Publications

Top Keywords

ECtHR engages in dangerous "triple pirouette" to find criminal prosecution for media coverage of PKK statements did not violate Article 10 external link

Fahy, R. & Voorhoof, D.
Strasbourg Observers, 2019

Art. 10 EVRM, frontpage, Mediarecht, Vrijheid van meningsuiting

Bibtex

Article{Fahy2019c, title = {ECtHR engages in dangerous "triple pirouette" to find criminal prosecution for media coverage of PKK statements did not violate Article 10}, author = {Fahy, R. and Voorhoof, D.}, url = {https://strasbourgobservers.com/2019/10/14/ecthr-engages-in-dangerous-triple-pirouette-to-find-criminal-prosecution-for-media-coverage-of-pkk-statements-did-not-violate-article-10/#more-4435}, year = {1014}, date = {2019-10-14}, journal = {Strasbourg Observers}, keywords = {Art. 10 EVRM, frontpage, Mediarecht, Vrijheid van meningsuiting}, }

Fixing Copyright Reform: A Better Solution to Online Infringement external link

Angelopoulos, C. & Quintais, J.
JIPITEC, vol. 10, num: 2, 2019

Abstract

The newly-adopted Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (DSMD) will fundamentally reshape EU copyright law. Among its most controversial offerings is Article 17, the so-called “value gap” provision, aimed at solving the alleged mismatch between the value that online content-sharing platforms extract from creative content and the revenue returned to the copyright-holders. This article argues that the new rules are misguided, misconceiving the real problems afflicting modern copyright. These are the proliferation of copyright infringement online in general – not only through content-sharing platforms – and the current piecemeal harmonisation of the rules on the liability of the intermediaries whose services are used to access and disseminate copyright-protected content. The current outdated and fragmented EU legal framework is ill-equipped to address these problems. Instead, it creates legal uncertainty for users and intermediaries in the online environment, while also failing to compensate creators fairly. The new rules will not change this. This article examines the pre-DSMD acquis and proposes a better solution than Article 17, consisting of two key changes: (a) the introduction of a harmonised EU framework for accessory liability for third party copyright infringement; and (b) the adoption of an alternative compensation system for right-holders covering non-commercial direct copyright use by the end-users of certain online platforms.

Auteursrecht, frontpage, inbreuk

Bibtex

Article{Angelopoulos2019, title = {Fixing Copyright Reform: A Better Solution to Online Infringement}, author = {Angelopoulos, C. and Quintais, J.}, url = {https://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-10-2-2019/4913}, year = {1011}, date = {2019-10-11}, journal = {JIPITEC}, volume = {10}, number = {2}, pages = {}, abstract = {The newly-adopted Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (DSMD) will fundamentally reshape EU copyright law. Among its most controversial offerings is Article 17, the so-called “value gap” provision, aimed at solving the alleged mismatch between the value that online content-sharing platforms extract from creative content and the revenue returned to the copyright-holders. This article argues that the new rules are misguided, misconceiving the real problems afflicting modern copyright. These are the proliferation of copyright infringement online in general – not only through content-sharing platforms – and the current piecemeal harmonisation of the rules on the liability of the intermediaries whose services are used to access and disseminate copyright-protected content. The current outdated and fragmented EU legal framework is ill-equipped to address these problems. Instead, it creates legal uncertainty for users and intermediaries in the online environment, while also failing to compensate creators fairly. The new rules will not change this. This article examines the pre-DSMD acquis and proposes a better solution than Article 17, consisting of two key changes: (a) the introduction of a harmonised EU framework for accessory liability for third party copyright infringement; and (b) the adoption of an alternative compensation system for right-holders covering non-commercial direct copyright use by the end-users of certain online platforms.}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, frontpage, inbreuk}, }

Platform ad archives: promises and pitfalls external link

Leerssen, P., Ausloos, J., Zarouali, B., Helberger, N. & Vreese, C.H. de
Internet Policy Review, vol. 8, num: 4, 2019

Abstract

This paper discusses the new phenomenon of platform ad archives. Over the past year, leading social media platforms have installed publicly accessible databases documenting their political advertisements, and several countries have moved to regulate them. If designed and implemented properly, ad archives can correct for structural informational asymmetries in the online advertising industry, and thereby improve accountability through litigation and through publicity. However, present implementations leave much to be desired. We discuss key criticisms, suggest several improvements and identify areas for future research and debate.

Advertising, frontpage, Micro-targeting, Platforms, Politics, Technologie en recht, Transparency

Bibtex

Article{Leerssen2019b, title = {Platform ad archives: promises and pitfalls}, author = {Leerssen, P. and Ausloos, J. and Zarouali, B. and Helberger, N. and Vreese, C.H. de}, url = {https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/platform-ad-archives-promises-and-pitfalls}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.4.1421}, year = {1010}, date = {2019-10-10}, journal = {Internet Policy Review}, volume = {8}, number = {4}, pages = {}, abstract = {This paper discusses the new phenomenon of platform ad archives. Over the past year, leading social media platforms have installed publicly accessible databases documenting their political advertisements, and several countries have moved to regulate them. If designed and implemented properly, ad archives can correct for structural informational asymmetries in the online advertising industry, and thereby improve accountability through litigation and through publicity. However, present implementations leave much to be desired. We discuss key criticisms, suggest several improvements and identify areas for future research and debate.}, keywords = {Advertising, frontpage, Micro-targeting, Platforms, Politics, Technologie en recht, Transparency}, }

Cut Out By The Middle Man: The Free Speech Implications Of Social Network Blocking and Banning In The EU external link

Leerssen, P.
JIPITEC, vol. 6, num: 2, 2015

Abstract

This article examines social network users’ legal defences against content removal under the EU and ECHR frameworks, and their implications for the effective exercise of free speech online. A review of the Terms of Use and content moderation policies of two major social network services, Facebook and Twitter, shows that end users are unlikely to have a contractual defence against content removal. Under the EU and ECHR frameworks, they may demand the observance of free speech principles in state-issued blocking orders and their implementation by intermediaries, but cannot invoke this ‘fair balance’ test against the voluntary removal decisions by the social network service. Drawing on practical examples, this article explores the threat to free speech created by this lack of accountability: Firstly, a shift from legislative regulation and formal injunctions to public-private collaborations allows state authorities to influence these ostensibly voluntary policies, thereby circumventing constitutional safeguards. Secondly, even absent state interference, the commercial incentives of social media cannot be guaranteed to coincide with democratic ideals. In light of the blurring of public and private functions in the regulation of social media expression, this article calls for the increased accountability of the social media services towards end users regarding the observance of free speech principles.

Banning, Private Censorship, Removal Orders, Social media, Vrijheid van meningsuiting

Bibtex

Article{Leerssen2019, title = {Cut Out By The Middle Man: The Free Speech Implications Of Social Network Blocking and Banning In The EU}, author = {Leerssen, P.}, url = {https://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-6-2-2015/4271/leerssen.pdf}, year = {1010}, date = {2015-10-10}, journal = {JIPITEC}, volume = {6}, number = {2}, pages = {}, abstract = {This article examines social network users’ legal defences against content removal under the EU and ECHR frameworks, and their implications for the effective exercise of free speech online. A review of the Terms of Use and content moderation policies of two major social network services, Facebook and Twitter, shows that end users are unlikely to have a contractual defence against content removal. Under the EU and ECHR frameworks, they may demand the observance of free speech principles in state-issued blocking orders and their implementation by intermediaries, but cannot invoke this ‘fair balance’ test against the voluntary removal decisions by the social network service. Drawing on practical examples, this article explores the threat to free speech created by this lack of accountability: Firstly, a shift from legislative regulation and formal injunctions to public-private collaborations allows state authorities to influence these ostensibly voluntary policies, thereby circumventing constitutional safeguards. Secondly, even absent state interference, the commercial incentives of social media cannot be guaranteed to coincide with democratic ideals. In light of the blurring of public and private functions in the regulation of social media expression, this article calls for the increased accountability of the social media services towards end users regarding the observance of free speech principles.}, keywords = {Banning, Private Censorship, Removal Orders, Social media, Vrijheid van meningsuiting}, }

Annotatie bij Hoge Raad 2 juli 2019 (nr. 349) external link

Dommering, E.
Nederlandse Jurisprudentie, num: 40, pp: 5677, 2019

Abstract

Het hof kon oordelen dat met de door verdachte opgeplakte poster werd opgeruid tot 'gewelddadig optreden tegen het openbaar gezag' en dat veroordeling niet in strijd is met vrijheid van meningsuiting.

Annotaties, frontpage, Vrijheid van meningsuiting

Bibtex

Article{Dommering2019f, title = {Annotatie bij Hoge Raad 2 juli 2019 (nr. 349)}, author = {Dommering, E.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2019_349.pdf}, year = {1008}, date = {2019-10-08}, journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie}, number = {40}, abstract = {Het hof kon oordelen dat met de door verdachte opgeplakte poster werd opgeruid tot \'gewelddadig optreden tegen het openbaar gezag\' en dat veroordeling niet in strijd is met vrijheid van meningsuiting.}, keywords = {Annotaties, frontpage, Vrijheid van meningsuiting}, }

Annotatie bij Hoge Raad 2 juli 2019 (nr. 348) external link

Dommering, E.
Nederlandse Jurisprudentie, num: 40, pp: 5658-5659, 2019

Abstract

Ophangen van posters waarin bouwbedrijf in verband wordt gebracht met deportaties door gesloten gezinsvoorziening te bouwen in Detentiecentrum Zeist. Oordeel dat veroordeling ter zake smaadschrift geen strijd oplevert met vrijheid van meningsuiting ontoereikend gemotiveerd.

Annotaties, frontpage, Vrijheid van meningsuiting

Bibtex

Article{Dommering2019e, title = {Annotatie bij Hoge Raad 2 juli 2019 (nr. 348)}, author = {Dommering, E.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2019_348.pdf}, year = {1008}, date = {2019-10-08}, journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie}, number = {40}, abstract = {Ophangen van posters waarin bouwbedrijf in verband wordt gebracht met deportaties door gesloten gezinsvoorziening te bouwen in Detentiecentrum Zeist. Oordeel dat veroordeling ter zake smaadschrift geen strijd oplevert met vrijheid van meningsuiting ontoereikend gemotiveerd.}, keywords = {Annotaties, frontpage, Vrijheid van meningsuiting}, }

How to license Article 17? Exploring the Implementation Options for the New EU Rules on Content-Sharing Platforms external link

Husovec, M. & Quintais, J.
2019

Abstract

How can the EU Member States license Article 17 of the new Directive on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market? This is the central question that this paper addresses. To answer it, we first analyse the nature of the right included in Article 17. We argue that the nature of the right has a number of serious consequences for its licensing. First, it determines whether the right is mandated by public international law, and hence what licensing modalities are allowed under the 1994 WTO TRIPS Agreement and 1996 WIPO treaties. Second, it clarifies what other conditions European Union law itself imposes on the newly established right and its implementation into national law. These restraints shape the margin of discretion of EU Member States. Third, it may imply changes to existing licensing practices, including the need for collective rights management organisations to obtain new mandates. Fourth, it influences how Member States can incorporate users’ rights into the legal framework. We argue that Article 17 is a special or sui generis right. We identify how this right fits the existing international and EU law, and explain why the Member States have a broad margin of discretion when implementing the corresponding licensing regimes. Perhaps most importantly, and counter-intuitively, we show that the legal arguments against Article 17 licensing via modalities of statutory licensing and mandatory collective management schemes are weaker than one might initially think.

Article 17, Copyright, DMS Directive, frontpage, Licensing, ontent sharing service providers, Platforms

Bibtex

Article{Husovec2019, title = {How to license Article 17? Exploring the Implementation Options for the New EU Rules on Content-Sharing Platforms}, author = {Husovec, M. and Quintais, J.}, url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3463011}, year = {1003}, date = {2019-10-03}, abstract = {How can the EU Member States license Article 17 of the new Directive on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market? This is the central question that this paper addresses. To answer it, we first analyse the nature of the right included in Article 17. We argue that the nature of the right has a number of serious consequences for its licensing. First, it determines whether the right is mandated by public international law, and hence what licensing modalities are allowed under the 1994 WTO TRIPS Agreement and 1996 WIPO treaties. Second, it clarifies what other conditions European Union law itself imposes on the newly established right and its implementation into national law. These restraints shape the margin of discretion of EU Member States. Third, it may imply changes to existing licensing practices, including the need for collective rights management organisations to obtain new mandates. Fourth, it influences how Member States can incorporate users’ rights into the legal framework. We argue that Article 17 is a special or sui generis right. We identify how this right fits the existing international and EU law, and explain why the Member States have a broad margin of discretion when implementing the corresponding licensing regimes. Perhaps most importantly, and counter-intuitively, we show that the legal arguments against Article 17 licensing via modalities of statutory licensing and mandatory collective management schemes are weaker than one might initially think.}, keywords = {Article 17, Copyright, DMS Directive, frontpage, Licensing, ontent sharing service providers, Platforms}, }

Know you algorithm: what media organizations need to explain to their users about news personalization external link

Drunen, M. van, Helberger, N. & Bastian, M.
International Data Privacy Law, vol. 2019, 2019

Abstract

Key Points: - If the right to an explanation is expected to effectively safeguard users’ rights, it must be interpreted in a manner that takes the contextual risks algorithms pose to those rights into account. - This article provides a framework of transparency instruments in the context of the news personalization algorithms employed by both traditional media organizations and social media companies. - Explaining the impact on a user’s news diet and the role of editorial values in the algorithm is especially important in this context. - Conversely, explanations of individual decisions and counterfactual explanations face specific practical and normative barriers that limit their utility.

algoritmes, frontpage, Journalistiek, medialaw, personalisatie

Bibtex

Article{Drunen2019, title = {Know you algorithm: what media organizations need to explain to their users about news personalization}, author = {Drunen, M. van and Helberger, N. and Bastian, M.}, url = {https://academic.oup.com/idpl/advance-article/doi/10.1093/idpl/ipz011/5544759}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/idpl/ipz011}, year = {1001}, date = {2019-10-01}, journal = {International Data Privacy Law}, volume = {2019}, pages = {}, abstract = {Key Points: - If the right to an explanation is expected to effectively safeguard users’ rights, it must be interpreted in a manner that takes the contextual risks algorithms pose to those rights into account. - This article provides a framework of transparency instruments in the context of the news personalization algorithms employed by both traditional media organizations and social media companies. - Explaining the impact on a user’s news diet and the role of editorial values in the algorithm is especially important in this context. - Conversely, explanations of individual decisions and counterfactual explanations face specific practical and normative barriers that limit their utility.}, keywords = {algoritmes, frontpage, Journalistiek, medialaw, personalisatie}, }

The independence of media regulatory authorities in Europe external link

Irion, K., Delinavelli, G., Coutinho, M.F., Fahy, R., Jusić, T., Klimkiewicz, B., Llorens, C., Rozgonyi, K., Svensson, S., Kersevan Smokvina, T. & Til, G. van
2019

Europe, frontpage, Mediarecht, onafhankelijkheid, toezichthouders

Bibtex

Report{Irion2019b, title = {The independence of media regulatory authorities in Europe}, author = {Irion, K. and Delinavelli, G. and Coutinho, M.F. and Fahy, R. and Jusić, T. and Klimkiewicz, B. and Llorens, C. and Rozgonyi, K. and Svensson, S. and Kersevan Smokvina, T. and Til, G. van}, url = {https://rm.coe.int/the-independence-of-media-regulatory-authorities-in-europe/168097e504}, year = {1001}, date = {2019-10-01}, keywords = {Europe, frontpage, Mediarecht, onafhankelijkheid, toezichthouders}, }

Polderpiraten voor anker external link

Poort, J., Ende, M. van der & Yagafarova, A.
TPEdigitaal, vol. 13, num: 2, pp: 97-111, 2019

Abstract

Dit artikel bespreekt hoe de verwerving en consumptie van muziek, films, series, games en boeken zich tussen 2012 en 2017 in Nederland heeft ontwikkeld. Voor al deze soorten materiaal is de omzet in die periode gestegen, behalve voor boeken. De groep die weleens materiaal downloadt of streamt uit illegale bronnen is kleiner geworden voor muziek en games, gelijk gebleven voor films en series en licht gestegen voor boeken. Piraten consumeren echter veel vaker betaalde content dan niet-piraten. De vrees voor piraterij zou de ontwikkeling van e-boekabonnementen daarom niet in de weg moeten staan.

Auteursrecht, boeken, film, frontpage, games, muziek, nederland, piraterij

Bibtex

Article{Poort2019d, title = {Polderpiraten voor anker}, author = {Poort, J. and Ende, M. van der and Yagafarova, A.}, url = {http://www.tpedigitaal.nl/artikel/polderpiraten-voor-anker}, year = {1001}, date = {2019-10-01}, journal = {TPEdigitaal}, volume = {13}, number = {2}, pages = {97-111}, abstract = {Dit artikel bespreekt hoe de verwerving en consumptie van muziek, films, series, games en boeken zich tussen 2012 en 2017 in Nederland heeft ontwikkeld. Voor al deze soorten materiaal is de omzet in die periode gestegen, behalve voor boeken. De groep die weleens materiaal downloadt of streamt uit illegale bronnen is kleiner geworden voor muziek en games, gelijk gebleven voor films en series en licht gestegen voor boeken. Piraten consumeren echter veel vaker betaalde content dan niet-piraten. De vrees voor piraterij zou de ontwikkeling van e-boekabonnementen daarom niet in de weg moeten staan.}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, boeken, film, frontpage, games, muziek, nederland, piraterij}, }