Nieuws

Diverse medewerkers van het IViR hebben de oproep aan de nieuwe minister voor Veiligheid en Justitie ondertekend om een meer samenhangende visie te ontwikkelen met betrekking tot privacy.

In de media is volop aandacht geweest voor deze oproep:

• Oproep aan minister: Waarborg privacy, Trouw, 3 april 2015.
• 'Van der Steur, zet wetsvoorstellen rond privacy in de ijskast', NRC, 2 april 2015.
• Oproep aan minister: waarborg privacy, De Telegraaf, 3 april 2015.
• 'Minister moet in discussie over privacy', De Volkskrant, 3 april 2015.
• Minister gaat graag in gesprek over privacy, BNR Nieuwsradio, 3 april 2015.
• Interview met Nico van Eijk door BNR ('Spitsuur', 18:40 uur).
• "Ook bij Van der Steur bungelt privacy onderaan", MR-online, 7 april 2015.

 

Diverse medewerkers van het IViR hebben de oproep aan de nieuwe minister voor Veiligheid en Justitie ondertekend om een meer samenhangende visie te ontwikkelen met betrekking tot privacy.

In de media is volop aandacht geweest voor deze oproep:

• Oproep aan minister: Waarborg privacy, Trouw, 3 april 2015.
• 'Van der Steur, zet wetsvoorstellen rond privacy in de ijskast', NRC, 2 april 2015.
• Oproep aan minister: waarborg privacy, De Telegraaf, 3 april 2015.
• 'Minister moet in discussie over privacy', De Volkskrant, 3 april 2015.
• Minister gaat graag in gesprek over privacy, BNR Nieuwsradio, 3 april 2015.
• Interview met Nico van Eijk door BNR ('Spitsuur', 18:40 uur).
• "Ook bij Van der Steur bungelt privacy onderaan", MR-online, 7 april 2015.

 

The Institute for Information Law (IViR) of the University of Amsterdam (UvA) is offering two annual summer courses in Amsterdam from July 4-8, 2016: the International Copyright Law Summer Course and the Privacy Law and Policy Summer Course. Additional information – including a list of faculty, a detailed course programme, and a link for online registration is available on the IVIR website and in the course flyer.

Civil Society Scholarships supported by the Open Society Foundations
IViR, in collaboration with the Open Society Foundations, invites civil society advocates working in digital rights advocacy to apply to the courses. Scholarships covering the Summer Course fee, as well as an adequate contribution toward travel and accommodation costs are available for eight civil society participants that would be able to make use of the knowledge they would gain in these courses in their daily work. Successful scholarship applicants from non OECD countries will also receive a per diem of 30 EUR for the duration of the summer course.

Application
If you wish to apply, please complete the online application form available at the course website and indicate that you are applying for the “OSF Civil Society Scholarship”. Please enter a statement (approximately 500 words) in the text box explaining your motivation for attending the summer course you are applying for and how the course would benefit the work of your organization. Please note that succesful applicants will be asked to complete a short report about their experience at the end of the course.

Deadline

Please apply as soon as possible, but no later than April 29, 2016, if you want to be considered for the Civil Society Scholarship. Acceptance notifications will be sent during the course of May 2016.

Stef van Gompel Faculty organizer Summer Course on International Copyright Law

Kristina Irion Faculty organizer Summer Course on Privacy Law and Policy

 

Christina Angelopoulos has been awarded second place in the 2014 Essay Competition for Young Researchers of the International Association for the Advancement of Teaching and Research in Intellectual Property (ATRIP) for her essay entitled “Beyond the Safe Harbours: Harmonising Substantive Intermediary Third Party Liability for Copyright Infringement in Europe”.

The yearly essay competition examines papers on any topic related to intellectual property law in English or French by authors no older than 33 years of age.
The essay was based on Christina’s article by the same title, published in 2013 in the Intellectual Property Quarterly, 2013-3, pp. 253-274.

Abstract of the article:
With the adoption and subsequent national implementation of the E-Commerce Directive’s safe harbour regime, the architecture set up for intermediary liability in Europe has become two-tiered: at a first stage, it is necessary to examine whether a given intermediary attracts, in its pursuit of a certain activity, civil liability according to the standards in place in national legislation and only then, in the second instance, must the inapplicability of any immunity be established. As a result, although it provides a veneer of approximation by immunising intermediaries under certain circumscribed conditions, the Directive does not harmonise the underlying substantive liability norms which decide whether the safe harbours will be necessary or redundant. Instead, these are determined by national tort law, leaving ample room for national divergences between the regimes of the various Member States. This paper examines the applicable tort rules currently in place in three selected jurisdictions of the UK, France and Germany, picking out their commonalities and divergences and revealing the confusion that governs the topic across European borders. The intention is to examine the structures in place that could allow for the eventual European harmonisation of substantive intermediary liability beyond the safe harbours.

Christina Angelopoulos has been awarded second place in the 2014 Essay Competition for Young Researchers of the International Association for the Advancement of Teaching and Research in Intellectual Property (ATRIP) for her essay entitled “Beyond the Safe Harbours: Harmonising Substantive Intermediary Third Party Liability for Copyright Infringement in Europe”.

The yearly essay competition examines papers on any topic related to intellectual property law in English or French by authors no older than 33 years of age.
The essay was based on Christina’s article by the same title, published in 2013 in the Intellectual Property Quarterly, 2013-3, pp. 253-274.

Abstract of the article:
With the adoption and subsequent national implementation of the E-Commerce Directive’s safe harbour regime, the architecture set up for intermediary liability in Europe has become two-tiered: at a first stage, it is necessary to examine whether a given intermediary attracts, in its pursuit of a certain activity, civil liability according to the standards in place in national legislation and only then, in the second instance, must the inapplicability of any immunity be established. As a result, although it provides a veneer of approximation by immunising intermediaries under certain circumscribed conditions, the Directive does not harmonise the underlying substantive liability norms which decide whether the safe harbours will be necessary or redundant. Instead, these are determined by national tort law, leaving ample room for national divergences between the regimes of the various Member States. This paper examines the applicable tort rules currently in place in three selected jurisdictions of the UK, France and Germany, picking out their commonalities and divergences and revealing the confusion that governs the topic across European borders. The intention is to examine the structures in place that could allow for the eventual European harmonisation of substantive intermediary liability beyond the safe harbours.

On Wednesday 18 February, Joost Poort will defend his thesis Empirical Evidence for Policy in Telecommunication, Copyright & Broadcasting.

Place: Agnietenkapel, Oudezijds Voorburgwal 229, Amsterdam.
Time: 14.00.

Abstract:
This dissertation contains nine articles with an empirical focus in copyright, telecommunication, and broadcasting. These articles address different research questions and employ a variety of methodological approaches. They all share an economic foundation and the aim to contribute to evidence based policymaking in the field of information law.
Topics covered range from the welfare effects of illegal downloading, to those of public television; from the effectiveness of blocking access to The Pirate Bay to stop consumers from illegal downloading, to the effect of adequate legal online services on illegal downloading; from fixed price regulation for e-books, to text and video relay services to enable the hearing impaired to use telephony services; from the valuation of commercial radio licenses, to setting renewal fees for telecommunication spectrum based on an auction.
Using these nine articles as case studies, the role and impact of economic evidence for policymaking in the field of information law is investigated. It is concluded that this role is positive rather than normative: legal or social norms maintain the upper hand as guiding principles for policy, more than the economic goal of welfare maximization. However, this does not by any means render economic analysis useless. Increasingly, politicians, judges and stakeholders require economic analysis and economic evidence to make informed decisions about new policy measures, to make optimal decisions within existing legal boundaries and to fathom the consequences of proposed legal interventions. Without empirical evidence they may simply assume the effects of a policy measure as an article of faith.

Samenvatting:
Dit proefschrift bevat negen artikelen met een empirische inslag op het gebied van het auteursrecht, telecommunicatie, radio en televisie. Deze artikelen adresseren uiteenlopende onderzoeksvragen met verschillende onderzoeksmethodes. Ze delen een economische grondslag en het oogmerk een bijdrage te leveren aan op feiten gebaseerd – ‘evidence based’ –beleid in het informatierecht.
De onderwerpen lopen uiteen van de welvaartseffecten van illegaal downloaden, tot die van de publieke omroep; van de effectiviteit van het afsluiten van de toegang tot The Pirate Bay om consumenten ervan te weerhouden illegaal te downloaden, tot het effect van adequate legale online diensten op dat downloaden; van een vaste prijs voor e-boeken, tot tekst- en videobemiddelingsdiensten om mensen met een auditieve beperking in staat te stellen te telefoneren; van de waardering van commerciële radiovergunningen, tot het vaststellen van verlengingsvergoedingen voor telecommunicatiespectrum op basis van een veilig.
Door deze negen artikelen te gebruiken als cast-studies, is de rol en invloed van economisch bewijsmateriaal voor de beleidsontwikkeling in het informatierecht onderzocht. Geconcludeerd wordt dat deze rol veeleer positief dan normatief is: meer dan het economische doel van welvaartsmaximalisatie, voeren wettelijke en maatschappelijke normen de boventoon als beginselen voor beleid. Maar dit maakt economische analyse allerminst overbodig. Steeds vaker hebben politici, rechters en belanghebbenden economische analyse en economisch bewijsmateriaal nodig om geïnformeerde beslissingen te nemen over nieuwe beleidsmaatregelen, om optimale beslissingen te nemen binnen bestaande juridische kaders en om de gevolgen van voorgestelde maatregelen te doorgronden. Zonder empirisch bewijsmateriaal zouden zij de effecten van een beleidsmaatregel simpelweg als geloofsartikel kunnen veronderstellen.

On Wednesday 18 February, Joost Poort will defend his thesis Empirical Evidence for Policy in Telecommunication, Copyright & Broadcasting.

Place: Agnietenkapel, Oudezijds Voorburgwal 229, Amsterdam.
Time: 14.00.

Abstract:
This dissertation contains nine articles with an empirical focus in copyright, telecommunication, and broadcasting. These articles address different research questions and employ a variety of methodological approaches. They all share an economic foundation and the aim to contribute to evidence based policymaking in the field of information law.
Topics covered range from the welfare effects of illegal downloading, to those of public television; from the effectiveness of blocking access to The Pirate Bay to stop consumers from illegal downloading, to the effect of adequate legal online services on illegal downloading; from fixed price regulation for e-books, to text and video relay services to enable the hearing impaired to use telephony services; from the valuation of commercial radio licenses, to setting renewal fees for telecommunication spectrum based on an auction.
Using these nine articles as case studies, the role and impact of economic evidence for policymaking in the field of information law is investigated. It is concluded that this role is positive rather than normative: legal or social norms maintain the upper hand as guiding principles for policy, more than the economic goal of welfare maximization. However, this does not by any means render economic analysis useless. Increasingly, politicians, judges and stakeholders require economic analysis and economic evidence to make informed decisions about new policy measures, to make optimal decisions within existing legal boundaries and to fathom the consequences of proposed legal interventions. Without empirical evidence they may simply assume the effects of a policy measure as an article of faith.

Samenvatting:
Dit proefschrift bevat negen artikelen met een empirische inslag op het gebied van het auteursrecht, telecommunicatie, radio en televisie. Deze artikelen adresseren uiteenlopende onderzoeksvragen met verschillende onderzoeksmethodes. Ze delen een economische grondslag en het oogmerk een bijdrage te leveren aan op feiten gebaseerd – ‘evidence based’ –beleid in het informatierecht.
De onderwerpen lopen uiteen van de welvaartseffecten van illegaal downloaden, tot die van de publieke omroep; van de effectiviteit van het afsluiten van de toegang tot The Pirate Bay om consumenten ervan te weerhouden illegaal te downloaden, tot het effect van adequate legale online diensten op dat downloaden; van een vaste prijs voor e-boeken, tot tekst- en videobemiddelingsdiensten om mensen met een auditieve beperking in staat te stellen te telefoneren; van de waardering van commerciële radiovergunningen, tot het vaststellen van verlengingsvergoedingen voor telecommunicatiespectrum op basis van een veilig.
Door deze negen artikelen te gebruiken als cast-studies, is de rol en invloed van economisch bewijsmateriaal voor de beleidsontwikkeling in het informatierecht onderzocht. Geconcludeerd wordt dat deze rol veeleer positief dan normatief is: meer dan het economische doel van welvaartsmaximalisatie, voeren wettelijke en maatschappelijke normen de boventoon als beginselen voor beleid. Maar dit maakt economische analyse allerminst overbodig. Steeds vaker hebben politici, rechters en belanghebbenden economische analyse en economisch bewijsmateriaal nodig om geïnformeerde beslissingen te nemen over nieuwe beleidsmaatregelen, om optimale beslissingen te nemen binnen bestaande juridische kaders en om de gevolgen van voorgestelde maatregelen te doorgronden. Zonder empirisch bewijsmateriaal zouden zij de effecten van een beleidsmaatregel simpelweg als geloofsartikel kunnen veronderstellen.

During the the fourth edition of the annual prize for the best publication of the year, organised by the Law Faculty of the University of Amsterdam, the third place was awarded to Joost Poort and João Pedro Quintais for their article "The Levy Runs Dry. A Legal and Economic Analysis of EU Private Copying Levies."

Purpose of the prize
The prize has been introduced on the initiative of the dean and the Science Committee in order to strengthen and support the research culture within the Faculty of Law and to allow young researchers  (PhD students, or candidates who completed their PhD within the last five years at the FdR) to give publicity to their work. The prize entails an amount of 1,000 Euros for the winner, 500 Euros for the first runner up, and 250 Euros for the third place. The prizes will be added to the research budget of the research group and which the winner can use for research activities such as congress visits, etc.

The jury about the article:
Excellent paper with direct relevance for all scholars: should we pay (and/or get paid) for copies of our publications. Beautiful example of successful combination of  a legal and eco­nomic analysis of private copying levies in the EU.

The article:
The Levy Runs Dry: A Legal and Economic Analysis of EU Private Copying Levies, Drs. J.P. Poort & Mr. J.P. Quintais, JIPITEC,  2013-3, p. 205-224

Abstract:
This article provides a legal and economic analysis of private copying levies in the EU, against the background of the Copyright Directive (2001/29), a number of recent rulings by the European Court of Justice and the recommendations presented by mediator Vitorino earlier this year. It concludes that notwithstanding these rulings and recommendations, there remains a lack of concordance on the relevance of contractual stipulations and digital rights management technologies (DRM) for setting levies, and the concept of harm. While Mr. Vitorino and AG Sharpston (in the Opinion preceding VG Wort v Kyocera) use different lines of reasoning to argue that levies raised on authorized copies would lead to double payment, the Court of Justice’s decision in VG Wort v Kyocera seems to conclude that such copies should nonetheless be levied. If levies are to provide fair compensation for harm resulting from acts of private copying, economic analysis suggests one should distinguish between various kinds of private copies and take account of the extent to which the value said copies have for consumers can be priced into the purchase. Given the availability of DRM (including technical protection measures), the possibility of such indirect appropriation leads to the conclusion that the harm from most kinds of private copies is de minimis and gives no cause for levies. The user value of copies from unauthorised sources (e.g. from torrent networks or cyber lockers), on the other hand, cannot be appropriated indirectly by rightholders. It is however an open question in references for preliminary rulings pending at the Court of Justice whether these copies are included in the scope of the private copying exception or limitation and can thus be be levied for. If they are not, as currently happens in several EU Member States, legal and economic analysis leads to the conclusion that the scope of private copying acts giving rise to harm susceptible of justifying levies is gradually diminishing.

 

During the the fourth edition of the annual prize for the best publication of the year, organised by the Law Faculty of the University of Amsterdam, the third place was awarded to Joost Poort and João Pedro Quintais for their article "The Levy Runs Dry. A Legal and Economic Analysis of EU Private Copying Levies."

Purpose of the prize
The prize has been introduced on the initiative of the dean and the Science Committee in order to strengthen and support the research culture within the Faculty of Law and to allow young researchers  (PhD students, or candidates who completed their PhD within the last five years at the FdR) to give publicity to their work. The prize entails an amount of 1,000 Euros for the winner, 500 Euros for the first runner up, and 250 Euros for the third place. The prizes will be added to the research budget of the research group and which the winner can use for research activities such as congress visits, etc.

The jury about the article:
Excellent paper with direct relevance for all scholars: should we pay (and/or get paid) for copies of our publications. Beautiful example of successful combination of  a legal and eco­nomic analysis of private copying levies in the EU.

The article:
The Levy Runs Dry: A Legal and Economic Analysis of EU Private Copying Levies, Drs. J.P. Poort & Mr. J.P. Quintais, JIPITEC,  2013-3, p. 205-224

Abstract:
This article provides a legal and economic analysis of private copying levies in the EU, against the background of the Copyright Directive (2001/29), a number of recent rulings by the European Court of Justice and the recommendations presented by mediator Vitorino earlier this year. It concludes that notwithstanding these rulings and recommendations, there remains a lack of concordance on the relevance of contractual stipulations and digital rights management technologies (DRM) for setting levies, and the concept of harm. While Mr. Vitorino and AG Sharpston (in the Opinion preceding VG Wort v Kyocera) use different lines of reasoning to argue that levies raised on authorized copies would lead to double payment, the Court of Justice’s decision in VG Wort v Kyocera seems to conclude that such copies should nonetheless be levied. If levies are to provide fair compensation for harm resulting from acts of private copying, economic analysis suggests one should distinguish between various kinds of private copies and take account of the extent to which the value said copies have for consumers can be priced into the purchase. Given the availability of DRM (including technical protection measures), the possibility of such indirect appropriation leads to the conclusion that the harm from most kinds of private copies is de minimis and gives no cause for levies. The user value of copies from unauthorised sources (e.g. from torrent networks or cyber lockers), on the other hand, cannot be appropriated indirectly by rightholders. It is however an open question in references for preliminary rulings pending at the Court of Justice whether these copies are included in the scope of the private copying exception or limitation and can thus be be levied for. If they are not, as currently happens in several EU Member States, legal and economic analysis leads to the conclusion that the scope of private copying acts giving rise to harm susceptible of justifying levies is gradually diminishing.

 

Per december 2014 is Prof. dr. Nico van Eijk toegetreden tot de kenniskring van de Commissie van Toezicht betreffende de Inlichtingen- en Veiligheidsdiensten (CTIVD). Deze kenniskring dient de Commissie te adviseren over technologische, juridische en maatschappelijke ontwikkelingen die van belang zijn voor het toezicht op de inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten. Leden van de kenniskring kunnen tevens worden ingezet teneinde tegenspraak te leveren in lopende onderzoeken.
De CTIVD heeft de betrokken ministers alsmede de Tweede Kamer op 23 december jl. hierover geïnformeerd. De brief is te raadplegen via de onderstaande link.

Brief aan de minister-president.