TDM: Poland challenges the rule of EU copyright law external link

Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2024

Copyright, EU, Poland, text and data mining

Bibtex

Online publication{nokey, title = {TDM: Poland challenges the rule of EU copyright law}, author = {Keller, P.}, url = {https://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2024/02/20/tdm-poland-challenges-the-rule-of-eu-copyright-law/}, year = {2024}, date = {2024-02-20}, journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog}, keywords = {Copyright, EU, Poland, text and data mining}, }

Rechtsbeschermingsmogelijkheden van het stemgeluid onder Nederlands portretrecht in de context van audio-deepfakes download

Ars Aequi, vol. 72, iss. : 9, pp: 627-634,

Abstract

Recente ontwikkelingen van AI-technologie maken het mogelijk de menselijke stem geheel waarheidsgetrouw na te bootsen. Potentiële inbreuk op ieders privacyrechten en de IE-rechten van makers is hiermee een nieuwe realiteit. Dit artikel bespreekt de mogelijkheden om ter bescherming van het stemgeluid aansluiting te vinden bij het portretrecht, op basis van de wet, relevante jurisprudentie en literatuur.

Copyright, portretrecht

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Rechtsbeschermingsmogelijkheden van het stemgeluid onder Nederlands portretrecht in de context van audio-deepfakes}, author = {Valk, E.G.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publications/rechtsbeschermingsmogelijkheden-van-het-stemgeluid-onder-nederlands-portretrecht-in-de-context-van-audio-deepfakes/aa20230627/}, year = {}, date = {DATE ERROR: pub_date = }, journal = {Ars Aequi}, volume = {72}, issue = {9}, pages = {627-634}, abstract = {Recente ontwikkelingen van AI-technologie maken het mogelijk de menselijke stem geheel waarheidsgetrouw na te bootsen. Potentiële inbreuk op ieders privacyrechten en de IE-rechten van makers is hiermee een nieuwe realiteit. Dit artikel bespreekt de mogelijkheden om ter bescherming van het stemgeluid aansluiting te vinden bij het portretrecht, op basis van de wet, relevante jurisprudentie en literatuur.}, keywords = {Copyright, portretrecht}, }

From the DMCA to the DSA: A Transatlantic Dialogue on Online Platform Regulation and Copyright external link

Verfassungs, 2024

Copyright, DMCA, DSA, Online platforms

Bibtex

Online publication{nokey, title = {From the DMCA to the DSA: A Transatlantic Dialogue on Online Platform Regulation and Copyright}, author = {Quintais, J.}, url = {https://verfassungsblog.de/from-the-dmca-to-the-dsa/?s=09}, year = {2024}, date = {2024-02-19}, journal = {Verfassungs}, keywords = {Copyright, DMCA, DSA, Online platforms}, }

Territoriality and the Quest for a Unitary Copyright Title external link

IIC, 2024

Abstract

After 30 years of harmonization at EU level, copyright and related rights remain decidedly territorial in scope. This is despite the continuous quest for an internal market and the profound impact on cross-border creation, dissemination and use of cultural content. This contribution recounts the outcome of research done on territoriality in the context of the ReCreating Europe project. It discusses why national territorial rights persist, what type of legal mechanisms the EU legislature employs to address the adverse effects of territoriality, and sketches a number of models for a unitary title based on Art. 118 TFEU which could be explored going forward.

Art. 118 TFEU, Copyright, EU, territoriality, unitary title

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Territoriality and the Quest for a Unitary Copyright Title}, author = {van Eechoud, M.}, url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40319-023-01412-w}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01412-w}, year = {2024}, date = {2024-02-01}, journal = {IIC}, abstract = {After 30 years of harmonization at EU level, copyright and related rights remain decidedly territorial in scope. This is despite the continuous quest for an internal market and the profound impact on cross-border creation, dissemination and use of cultural content. This contribution recounts the outcome of research done on territoriality in the context of the ReCreating Europe project. It discusses why national territorial rights persist, what type of legal mechanisms the EU legislature employs to address the adverse effects of territoriality, and sketches a number of models for a unitary title based on Art. 118 TFEU which could be explored going forward.}, keywords = {Art. 118 TFEU, Copyright, EU, territoriality, unitary title}, }

How the EU Outsources the Task of Human Rights Protection to Platforms and Users: The Case of UGC Monetization external link

Senftleben, M., Quintais, J. & Meiring, A.
Berkeley Technology Law Journal, vol. 38, iss. : 3, pp: 933-1010, 2024

Abstract

With the shift from the traditional safe harbor for hosting to statutory content filtering and licensing obligations, EU copyright law has substantially curtailed the freedom of users to upload and share their content creations. Seeking to avoid overbroad inroads into freedom of expression, EU law obliges online platforms and the creative industry to take into account human rights when coordinating their content filtering actions. Platforms must also establish complaint and redress procedures for users. The European Commission will initiate stakeholder dialogues to identify best practices. These “safety valves” in the legislative package, however, are mere fig leaves. Instead of safeguarding human rights, the EU legislator outsources human rights obligations to the platform industry. At the same time, the burden of policing content moderation systems is imposed on users who are unlikely to bring complaints in each individual case. The new legislative design in the EU will thus “conceal” human rights violations instead of bringing them to light. Nonetheless, the DSA rests on the same – highly problematic – approach. Against this background, the paper discusses the weakening – and potential loss – of fundamental freedoms as a result of the departure from the traditional notice-and-takedown approach. Adding a new element to the ongoing debate on content licensing and filtering, the analysis will devote particular attention to the fact that EU law, for the most part, has left untouched the private power of platforms to determine the “house rules” governing the most popular copyright-owner reaction to detected matches between protected works and content uploads: the (algorithmic) monetization of that content. Addressing the “legal vacuum” in the field of content monetization, the analysis explores outsourcing and concealment risks in this unregulated space. Focusing on large-scale platforms for user-generated content, such as YouTube, Instagram and TikTok, two normative problems come to the fore: (1) the fact that rightholders, when opting for monetization, de facto monetize not only their own rights but also the creative input of users; (2) the fact that user creativity remains unremunerated as long as the monetization option is only available to rightholders. As a result of this configuration, the monetization mechanism disregards users’ right to (intellectual) property and discriminates against user creativity. Against this background, we discuss whether the DSA provisions that seek to ensure transparency of content moderation actions and terms and conditions offer useful sources of information that could empower users. Moreover, we raise the question whether the detailed regulation of platform actions in the DSA may resolve the described human rights dilemmas to some extent.

Artificial intelligence, Content moderation, Copyright, derivative works, discrimination, Freedom of expression, Human rights, liability, proportionality, user-generated content

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {How the EU Outsources the Task of Human Rights Protection to Platforms and Users: The Case of UGC Monetization}, author = {Senftleben, M. and Quintais, J. and Meiring, A.}, url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4421150}, year = {2024}, date = {2024-01-23}, journal = {Berkeley Technology Law Journal}, volume = {38}, issue = {3}, pages = {933-1010}, abstract = {With the shift from the traditional safe harbor for hosting to statutory content filtering and licensing obligations, EU copyright law has substantially curtailed the freedom of users to upload and share their content creations. Seeking to avoid overbroad inroads into freedom of expression, EU law obliges online platforms and the creative industry to take into account human rights when coordinating their content filtering actions. Platforms must also establish complaint and redress procedures for users. The European Commission will initiate stakeholder dialogues to identify best practices. These “safety valves” in the legislative package, however, are mere fig leaves. Instead of safeguarding human rights, the EU legislator outsources human rights obligations to the platform industry. At the same time, the burden of policing content moderation systems is imposed on users who are unlikely to bring complaints in each individual case. The new legislative design in the EU will thus “conceal” human rights violations instead of bringing them to light. Nonetheless, the DSA rests on the same – highly problematic – approach. Against this background, the paper discusses the weakening – and potential loss – of fundamental freedoms as a result of the departure from the traditional notice-and-takedown approach. Adding a new element to the ongoing debate on content licensing and filtering, the analysis will devote particular attention to the fact that EU law, for the most part, has left untouched the private power of platforms to determine the “house rules” governing the most popular copyright-owner reaction to detected matches between protected works and content uploads: the (algorithmic) monetization of that content. Addressing the “legal vacuum” in the field of content monetization, the analysis explores outsourcing and concealment risks in this unregulated space. Focusing on large-scale platforms for user-generated content, such as YouTube, Instagram and TikTok, two normative problems come to the fore: (1) the fact that rightholders, when opting for monetization, de facto monetize not only their own rights but also the creative input of users; (2) the fact that user creativity remains unremunerated as long as the monetization option is only available to rightholders. As a result of this configuration, the monetization mechanism disregards users’ right to (intellectual) property and discriminates against user creativity. Against this background, we discuss whether the DSA provisions that seek to ensure transparency of content moderation actions and terms and conditions offer useful sources of information that could empower users. Moreover, we raise the question whether the detailed regulation of platform actions in the DSA may resolve the described human rights dilemmas to some extent.}, keywords = {Artificial intelligence, Content moderation, Copyright, derivative works, discrimination, Freedom of expression, Human rights, liability, proportionality, user-generated content}, }

Annotatie bij Hof Amsterdam 13 december 2022 download

Intellectuele Eigendom & Reclamerecht (IER), iss. : 5, num: 33, pp: 313-316, 2024

Abstract

Roddelpraat. Online uitzending programma op YouTube-kanaal en website – laten horen geheel auteursrechtelijk beschermd werk van publiek bekend persoon zonder rechtvaardiging.

Copyright

Bibtex

Case note{nokey, title = {Annotatie bij Hof Amsterdam 13 december 2022}, author = {van Eechoud, M.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publications/annotatie-bij-hof-amsterdam-13-december-2022/ier-2023-33-roddelpraat-online-uitzending-programma-op-youtube-kanaal-en-website-laten-horen-geheel-auteursrechtelijk-beschermd-werk-van-publiek-bekend-persoon-zond/}, year = {2024}, date = {2024-01-23}, journal = {Intellectuele Eigendom & Reclamerecht (IER)}, issue = {5}, number = {33}, abstract = {Roddelpraat. Online uitzending programma op YouTube-kanaal en website – laten horen geheel auteursrechtelijk beschermd werk van publiek bekend persoon zonder rechtvaardiging.}, keywords = {Copyright}, }

Copyright Content Moderation in the European Union: State of the Art, Ways Forward and Policy Recommendations external link

Quintais, J., Katzenbach, C., Schwemer, S., Dergacheva, D., Riis, T., Mezei, P., Harkai, I. & Magalhães, J.C.
IIC, 2024

Abstract

This Opinion describes and summarises the results of the interdisciplinary research carried out by the authors during the course of a three-year project on intermediaries’ practices regarding copyright content moderation. This research includes the mapping of the EU legal framework and intermediaries’ practices regarding copyright content moderation, the evaluation and measuring of the impact of moderation practices and technologies on access and diversity, and a set of policy recommendations. Our recommendations touch on the following topics: the definition of “online content-sharing service provider”; the recognition and operationalisation of user rights; the complementary nature of complaint and redress safeguards; the scope of permissible preventive filtering; the clarification of the relationship between Art. 17 of the new Copyright Directive and the Digital Services Act; monetisation and restrictive content moderation actions; recommender systems and copyright content moderation; transparency and data access for researchers; trade secret protection and transparency of content moderation systems; the relationship between the copyright acquis, the Digital Services Act and the upcoming Artificial Intelligence Act; and human competences in copyright content moderation.

Content moderation, Copyright, Digital services act, Digital Single Market, intermediaries, Platforms

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Copyright Content Moderation in the European Union: State of the Art, Ways Forward and Policy Recommendations}, author = {Quintais, J. and Katzenbach, C. and Schwemer, S. and Dergacheva, D. and Riis, T. and Mezei, P. and Harkai, I. and Magalhães, J.C.}, url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40319-023-01409-5}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01409-5}, year = {2024}, date = {2024-01-01}, journal = {IIC}, abstract = {This Opinion describes and summarises the results of the interdisciplinary research carried out by the authors during the course of a three-year project on intermediaries’ practices regarding copyright content moderation. This research includes the mapping of the EU legal framework and intermediaries’ practices regarding copyright content moderation, the evaluation and measuring of the impact of moderation practices and technologies on access and diversity, and a set of policy recommendations. Our recommendations touch on the following topics: the definition of “online content-sharing service provider”; the recognition and operationalisation of user rights; the complementary nature of complaint and redress safeguards; the scope of permissible preventive filtering; the clarification of the relationship between Art. 17 of the new Copyright Directive and the Digital Services Act; monetisation and restrictive content moderation actions; recommender systems and copyright content moderation; transparency and data access for researchers; trade secret protection and transparency of content moderation systems; the relationship between the copyright acquis, the Digital Services Act and the upcoming Artificial Intelligence Act; and human competences in copyright content moderation.}, keywords = {Content moderation, Copyright, Digital services act, Digital Single Market, intermediaries, Platforms}, }

EU copyright law round up – fourth trimester of 2023 external link

Trapova, A. & Quintais, J.
Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2024

Artificial intelligence, Copyright, EU

Bibtex

Online publication{nokey, title = {EU copyright law round up – fourth trimester of 2023}, author = {Trapova, A. and Quintais, J.}, url = {https://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2024/01/04/eu-copyright-law-round-up-fourth-trimester-of-2023/}, year = {2024}, date = {2024-01-04}, journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog}, keywords = {Artificial intelligence, Copyright, EU}, }

Generative AI and Author Remuneration

IIC, vol. 54, pp: 1535-1560, 2023

Abstract

With the evolution of generative AI systems, machine-made productions in the literary and artistic field have reached a level of refinement that allows them to replace human creations. The increasing sophistication of AI systems will inevitably disrupt the market for human literary and artistic works. Generative AI systems provide literary and artistic output much faster and cheaper. It is therefore foreseeable that human authors will be exposed to substitution effects. They may lose income as they are replaced by machines in sectors ranging from journalism and writing to music and visual arts. Considering this trend, the question arises whether it is advisable to take measures to compensate human authors for the reduction in their market share and income. Copyright law could serve as a tool to introduce an AI levy system and ensure the payment of equitable remuneration. In combination with mandatory collective rights management, the new revenue stream could be used to finance social and cultural funds that improve the working and living conditions of flesh-and-blood authors.

collective rights management, Copyright, Freedom of expression, text and data mining, three-step test

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Generative AI and Author Remuneration}, author = {Senftleben, M.}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01399-4}, year = {2023}, date = {2023-11-07}, journal = {IIC}, volume = {54}, pages = {1535-1560}, abstract = {With the evolution of generative AI systems, machine-made productions in the literary and artistic field have reached a level of refinement that allows them to replace human creations. The increasing sophistication of AI systems will inevitably disrupt the market for human literary and artistic works. Generative AI systems provide literary and artistic output much faster and cheaper. It is therefore foreseeable that human authors will be exposed to substitution effects. They may lose income as they are replaced by machines in sectors ranging from journalism and writing to music and visual arts. Considering this trend, the question arises whether it is advisable to take measures to compensate human authors for the reduction in their market share and income. Copyright law could serve as a tool to introduce an AI levy system and ensure the payment of equitable remuneration. In combination with mandatory collective rights management, the new revenue stream could be used to finance social and cultural funds that improve the working and living conditions of flesh-and-blood authors.}, keywords = {collective rights management, Copyright, Freedom of expression, text and data mining, three-step test}, }