Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius, reseacher at IViR, discussed his research, in Dutch, during a 1 hour special of the Amsterdam radio show 'Radio Swammerdam'. The topic of the show is privacy on the internet: 'Heb je (n)iets te verbergen?' ['Nothing to hide?'].
Geert Lovink was a guest on the show too.
The show can be listened as a podcast here:
19 December 2015, 11:00 – 16:30
Chair: Bernt Hugenholtz
Agnietenkapel – Universiteit van Amsterdam
Oudezijds Voorburgwal 231, Amsterdam
Free entry, registration required (see below)
Over the last three decades the world has witnessed a dramatic growth in patents. For example, in the United States annual patent grants have risen from 66,000 in 1980 to well over 300,000 today. Similar trends, albeit a bit more modest, can be observed in Europe. And in countries with a shorter patent tradition, figures are telling the same, or an even more remarkable story. In China, for example, the number of grants has increased more than tenfold since 2000.
This led the former President of the European Patent Office, Alison Brimelow, to liken the (alleged) overheating of the patent system to climate change. According to her the situation is ‘a bit like global warming: it is changing; you don’t know where it is going; you don’t know what the problems are.’
In this symposium we will turn our attention to one of the possible causes: the inventive step analysis. Might it be the case that the main gatekeeper of the patent fortress has gradually become less vigilant — perhaps even to such a degree that the whole patent empire may be put in danger? Or should we look elsewhere to find the causes of ‘global patent warming’ (if it exists at all)?
Six speakers will share with us their (varying) views on the subject:
After the presentations all speakers will participate in a panel discussion.
To register for the symposium, please send an e-mail to ivir@ivir.nl
Programme
| 11:00-11:10 |
Welcome Bernt Hugenholtz |
| 11:10-11:40 |
The inventiveness requirement through history Lodewijk Pessers |
| 11:50-12:20 |
Take out inventive step and we will have warming: does the solution lie in procedure rather than substance? Rochelle Dreyfuss |
| 12:30-13:10 | Pause/lunch |
| 13:10-13:40 |
Some remarks on inventive activity and inventive step in Germany Theo Bodewig |
| 13:50-14:20 |
Software patents and (lack of) inventive step; biotech patents and (lack of) inventive step: Is inventive step really the problem here? Sven Bostyn |
| 14:30-15:00 |
The early years of the 'person skilled in the art' Helen Gubby |
| 15:10-15:40 |
Inventive step and plausibility Gertjan Juipers |
| 15:50-16:30 |
Panel discussion Lodewijk Pessers, Rochelle Dreyfuss, Theo Bodewig, Sven Bostyn, Helen Gubby, Gertjan Kuipers |
Op dinsdag 8 december 2015 sprak Nico van Eijk in de Eerste Kamer tijdens een deskundigenbijeenkomst over de wijziging van de Mediawet voor het toekomstbestendigmaken van de publieke mediadienst.
Frederik Borgesius, onderzoeker bij het IViR, heeft de Prix de thèse anglophone René Cassin 2015, uitgegeven door het Institut International des Droits de l'Homme, gewonnen voor zijn proefschrift getiteld 'Improving Privacy Protection in the Area of Behavourial Targeting'.
Van harte gefeliciteerd Frederik!
The Institute for Information Law is pleased to announce that a paper written by Lucie Guibault, Christian Handke and Joan-Josep Vallbé has been awarded with the LIBER Innovation Award. This award is given to the 3 most innovative and relevant papers submitted to the LIBER Conference, which will be held in London on the 24-26 of June 2015.
Is Europe falling behind in data mining? Copyright law's impact on data mining in academic research.
Abstract:
This paper discusses how different levels of copyright protection affect the text and data mining (TDM) performance of academic researchers in the main research areas.
Copyright protection is determined at the national level. The scope of rights and exceptions varies per country: in some countries, exceptions expressly allow TDM to take place, while in others such activities are restricted. In most countries, the law is unclear. Statutory copyright exceptions, where they exist, can be interpreted in different ways. The assessment on the lawfulness of TDM falls back on the judgment of the researcher. Depending on the knowledge or perception of the law, TDM may be deemed allowed, probably allowed, probably not allowed or restricted. This paper assesses the consequences of the different levels of copyright protection on TDM activities.
Our aim is to explain the comparative variation in research output about data mining. For this, we collected data from Thomson Reuter’s Web of Science. To identify the research output of interest, we extracted the number of all published research from authors residing in the 31 largest national economies that contained the expression “data mining” in the extended abstract, including 14 EU member states, for the years 1992 to 2014. To control for the total research output of the respective countries, our dependent variable is the quotient between this absolute academic TDM output and the total research output from these countries. Our unit of analysis is the country-year proportion of TDM research output.
Other control variables include the rule of law (as reported by the World Bank), dealing with the level of enforcement of copyright, and the size and wealth of countries.
To estimate the effect of copyright law on the share of TDM in total research output, we fit a multilevel linear regression model with varying intercept for country and year.
The data illustrate the rapid growth of TDM related articles in total research output across all countries. We find a highly significant effect of copyright law: the more restrictive copyright law in most European countries is associated with a significantly lower share of TDM output. Data mining makes up a higher share of total research output in countries with more permissive copyright laws. Especially some Asian countries overperform in terms of their TDM research output. What is more, the share of TDM in total research output grows more rapidly in the less restrictive countries.
8 April 2015
Room C1.17, OMHP
Welcome to the webpage of the inaugural International Media Law, Policy & Practice (IMLPP) conference. Run by students, this conference was organised as a closing event for the 2015 IMLPP course. IMLPP is an optional course on the specialised Informatierecht LL.M. programme, which is offered by the Institute for Information Law (IViR) at the Faculty of Law, University of Amsterdam. The course coordinator is Dr. Tarlach McGonagle (IViR).
The main aim of the conference is to provide IMLPP students with a platform to present the research that they have carried out during the course. A handful of external expert speakers will participate, but the mainstay of the conference will be presentations by the students themselves. The conference will also include a moot court competition involving IMLPP students.
Conference report by Rachel Wouda (conference rapporteur and research intern, IViR).
| Conference programme | |
|---|---|
| 09.15-09.30 |
Welcome Tarlach McGonagle (IViR) |
| 09.30-11.00 |
Panel I: Clear channels for whistleblowing in a changing media landscape Chair: Patrick Leerssen (IMLPP) Speakers: Thomas Bruning (Nederlandse Vereniging van Journalisten), Jasper Teulings (Greenpeace International), Martijn Lindeman (IMLPP) |
| 11.00-11.30 |
Coffee |
| 11.30-13.00 |
International Media Law Moot Court Judges: Willem F. Korthals Altes (Senior Judge, District Court of Amsterdam), Manon Oostveen (IViR) & Britt van Breda (Informatierecht) Applicants: Oskar Mulder & Karen Siemers (IMLPP) Respondents: Marieke Eskens & Anouk Visser (IMLPP) |
| 13.00-14.00 |
Lunch (Room A0.09) |
| 14.00-15.30 |
Panel II: Regulating old, new and future media Chair: Georgia Robertson (IMLPP) Speakers: Eva Lievens (Universities of Ghent and Leuven), Svetlana Yakovleva (IMLPP) & Sam van Velze (IMLPP) |
| 15.30-16.00 |
Coffee |
| 16.00-16.30 |
Presentation of other student projects Roel Maalderink, Susanna Nijsten & Thommy ten Veldhuijs (all IMLPP) |
| 16.30-16.45 |
Closing remarks |
|
Additional resources for International Media Law Moot Court: |
|---|
|
De Monroe Price Moot Court Competition: een pleidooi Mr. W.F. Korthals Altes Mediaforum, 2015-1, p. 20-21. |
|
Freedom of Expression, the Media and Journalists: Case-law of the European Court of Human Rights Dr. T. McGonagle & F.J. Cabrera Blázquez (eds.), in collaboration with D. Voorhoof IRIS Themes, nr. III, Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory 2013, 403 pp. |
|
Van 'public watchdog' naar 'public watchblog' : het EHRM en journalistieke weblogs M. Oosterveld & Mr. M.A.A. Oostveen Mediaforum, 2013-6, p. 146-153 |
|
#Fightingagainst#IslamicState#hatespeech#withwords B. van Breda, student, Informatierecht LL.M. programme (Paperextensie Informatierecht, January 2015). |
|
De problematiek van hate speech online R. Wouda, student, Informatierecht LL.M. programme (Paperextensie Informatierecht, January 2015). |
Also, check out the Twitter timeline about the conference!
Prof. Mireille van Eechoud is per 5 mei 2015 benoemd in de Commissie Auteursrecht. De Commissie Auteursrecht is een bij wet ingestelde commissie die de Minister van Justitie adviseert over auteursrechtaangelegenheden.
Zie hier de officiële bekendmaking in de Staatscourant.
Amsterdam, 26 April 2013.
What fresh perspectives can viewing copyright law through a Humanities’ looking glass bring to key notions of tomorrow’s copyright law? That was the central concern which ran throughout the research project at the heart of this conference.
In the construction and analysis of copyright norms, economic and technological concerns have long dominated the debate. Insights from such diverse disciplines as literary studies, musicology, film studies, philosophy of art and media studies on notions of authorship and originality have gone largely unnoticed.
This conference brought together a rich variety of academics and artists. Speakers and panelists included professor Barton Beebe (NYU Law School), professor Lionel Bently (U Cambridge), dr. Laura Biron (U Cambridge), professor Martha Buskirk (Montserrat College of Art), dr. Elena Cooper (U Cambridge), professor Mireille van Eechoud (U Amsterdam), dr. Stef van Gompel (U Amsterdam), professor Jostein Gripsrud (U Bergen), professor David Hesmondhalgh (U Leeds), professor Bernt Hugenholtz (U Amsterdam), professor Peter Jaszi (American University Washington), dr Nick Lambert (U of London), dr Erlend Lavik (U of Bergen), professor Derek Matravers (Open University) and Joseph Nechvatal.
With the audience they critically reflected on issues such as:
▪ The diverse ways in which relations between creative contributors are perceived in creative communities and how this reflects (or should reflect) in copyright law;
▪ Can central insights from analytic philosophy of art help shape norms about joint works of authorship?:
▪ What are the functions of authorship in copyright law and to what extent are existing legal conceptions sufficiently flexible to accommodate shifts in production practices?:
▪ What role aesthetics ought, and ought not, to play in copyright law;
| Programme: | |
|---|---|
| 9.30 | Registration, coffee/tea |
| 10.00-10.45 |
Welcome, by Chair Bernt Hugenholtz |
|
Voices near and far – Digital authorship and creativity debates in law, by Mireille van Eechoud (PL/PI University of Amsterdam) |
|
|
Humanities and copyright, by Jostein Gripsrud (PI University of Bergen) |
|
| 11.00-11.45 | Copyright Law & Aesthetics |
|
Judging originality – Copyright law’s peculiar notion of creative work, by Stef van Gompel |
|
|
The role of aesthetics in copyright law, by Erlend Lavik |
|
|
Joint authorship doctrine – Insights from philosophy of art, by Laura Biron |
|
| [refreshments break] | |
| 12.00-13.00 | Panel discussion with Barton Beebe, Martha Buskirk, Derek Matravers, Joseph Nechvatal |
| 13.00 | Lunch (on location) |
| 14.00-15.00 | Authorship in practice |
|
Disaggregating the authorship function as a response to discontinuities between legal and social conceptions of authorship, by Lionel Bently (PI University of Cambridge) |
|
|
Hierarchically ordered individuals: Collective production in theatre and popular music, by Jostein Gripsrud |
|
|
Authorship and Copyright: Reassessing the Challenge of the Digital, by Elena Cooper |
|
| [refreshments break] | |
| 15.30-16.30 | Panel discussion with David Hesmondhalgh, Nick Lambert & Peter Jaszi |
| Question round & Wrap up | |
| 17.00-18.00 | Drinks & tapas at Compagnietheater |
| 18.00-20.00 | Assembly (Creativity That Counts?) by Agency at Compagnietheater |
| Panelists: | |
|---|---|
| Barton Beebe | Professor of Law at New York University School of Law, USA. His research ranges from theoretical explorations of the problem of aesthetic progress to detailed empirical work on fair use opinions. More info |
| Martha Buskirk | Professor of art history and criticism at Montserrat College of Art, Beverly Massachutes, USA. More info. |
| Donna Cox | Professor at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA and Director of the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA). Much of her work concerns collaborative work in visualization. More info |
| David Hesmondhalgh | Professor of Media and Music Industries at the University of Leeds, Head of Institute for Communication Studies and Director of Media Industries Research Centre. More info |
| Peter Jaszi | Professor of Law and Faculty Director of the Glushko-Samuelson Intellectual Property Clinic, American University Washington College of Law. More info. |
| Nick Lambert | Lecturer in Digital Art and Culture at the Birkbeck University of London. More info. |
| Derek Matravers | Professor of Philosophy at the Open University and Media Fellow, Arts Faculty. His interests are in aesthetics and the philosophy of art. More info. |
| Joseph Nechvatal | Artist whose work includes the innovative use of computer viruses to produce digital paintings. More info |
| Members of the project team | |
|---|---|
| University of Amsterdam, IVIR | |
| Mireille van Eechoud | Professor of Information Law at the Faculty of Law, project leader of the OOR project and PI of the Amsterdam part of the project. More info. |
| Stef van Gompel | Post-doctoral researcher at the Faculty of Law, where he focuses on the copyright work as creative expression. More info. |
| Bernt Hugenholtz | Professor of Intellectual Property Law at the Faculty of Law, director of IVIR and advisor on the Amsterdam project. More info. |
| University of Bergen, Infomedia | |
| Jostein Gripsrud | Professor at the Department of Information Science and Media Studies and PI for the Bergen part of the OOR project. More info. |
| Erlend Lavik | Lavik's previous work is on US film history, contemporary television drama and film criticism. As post-doc on the HERA project he explores the concepts of originality and authorship, both from a humanities and a legal perspective. More info. |
| University of Cambridge, CIPIL | |
| Lionel Bently | Herchel Smith Professor of Intellectual Property Law at the University of Cambridge; Director of the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law and Professorial Fellow, Emmanuel College. He is PI for the Cambridge part of the OOR project, which focuses on questions of multiple authorship. More info. |
| Laura Biron | Research fellow at Queens' College, Cambridge. As post-doctoral researcher on the OOR project she is looking at some questions about multiple authorship from the perspective of aesthetics and metaphysics. More info. |
| Elena Cooper | Orton Fellow in Intellectual Property Law at Trinity Hall, Cambridge and postdoctoral researcher for the OOR project, working on multiple authorship. More info. |
Assembly (Creativity that Counts?)
by Agency
Speculating on the question “how can collectives become included within art practices?”, Agency calls forth the controversy Thing 001621 (Dead Son Drawn by Psychic Artist).
Thing 001621 (Dead Son Drawn by Psychic Artist) concerns a legal court case around the collaboration of a drawing by a psychic artist and will convene an assembly in order to bear witness. Collectively we will revisit the discussion during this controversy and a group of various concerned guests will be invited to respond: Johan Gustavsson (artist), Peter Jaszi (copyright scholar), Coral Ryder (spirit portrait artist), Steve Rushton (writer, editor and curator), etc.
Agency is an art initiative that was founded in 1992 by Kobe Matthys and has its office in Brussels. It mainly constitutes a growing 'list of things' that resist the split between culture and nature. This list is mostly derived from legal cases and controversies involving intellectual property. Agency calls things forth from its list via varying assemblies inside exhibitions, performances, publications, etc. Every assembly poses a different speculative question. The series of questions explores in a topological way the operative consequences of the apparatus of intellectual property for an ecology of art practices.
Most recently Agency presented assemblies at Musée de la danse, Rennes (2013), Les Laboratoires d'Aubervilliers, Aubervilliers (2012), Objectif-Exhibitions, Antwerpen (2011), The Showroom, London (2011), Contemporary Art Museum, St. Louis (2010) and in the group exhibitions “Resonance” at Goethe Institute New York, “Mind the System, Find the Gap” at Z33 Hasselt (2012), "Animism" at Extra City and M HKA Antwerp, at Kunsthalle Bern, at Generali Foundation Vienna, at Haus der Kulturen der Welt Berlin (2009 -12), “Grand Domestic Revolution” at Casco Utrecht (2011-2012), "Speech Matters" Venice (2011), "Watchmen, Liars, Dreamers" at Le Plateau, Paris (2010), etc.
OOR project partners:
Institute for Information Law
University of Amsterdam
Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law
University of Cambridge
Department of Information Science and Media Studies
University of Bergen
The OOR project is financially supported by the HERA Joint Research Programme (http://www.heranet.info) which is co- funded by AHRC, AKA, DASTI, ETF, FNR, FWF, HAZU, IRCHSS, MHEST, NWO, RANNIS, RCN, VR and The European Community FP7 2007-2013, under the Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities programme.
