerns related to generative AI, focusing on issues that arise during the input, model, and output stages, and how these concerns intersect with the text and data mining (TDM) exceptions under the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive (CDSMD). The paper then explores the AI Act's structure and key definitions relevant to copyright law. The core analysis addresses the AI Act's impact on copyright, including the role of TDM in AI model training, the copyright obligations imposed by the Act, requirements for respecting copyright law—particularly TDM opt-outs—and the extraterritorial implications of these provisions. It also examines transparency obligations, compliance mechanisms, and the enforcement framework. The paper further critiques the current regime's inadequacies, particularly concerning the fair remuneration of creators, and evaluates potential improvements such as collective licensing and bargaining. It also assesses legislative reform proposals, such as statutory licensing and AI output levies, and concludes with reflections on future directions for integrating AI governance with copyright protection.

AI Act, Content moderation, Copyright, DSA, Generative AI, text and data mining, Transparency

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Generative AI, Copyright and the AI Act}, author = {Quintais, J.}, url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4912701}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2025.106107}, year = {2025}, date = {2025-01-30}, journal = {Computer Law & Security Review}, volume = {56}, number = {106107}, pages = {}, abstract = {This paper provides a critical analysis of the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act\'s implications for the European Union (EU) copyright acquis, aiming to clarify the complex relationship between AI regulation and copyright law while identifying areas of legal ambiguity and gaps that may influence future policymaking. The discussion begins with an overview of fundamental copyright concerns related to generative AI, focusing on issues that arise during the input, model, and output stages, and how these concerns intersect with the text and data mining (TDM) exceptions under the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive (CDSMD). The paper then explores the AI Act\'s structure and key definitions relevant to copyright law. The core analysis addresses the AI Act\'s impact on copyright, including the role of TDM in AI model training, the copyright obligations imposed by the Act, requirements for respecting copyright law—particularly TDM opt-outs—and the extraterritorial implications of these provisions. It also examines transparency obligations, compliance mechanisms, and the enforcement framework. The paper further critiques the current regime\'s inadequacies, particularly concerning the fair remuneration of creators, and evaluates potential improvements such as collective licensing and bargaining. It also assesses legislative reform proposals, such as statutory licensing and AI output levies, and concludes with reflections on future directions for integrating AI governance with copyright protection.}, keywords = {AI Act, Content moderation, Copyright, DSA, Generative AI, text and data mining, Transparency}, }

DPG Media et al vs. HowardsHome – A national ruling on DSM’s press publishers’ rights and TDM exceptions external link

Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2025

Copyright

Bibtex

Online publication{nokey, title = {DPG Media et al vs. HowardsHome – A national ruling on DSM’s press publishers’ rights and TDM exceptions}, author = {Valk, E.G. and Toepoel, I.}, url = {https://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2025/01/16/dpg-media-et-al-vs-howardshome-a-national-ruling-on-dsms-press-publishers-rights-and-tdm-exceptions/}, year = {2025}, date = {2025-01-16}, journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog}, keywords = {Copyright}, }