Ongoing advances in artificial intelligence (AI) are increasingly part of scientific efforts as well as the public debate and the media agenda, raising hopes and concerns about the impact of automated decision making across different sectors of our society. This topic is receiving increasing attention at both national and cross- national levels. The present report contributes to informing this public debate, providing the results of a survey with 958 participants recruited from high-quality sample of the Dutch population. It provides an overview of public knowledge, perceptions, hopes and concerns about the adoption of AI and ADM across different societal sectors in the Netherlands. This report is part of a research collaboration between the Universities of Amsterdam, Tilburg, Radboud, Utrecht and Eindhoven (TU/e) on automated decision making, and forms input to the groups’ research on fairness in automated decision making.

Opinie

Chapter in: Critical Indigenous Rights Studies, G. Corradi, K. de Feyter, E. Desmet, K. Vanhees (eds.), Routlegde, 2018.

The protection of traditional cultural expressions (TCEs) is not a straightforward issue. At first sight, characteristics of TCEs and their protection suggest similarity to copyright works. However, TCE protection should not be viewed as simply an (isolated) intellectual property issue. Rather, the protection of TCEs is part of a broader (political) context and struggle for rights. The chapter focuses on showing the complexity of the interrelation between copyright and indigenous peoples’ rights. It argues that a cultural and indigenous rights perspective could help address tensions deriving from differing worldviews, the application of dominant, existing legal frameworks and diverging understandings of protecting creativity and works of culture.

This article offers a normative analysis of key blockchain technology concepts from the perspective of copyright law. Some features of blockchain technologies—scarcity, trust, transparency, decentralized public records and smart contracts—seem to make this technology compatible with the fundamentals of copyright. Authors can publish works on blockchain creating a quasi-immutable record of initial ownership, and encode ‘smart’ contracts to license the use of works. Remuneration may happen on online distribution platforms where the smart contracts reside. In theory, such an automated setup allows for the private ordering of copyright. Blockchain technology, like Digital Rights Management 20 years ago, is thus presented as an opportunity to reduce market friction, and increase both licensing efficiency and the autonomy of creators. Yet, some of the old problems remain. The article examines the differences between new, smart-contract-based private ordering regime and the fundamental components of copyright law, such as exceptions and limitations, the doctrine of exhaustion, restrictions on formalities, the public domain and fair remuneration.

This article introduces U.S. lawyers and academics to the normative foundations, attributes, and strategic approach to regulating personal data advanced by the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”). We explain the genesis of the GDPR, which is best understood as an extension and refinement of existing requirements imposed by the 1995 Data Protection Directive; describe the GDPR’s approach and provisions; and make predictions about the GDPR’s short and medium-term implications. The GDPR is the most consequential regulatory development in information policy in a generation. The GDPR brings personal data into a detailed and protective regulatory regime, which will influence personal data usage worldwide. Understood properly, the GDPR encourages firms to develop information governance frameworks, to in-house data use, and to keep humans in the loop in decision making. Companies with direct relationships with consumers have strategic advantages under the GDPR, compared to third party advertising firms on the internet. To reach these objectives, the GDPR uses big sticks, structural elements that make proving violations easier, but only a few carrots. The GDPR will complicate and restrain some information-intensive business models. But the GDPR will also enable approaches previously impossible under less-protective approaches.

Nu de harmonisatie van de auteursrechtwetgeving in Europa bijna is afgerond, wint het idee van daadwerkelijke eenmaking van het auteursrecht in de Europese Unie terrein. In een mededeling over het EU-auteursrechtbeleid heeft de Europese Commissie de invoering van een unitair auteursrecht, dat voor de nationale auteurswetten van de lidstaten in de plaats zou moeten komen, als ‘langetermijnvisie’ vastgelegd. Desalniettemin lijkt formele unificatie in de vorm van een Auteursrechtverordening nog ver weg. Ondertussen maken de Europese wetgever en het Hof van Justitie stap voor stap een einde aan de territorialiteit van het auteursrecht, waardoor een eengemaakt Europees auteursrecht langzaam maar gestaag toch dichterbij komt. In dit artikel wordt dit proces van sluipende unificatie van het auteursrecht geschetst.

De Europese Commissie zet in het kader van de ‘data-economiestrategie’ nieuwe stappen op het terrein van opendatabeleid. Het voorstel tot wijziging van Richtlijn 2003/98/EC inzake hergebruik van overheidsinformatie (PSI Directive) legt de mogelijkheid voor (semi)publieke instellingen om databank- en auteursrechten uit te oefenen verder aan banden. Er komt een vergaand verbod op de uitoefening van databankrechten. Ook vallen er straks meer semipublieke databronnen onder de hergebruikregels, uit nutssectoren, transport en onderzoek. Een analyse van de plannen.

with M. McGonagle & S. McLaughlin, International Encyclopedia of Laws series (IEL), Wolters Kluwer, Alphen aan den Rijn, 2018, 228 pp.

The economic and societal impact of digital platforms raises a number of questions for policymakers, including whether existing regulatory approaches and instruments are sufficient to promote and safeguard public interests. This article develops a practical framework that provides structure and guidance to policymakers who design policies for the digital economy. The framework differs from other approaches in taking the digital business models of platforms as the starting point for the analysis. The framework consists of three pillars, namely determining a platform's characteristics, relating these to public interests, and formulating policy options. The framework then invokes a return‐path analysis for assessing how the interventions affect the business model, whether it has the desired effect on public interests, and ensuring it has no undesired side‐effects on public interests. The framework puts forward two key messages for current discussions on digital platforms. First, one should look at the underlying characteristics of platforms rather than trying to understand digital platforms as a single category. Second, policymakers should explore existing rules and policy options, as they seem fit to deal with several characteristics of digital platforms in a time frame that matches the rapid development of platform technologies and business models.

De uitspraak van de rechter dat journalisten stiekem een gesprek in de fractiekamer van Kamerlid Farid Azarkan mochten opnemen, is slecht nieuws voor de democratie en de journalistiek.