An EU Copyright Framework for Research: Opinion of the European Copyright Society

An EU Copyright Framework for Research: Opinion of the European Copyright Society external link

Sganga, C., Geiger, C., Margoni, T., Senftleben, M. & van Eechoud, M.

JIPITEC, vol. 16, iss. : 2, pp: 312-326, 2025

Abstract

Research and academic freedom are at the core of the EU project. Yet, the relationship between EU copyright law and research is intricate. Research and education interests have traditionally been recognized within copyright law to some degree, however, the current EU copyright acquis is not really conducive to an effective research environment. This jeopardises the fulfilment of the EU’s ambitions in the field. Building on the pillars of action of the European Research Area (ERA) Policy Agenda 2022-2024 and its follow-up, the ECS emphasises the need for a copyright framework that fosters research, and supports the call for immediate action on the EU copyright framework to address the most pressing challenges it raises for European researchers and their institutions. This Opinion stresses the need to ensure a proper balance between IP rights, protected under Article 17(2) CFREU, and the freedom of art and science (Article 13 CFREU), coupled with the ‘right to research’, as enshrined in international legal instruments (UDHR and ICESCR), the objectives of the EU treaties, and the CFREU and ECHR. Various EU and national legal instruments are in place that facilitate access and reuse of scientific works, but these have several shortcomings. They weaken the effective balance between copyright, research policy needs, and the fulfilment of ERA policy goals, including the EU Open Science agenda. This opinion focuses on the flaws in key provisions aimed at balancing copyright and research needs: the general InfoSoc Directive research exception, the text and data mining exception of the CDSM Directive and national secondary publication rights. It also briefly assesses the interface between copyright and (research) data regulation. We propose several policy interventions to address the identified shortcomings. These include the introduction of an EU-wide secondary publication right with specific characteristics; the amendment of text and data mining exceptions; the creation of a general mandatory research exception overcoming the challenges raised by Article 5(3)(d) InfoSoc; and a more careful legislative drafting to reduce legal complexity and ensure consistency across copyright and data legislation.

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Sganga, C.
AU  - Geiger, C.
AU  - Margoni, T.
AU  - Senftleben, M.
AU  - van Eechoud, M.
PY  - 2025
DA  - 2025-09-04
T1  - An EU Copyright Framework for Research: Opinion of the European Copyright Society
JO  - JIPITEC
VL  - 16
IS  - 2
SP  - 312-326
UR  - https://www.jipitec.eu/jipitec/article/view/443
AB  - Research and academic freedom are at the core of the EU project. Yet, the relationship between EU copyright law and research is intricate. Research and education interests have traditionally been recognized within copyright law to some degree, however, the current EU copyright acquis is not really conducive to an effective research environment. This jeopardises the fulfilment of the EU’s ambitions in the field.

Building on the pillars of action of the European Research Area (ERA) Policy Agenda 2022-2024 and its follow-up, the ECS emphasises the need for a copyright framework that fosters research, and supports the call for immediate action on the EU copyright framework to address the most pressing challenges it raises for European researchers and their institutions.

This Opinion stresses the need to ensure a proper balance between IP rights, protected under Article 17(2) CFREU, and the freedom of art and science (Article 13 CFREU), coupled with the ‘right to research’, as enshrined in international legal instruments (UDHR and ICESCR), the objectives of the EU treaties, and the CFREU and ECHR. Various EU and national legal instruments are in place that facilitate access and reuse of scientific works, but these have several shortcomings. They weaken the effective balance between copyright, research policy needs, and the fulfilment of ERA policy goals, including the EU Open Science agenda.

This opinion focuses on the flaws in key provisions aimed at balancing copyright and research needs: the general InfoSoc Directive research exception, the text and data mining exception of the CDSM Directive and national secondary publication rights. It also briefly assesses the interface between copyright and (research) data regulation. We propose several policy interventions to address the identified shortcomings. These include the introduction of an EU-wide secondary publication right with specific characteristics; the amendment of text and data mining exceptions; the creation of a general mandatory research exception overcoming the challenges raised by Article 5(3)(d) InfoSoc; and a more careful legislative drafting to reduce legal complexity and ensure consistency across copyright and data legislation.
K1  - Copyright
K1  - european copyright society
K1  - research
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{nokey,
	title = {An EU Copyright Framework for Research: Opinion of the European Copyright Society},
	author = {Sganga, C. and Geiger, C. and Margoni, T. and Senftleben, M. and van Eechoud, M.},
	year = {2025},
	date = {2025-09-04},
	journal = {JIPITEC},
	volume = {16},
	issue = {2},
	pages = {312-326},
	abstract = {Research and academic freedom are at the core of the EU project. Yet, the relationship between EU copyright law and research is intricate. Research and education interests have traditionally been recognized within copyright law to some degree, however, the current EU copyright acquis is not really conducive to an effective research environment. This jeopardises the fulfilment of the EU’s ambitions in the field.

This opinion focuses on the flaws in key provisions aimed at balancing copyright and research needs: the general InfoSoc Directive research exception, the text and data mining exception of the CDSM Directive and national secondary publication rights. It also briefly assesses the interface between copyright and (research) data regulation. We propose several policy interventions to address the identified shortcomings. These include the introduction of an EU-wide secondary publication right with specific characteristics; the amendment of text and data mining exceptions; the creation of a general mandatory research exception overcoming the challenges raised by Article 5(3)(d) InfoSoc; and a more careful legislative drafting to reduce legal complexity and ensure consistency across copyright and data legislation.},
	keywords = {Copyright, european copyright society, research},
}

Save .bib

Money talks? The impact of corporate funding on information law research external link

Bodó, B., Schwichow, H. von & Appelman, N.

2020

Abstract

Corporate funding is a contentious issue in information law and policy research. In the fall of 2019, the Institute of Information Law at the University of Amsterdam, and the European Hub of the Network of Centers invited academic research institutions, as well as junior and senior scholars to reflect on the issues around corporate influence on research through money, data, infrastructure, access. The discussion arrived at a number of important conclusions: - The discussion on funding must include data, infrastructure deals, and other forms of indirect funding - Sometimes corporate funding is the only way to get access to critical resources - Transparency is a must, but not a silver bullet to deal with funding - It is difficult to set up universal a priori norms of which type of funding is acceptable in which situations, - Academia may need new institutional solutions to review funding, and manage the potential risks of funders taking over the agenda, research bias, and reputational harms - Public funding bodies are part of the problem as much of the solution. The rapid, but consequential shifts in the digital landscape in terms of technological innovation, dominant economic actors, power relations, social, political structures, transform the environment of academic research which aims to address the legal and policy issues around those changes. More and more issues, such as content moderation, intermediary liability, digital advertising, algorithmic discrimination, the accountability of AI systems are framed as regulatory dilemmas. As a result, legal research is both in growing demand, and has gained visibility, and significance. As the future rules of the information society are shaping up in the discussions led, or at least prominently shaped by information law research, the temptation to influence it also increases. Research institutions must acknowledge the shifting landscape and the growing stakes. Challenges at that scale require more than individual integrity: there is a need for institutional solutions that on the one hand can actively assess, and mitigate the potential harms in each individual case, and on the other hand, is able to actively shape the funding landscape, and the norms around funding.

RIS

TY  - RPRT
AU  - Bodó, B.
AU  - Schwichow, H. von
AU  - Appelman, N.
PY  - 0507
DA  - 2020-05-07
T1  - Money talks? The impact of corporate funding on information law research
UR  - https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/money-talks-summary-report-final.pdf
AB  - Corporate funding is a contentious issue in information law and policy research. In the fall of 2019, the Institute of Information Law at the University of Amsterdam, and the European Hub of the Network of Centers invited academic research institutions, as well as junior and senior scholars to reflect on the issues around corporate influence on research through money, data, infrastructure, access. The discussion arrived at a number of important conclusions:
- The discussion on funding must include data, infrastructure deals, and other forms of indirect funding
- Sometimes corporate funding is the only way to get access to critical resources
- Transparency is a must, but not a silver bullet to deal with funding
- It is difficult to set up universal a priori norms of which type of funding is acceptable in which situations,
- Academia may need new institutional solutions to review funding, and manage the potential risks of funders taking over the agenda, research bias, and reputational harms
- Public funding bodies are part of the problem as much of the solution.
The rapid, but consequential shifts in the digital landscape in terms of technological innovation, dominant economic actors, power relations, social, political structures, transform the environment of academic research which aims to address the legal and policy issues around those changes. More and more issues, such as content moderation, intermediary liability, digital advertising, algorithmic discrimination, the accountability of AI systems are framed as regulatory dilemmas. As a result, legal research is both in growing demand, and has gained visibility, and significance. As the future rules of the information society are shaping up in the discussions led, or at least prominently shaped by information law research, the temptation to influence it also increases. Research institutions must acknowledge the shifting landscape and the growing stakes. Challenges at that scale require more than individual integrity: there is a need for institutional solutions that on the one hand can actively assess, and mitigate the potential harms in each individual case, and on the other hand, is able to actively shape the funding landscape, and the norms around funding.
K1  - corporate funding
K1  - frontpage
K1  - information law
K1  - research
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Report{Bodó2020,
	title = {Money talks? The impact of corporate funding on information law research},
	author = {Bodó, B. and Schwichow, H. von and Appelman, N.},
	year = {0507},
	date = {2020-05-07},
	abstract = {Corporate funding is a contentious issue in information law and policy research. In the fall of 2019, the Institute of Information Law at the University of Amsterdam, and the European Hub of the Network of Centers invited academic research institutions, as well as junior and senior scholars to reflect on the issues around corporate influence on research through money, data, infrastructure, access. The discussion arrived at a number of important conclusions:
- The discussion on funding must include data, infrastructure deals, and other forms of indirect funding
- Sometimes corporate funding is the only way to get access to critical resources
- Transparency is a must, but not a silver bullet to deal with funding
- It is difficult to set up universal a priori norms of which type of funding is acceptable in which situations,
- Academia may need new institutional solutions to review funding, and manage the potential risks of funders taking over the agenda, research bias, and reputational harms
- Public funding bodies are part of the problem as much of the solution.
The rapid, but consequential shifts in the digital landscape in terms of technological innovation, dominant economic actors, power relations, social, political structures, transform the environment of academic research which aims to address the legal and policy issues around those changes. More and more issues, such as content moderation, intermediary liability, digital advertising, algorithmic discrimination, the accountability of AI systems are framed as regulatory dilemmas. As a result, legal research is both in growing demand, and has gained visibility, and significance. As the future rules of the information society are shaping up in the discussions led, or at least prominently shaped by information law research, the temptation to influence it also increases. Research institutions must acknowledge the shifting landscape and the growing stakes. Challenges at that scale require more than individual integrity: there is a need for institutional solutions that on the one hand can actively assess, and mitigate the potential harms in each individual case, and on the other hand, is able to actively shape the funding landscape, and the norms around funding.},
	keywords = {corporate funding, frontpage, information law, research},
}

Save .bib

Keyword: research