| Staff |
 |
| Stef
van Gompel |
| PhD-candidate |
| |
| Institute
for Information Law (IViR)
Visiting
address
Korte Spinhuissteeg 3
1012 CG Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Post
address
Kloveniersburgwal 48
1012 CX Amsterdam
The Netherlands
|
| kamer
B2.13 |
| tel:
+31 20 - 525 36 43 |
| fax:
+31 20 - 525 30 33 |
  |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Curriculum Vitae
|
| Stef van Gompel studied
Law at the University of Amsterdam, where he obtained
his law degree (LL.M.) cum laude in 2005. He
specialised in Intellectual Property Law and Media and
Information Law. He wrote his master's thesis on the
regulation of collective management societies in Europe.
In 2004, he started as an intern at IViR, where he
participated in a variety of research projects in
different areas of Information Law.
Before studying Law, he
studied Music Management at the Fontys Business College
of Higher Education in Tilburg, where he graduated in
1999. During an internship at the collective management
society, SENA, he conducted research on the legal
framework and the distribution regulations of collective
management societies concerning the right to equitable
remuneration for performing artists in seven EU Member
States.
He is currently writing
his Ph.D. thesis on the history of, rationales for, and
possible future of, the prohibition of copyright
formalities.
|
Publications
|
(with
P.B. Hugenholtz)
The Orphan Works Problem: The Copyright Conundrum of
Digitizing Large-Scale Audiovisual Archives, and How to
Solve it, Popular Communication - The
International Journal of Media and Culture, 2010-1,
p. 61-71.
This article examines
the problem of 'orphan works' against the background of
various projects for mass-digitization of audiovisual
content. Orphan works are works for which the copyright
owners cannot be identified or located. The fact that a
particular work is 'orphaned' makes it impossible to
clear the rights and to legally reutilize the work. This
article describes and evaluates six different possible
regulatory solutions to the orphan works problem,
including extended collective licensing and compulsory
licensing. The article concludes that if one wants to
make the vast European audiovisual cultural heritage
available for future usage, regulatory intervention is
indispensable.
03.03.2010
|
(with
M.M.M. van Eechoud,
P.B. Hugenholtz,
L. Guibault and
N. Helberger)
Harmonizing European Copyright Law: The Challenges of
Better Lawmaking, Information Law Series 19, Alphen
aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International 2009.
Nobody likes today’s
copyright law. Widespread unauthorized use of copyright material proliferates
with impunity, while citizens and users protest that intrusive copyright
and related rights law stifle cultural expression. Equipment manufacturers
and intermediaries complain about yet more ’security’ features
that complicate their products and services and encumber marketing, while
content owners desperately want enforcement to work. And of course it is
crucial that whatever regulatory instruments come into play must not age
prematurely in Internet time.
The European Union faces the daunting challenge of articulating coherent
copyright policies that satisfy these contradictory multiple demands. Yet
the legal framework must conform to the European Union’s remit of fostering
economic growth in a common market, while respecting the national traditions
of its still growing family of Member States. Clearly, an extraordinary balancing
act is called for if justice is to be done to all of the private and public
interests affected.
So how has the European acquis communautaire scored on these issues so far?
In this groundbreaking study the Institute for Information Law of the University
of Amsterdam brings its extensive academic expertise to bear on this question.
The authors scrutinize the present law as laid down in the seven copyright
and related rights directives, against the background of the relevant international
standards of the Berne Convention, the TRIPs agreement, and the WIPO Internet
Treaties. They map out in detail the degree to which certain areas of copyright
have been harmonized as they expose the gaps and inconsistencies in the acquis
and the urgent unresolved issues that persist. They identify the EU’s
ambitions in relation to its present and future competences (following the
Lisbon Reform) to regulate copyright, and to its Better Regulation agenda.
Following a comprehensive analysis of almost two decades of regulatory intervention,
they move on to the salient current trends that point toward a more coherent
and balanced European copyright law.
13.10.2009
|
(with N.
Helberger, N. Dufft & P.B.
Hugenholtz)
Never
Forever: Why Extending the Term of Protection for Sound
Recordings is a Bad Idea, European Intellectual Property Review, 2008-5, p.
174-181.
This article critically
examines the arguments put forward in favour of a term
extension of related rights of phonogram producers. The
authors conclude that there are no convincing reasons to
extend the existing term of protection. The article also
explains why the popular argument that a term extension
would improve the situation of performers is probably a
fallacy.
04.06.2008
|
|
Unlocking
the Potential of Pre-Existing Content: How to Address the
Issue of Orphan Works in Europe?, IIC
International Review of Intellectual property and
Competition Law, Vol. 38 (2007), No. 6, p. 669-702.
04.06.2008
|
|
Audiovisual
Archives and the Inability to Clear Rights in Orphan Works,
IRIS plus (Supplement to IRIS - Legal Observations of
the European Audiovisual Observatory), 2007-4.
There is also a German
and French
translation of this article.
This article deals with
the question of 'orphan works', i.e., works whose right
owners cannot be identified or located. The fact that a
particular work is orphaned makes it impossible to clear
the rights and to legally reutilise the work. To unlock
the potential of the many pre-existing works stored in
audiovisual archives, it is essential that legal
solutions will be devised to adequately address this
problem. This article examines and evaluates a number of
solutions that could possibly be introduced at the
European or national level.
20.04.2007
|
|
(with L. Guibault) Collective
Management in the European Union, also published in:
Daniel Gervais (ed.), Collective Management of
Copyright and Related Rights, The Hague, Kluwer Law
International, 2006, p. 117-152.
20.03.2007
|
|
(with P.B.
Hugenholtz, M.M.M. van Eechoud
et al.)
The
Recasting of Copyright & Related Rights for the
Knowledge Economy, report to the European Commission,
DG Internal Market, November 2006, 308 p.
See also the executive
summary.
Study carried out by
the Institute for Information Law for the European
Commission (DG Internal Market). Chapters 1 and 2
describe and examine the existing 'acquis communautaire'
in the field of copyright and related (neighbouring)
rights, with special focus on inconsistencies and
unclarities. Chapters 3-6 deal with distinct issues that
were identified a priori by the European Commission as
meriting special attention: possible extension of the
term of protection of phonograms (Chapter 3), possible
alignment of the term of protection of co-written
musical works (Chapter 4), the problems connected to
multiple copyright ownership, including the issue of
'orphan works' (Chapter 5), and copyright awareness
among consumers (Chapter 6). Chapter 7 provides an
overall assessment of the benefits and drawbacks of the
fifteen years of harmonisation of copyright and related
rights in the EU and dwells on regulatory alternatives.
10.01.2007
|
| (with N.
Helberger, N. Dufft, K. Kerényi, B. Krings, R.
Lambers, C. Orwat and U. Riehm)
‘Digital
Rights Management and Consumer Acceptability: A
Multi-Disciplinary Discussion of Consumer Concerns and
Expectations’, State-of-the-Art Report,
INDICARE, December 2004.
03.02.2006
|
|
|
Updated
03.03.2010
|
|
|
|
