@article{Giannopoulou2021,

title = {Putting Data Protection by Design on the Blockchain},

author = {Giannopoulou, A.},

doi = {10.21552/edpl/2021/3/7},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-10-22},

urldate = {2021-10-22},

journal = {European Data Protection Law Review},

volume = {7},

number = {3},

pages = {388-399},

abstract = {The principle of data protection by design, as it is enshrined in article 25 of the GDPR, is difficult to apply in blockchains. This article will assess how the reliance on asymmetric encryption and other privacy enhancing technological architectures -necessary in a blockchain-based system- approach both user control and data protection by design compliance from the single scope of anonymization and unlinkability. Data subjects’ rights, accountability, and the potential shortcomings of applied technological constraints are thus sidelined. Ultimately, this limited understanding of technological privacy, acts as a misguiding set of principles for technological co-regulation through standardisation in blockchains. The standardization of these choices without a holistic analysis of data protection by design imperatives could ultimately weaken the position of data subjects, whose trust in the technological protections of personal data might prove to be relatively misplaced.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Irion2021e,

title = {Governing “European values” inside data flows: : interdisciplinary perspectives},

author = {Irion, K. and Kolk, A. and Buri, M. and Milan, S.},

url = {https://policyreview.info/european-values},

doi = {10.14763/2021.3.1582},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-10-11},

urldate = {2021-10-11},

journal = {Internet Policy Review},

volume = {10},

number = {3},

abstract = {This editorial introduces ten research articles, which form part of this special issue, exploring the governance of “European values” inside data flows. Protecting fundamental human rights and critical public interests that undergird European societies in a global digital ecosystem poses complex challenges, especially because the United States and China are leading in novel technologies. We envision a research agenda calling upon different disciplines to further identify and understand European values that can adequately perform under conditions of transnational data flows.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Bod\'{o}2021b,

title = {Personal data ordering in context: the interaction of meso-level data governance regimes with macro frameworks},

author = {Bod\'{o}, B. and Irion, K. and Janssen, H. and Giannopoulou, A.},

url = {https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/personal-data-ordering-context-interaction-meso-level-data-governance-regimes},

doi = {10.14763/2021.3.1581},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-10-11},

urldate = {2021-10-11},

journal = {Internet Policy Review},

volume = {10},

number = {3},

abstract = {The technological infrastructures enabling the collection, processing, and trading of data have fuelled a rapid innovation of data governance models. We differentiate between macro, meso, and micro level models, which correspond to major political blocks; societal-, industry-, or community level systems, and individual approaches, respectively. We focus on meso-level models, which coalesce around: (1) organisations prioritising their own interests over interests of other stakeholders; (2) organisations offering technological and legal tools aiming to empower individuals; (3) community-based data intermediaries fostering collective rights and interests. In this article we assess these meso-level models, and discuss their interaction with the macro-level legal frameworks that have evolved in the US, the EU, and China. The legal landscape has largely remained inconsistent and fragmented, with enforcement struggling to keep up with the latest developments. We argue, first, that the success of meso-logics is largely defined by global economic competition, and, second, that these meso-logics may potentially put the EU’s macro-level framework with its mixed internal market and fundamental rights-oriented model under pressure. We conclude that, given the relative absence of a strong macro level-framework and an intensive competition of governance models at meso-level, it may be challenging to avoid compromises to the European macro framework. },

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Hugenholtz2021d,

title = {Copyright and Artificial Creation: Does EU Copyright Law Protect AI-Assisted Output?},

author = {Hugenholtz, P. and Quintais, J.},

url = {https://rdcu.be/cy4IY},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-021-01115-0},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-10-07},

journal = {IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law },

abstract = {This article queries whether and to what extent works produced with the aid of AI systems \textendash AI-assisted output \textendash are protected under EU copyright standards. We carry out a doctrinal legal analysis to scrutinise the concepts of “work”, “originality” and “creative freedom”, as well as the notion of authorship, as set forth in the EU copyright acquis and developed in the case-law of the Court of Justice. On this basis, we develop a four-step test to assess whether AI-assisted output qualifies as an original work of authorship under EU law, and how the existing rules on authorship may apply. Our conclusion is that current EU copyright rules are generally suitable and sufficiently flexible to deal with the challenges posed by AI-assisted output.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@online{Trapova2021c,

title = {EU copyright law round up \textendash third trimester of 2021},

author = {Trapova, A. and Quintais, J.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/10/07/eu-copyright-law-round-up-third-trimester-of-2021/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-10-07},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {online}

}

@article{Senftleben2021b,

title = {The Siren Song of the Subtle Copycat - Revisiting Trademark Law with Insights from Consumer Research},

author = {Senftleben, M. and Horen, F. van},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3922568

https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/TheTrademarkReporter_2021_4.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-10-01},

journal = {The Trademark Reporter},

volume = {111},

number = {4},

pages = {739-777},

abstract = {The architecture of trademark protection systems rests on the assumption that brand imitation strategies are particularly harmful when they seek to achieve a high level of similarity by copying specific trademarked features of the original brand. Marketing research, however, shows that this assumption is doubtful. Subtle, theme-based imitation strategies \textendash aiming at a modest degree of similarity \textendash may allow copycats to garner greater profits and manipulate consumers’ purchasing decisions. Like an enchanting siren song, they may lure customers away from the original products of brand owners. Against this background, the paper discusses the question whether trademark law should be recalibrated.

To lay groundwork for this discussion, the analysis outlines central functions of trademarks in today’s market economy before describing, on the basis of EU trademark law, the traditional approach to copycat strategies from a marketing and legal perspective. Introducing insights from recent marketing research, the paper explains why subtle, theme-based strategies may be more harmful than blatant, feature-based copying. The further examination places this insight in a legal context. Contrasting the empirical findings of marketing research with traditional assessment schemes in EU trademark law, it becomes apparent that there is a remarkable mismatch between legal theory and market reality. Current trademark provisions are not aligned with “real life” consumer perception. As a result, copycats with a subtle imitation strategy remain under the radar of applicable infringement tests. This dilemma is taken as a starting point to discuss the need for reforms in trademark law.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@book{Sax2021f,

title = {Between Empowerment and Manipulation: The Ethics and Regulation of For-Profit Health Apps},

author = {Sax, M.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/sax_info_47-2/},

isbn = {9789403537917},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-09-30},

urldate = {2021-09-30},

publisher = {Wolters Kluwer},

series = {Information Law Series},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {book}

}

@article{Reda2021bb,

title = {A Proposal to leverage Article 17 to build a public repository of Public Domain and openly licensed works},

author = {Reda, J. and Keller, P.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/09/23/a-proposal-to-leverage-article-17-to-build-a-public-repository-of-public-domain-and-openly-licensed-works/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-09-23},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Angelopoulos2021,

title = {De reikwijdte van artikel 17 DSM-richtlijn in het licht van het verbod op algemene toezichtverplichtingen: een Odyssee},

author = {Angelopoulos, C. and Senftleben, M. and Thije, P. ten},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Auteursrecht_2021_3.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-09-21},

journal = {Auteursrecht},

number = {3},

pages = {120-142},

abstract = {Met de Richtlijn auteursrechten en naburige rechten in de digitale eengemaakte markt (‘DSM-RL’) zijn nieuwe wettelijke verplichtingen op het terrein van het filteren van online content ontstaan. Aanbieders van onlinediensten voor het delen van content (‘OCSSPs’) dienen \textendash op basis van door rechthebbenden verstrekte informatie \textendash ervoor te zorgen dat beschermd materiaal niet beschikbaar is op hun platforms. Tegelijkertijd bevestigt artikel 17 lid 8 DSM-RL dat de nieuwe auteursrechtelijke regels niet tot een algemene toezichtverplichting moeten leiden. Ondanks de nieuwe filterverplichtingen heeft de Uniewetgever het traditionele verbod op een algemene toezichtverplichting \textendash dat al 20 jaar deel uitmaakt van de regeling van aansprakelijkheidsprivileges in de Richtlijn inzake elektronische handel (‘REH’) \textendash uitdrukkelijk overeind gehouden. Ook het voorstel van de Europese Commissie voor een Digital Services Act (‘DSA’) houdt het verbod op algemene toezichtverplichtingen in stand. Tegen deze achtergrond rijst de vraag hoe de nieuwe auteursrechtelijke filterverplichtingen moeten worden uitgelegd om een verboden algemene toezichtverplichting te voorkomen. De volgende analyse geeft antwoord op deze vraag op basis van een nadere bespreking van het verbod op algemene toezichtverplichtingen in de REH, de DSM-RL en het DSA-voorstel. Naast relevante rechtspraak van het HvJ EU komt het nauwe verband tussen het verbod op algemene toezichtverplichtingen en fundamentele rechten aan de orde.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Helberger2021bb,

title = {Conditions for technological solutions in a COVID-19 exit strategy, with particular focus on the legal and societal conditions},

author = {Helberger, N. and Eskens, S. and Strycharz, J. and Bouch\`{e}, G. and van Hoboken, J. and Mil, J. van and Toh, J. },

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/covid-report-1.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-09-13},

abstract = {Which legal, ethical and societal conditions need to be fulfilled for the use of digital solutions in managing the COVID-19 exit-strategy? This was the central question of this research. Digital technologies can be part of solutions to societal challenges, for example to manage the pandemic and lead the Netherlands out of the COVID-19 crisis. One set of technologies that figured particularly prominently in that debate was the use of contact tracing apps like the CoronaMelder, as well as digital vaccination passports (CoronaCheck app).  

In the Netherlands, Europe and worldwide, the introduction of apps such as the CoronaMelder or the CoronaCheck app was met by criticism from experts, politicians, civil society and academics. Concerns range from the lack of evidence for the effectiveness of such apps, uncertainty about the conditions that need to be fulfilled to reach their goal, our growing dependency on technology companies up to worries about the fundamental rights and adverse effects for vulnerable groups, such as elderly or users without a smart phone. 

The overall goal of the research was to monitor the societal, ethical and legal implications of implementing apps like the CoronaMelder, and from that draw lessons for the future use of ‘technology-assisted governance solutions’. One important conclusion from the report is that ‘there are no easy technological fixes, and in order for a technological solution to work, it needs to be part of a broader vision on what such a solution needs to function in society, achieve its intended goals and respect the fundamental rights of users as well as non-users.’ The report also offers critical reflections on the need for democratic legitimisation and accountability, the role of big tech and insights on the societal impact of the CoronaMelder and other technological solutions.

},

note = {Report for ZonMw, written by N. Helberger, S. Eskens, J. Strycharz, G. Bouch\`{e}, J. van Hoboken, J. van Mil, J. Toh, with N. Appelman, J. van Apeldoorn, M. van Eechoud, N. van Doorn, M. Sax & C. de Vreese, September 2021, Amsterdam},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{nokey,

title = {Editorial independence in an automated media system},

author = {Drunen, M. van},

url = {https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/editorial-independence-automated-media-system},

doi = {10.14763/2021.3.1569},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-09-13},

journal = {Internet Policy Review},

volume = {10},

number = {3},

abstract = {The media has increasingly grown to rely on automated decision-making to produce and distribute news. This trend challenges our understanding of editorial independence by transforming the role of human editorial judgment and creating new dependencies on external software and data providers, engineers, and platforms. Recent policy initiatives such as the EU’s Media Action Plan and Digital Services Act are now beginning to revisit the way law can enable the media to act independently in the context of new technological tools and actors. Fully understanding and addressing the challenges automation poses to editorial independence, however, first requires better normative insight into the functions editorial independence performs in European media policy. This article provides a normative framework of editorial independence’s functions in European media policy and uses it to explore the new challenges posed by the automation of editorial decision-making.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@online{Appelman2021,

title = {Using Terms and Conditions to apply Fundamental Rights to Content Moderation: Is Article 12 DSA a Paper Tiger?},

author = {Appelman, N. and Quintais, J. and Fahy, R.},

editor = {Verfassungsblog},

url = {https://verfassungsblog.de/power-dsa-dma-06/},

doi = {10.17176/20210901-233103-0.},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-09-01},

organization = {Verfassungsblog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {online}

}

@article{Helberger2021bb,

title = {Towards Unfair Political Practices Law: Learning lessons from the regulation of unfair commercial practices for online political advertising},

author = {Helberger, N. and Dobber, T. and Vreese, C.H. de},

url = {https://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-12-3-2021/5338},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-08-26},

journal = {JIPITEC},

volume = {12},

number = {3},

pages = {273-296},

abstract = {Online political advertising operates in a tense forcefield between political and commercial elements and thus presents regulators with a difficult conundrum: because online political advertising is political rather than commercial speech, it is destined to follow a different regulatory tradition than commercial advertising. And yet many of the tools used, players involved and concerns triggered by modern online political advertising strategies very much resemble the tools, players and concerns in online commercial targeting. Commercial advertising is subject to consumer law and unfair advertising regulation, including rules about unfair commercial practices. Unfair commercial practices law and other rules about commercial advertising, however, are explicitly not applicable to forms of non-commercial political or ideological advertising. An important reason why this is so is the different level of protection of political and commercial speech under fundamental rights law standards. And yet with the ongoing commercial turn in advertising, the traditional division between forms of commercial and political advertising is no longer that self-evident. Also, it cannot be denied that commercial advertising law has a long tradition of thinking of where and how to draw the line between lawful advertising and unlawful persuasion through withholding or misleading consumers about the information they need to take informed decisions, or abusing superior knowledge, exerting undue psychological pressure and engaging in other forms of unfair behaviour. The question this article explores is whether there are lessons to be learned from the regulation of commercial advertising for the pending initiatives at the national and the European level to regulate online political advertising, and online political targeting in specific.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{vanEechoud2021bb,

title = {Please share nicely \textemdash From Database directive to Data (governance) acts},

author = {van Eechoud, M.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/08/18/please-share-nicely-from-database-directive-to-data-governance-acts/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-08-24},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@online{Trapova2021,

title = {EU copyright law round up \textendash second trimester of 2021},

author = {Trapova, A. and Quintais, J.},

editor = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/08/16/eu-copyright-law-round-up-second-trimester-of-2021/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-08-16},

organization = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {online}

}

@article{Reuver2021,

title = {Are we human, or are we users? The role of natural language processing in human-centric news recommenders that nudge users to diverse content},

author = {Reuver, M. and Mattis, N. and Sax, M. and Verberne, S. and Tintarev, N. and Helberger, N. and M\"{u}ller, J. and Vrijenhoek, S. and Fokkens, A. and Van Atteveldt, W.},

url = {https://aclanthology.org/2021.nlp4posimpact-1.6/},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.nlp4posimpact-1.6},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-08-01},

journal = {The 1st Workshop on NLP for Positive Impact: NLP4PosImpact 2021 : proceedings of the workshop},

pages = {47-59},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Bastian2021,

title = {Safeguarding the Journalistic DNA: Attitudes towards the Role of Professional Values in Algorithmic News Recommender Designs},

author = {Bastian, M. and Helberger, N. and Makhortykh, M.},

url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21670811.2021.1912622},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2021.1912622},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-07-29},

journal = {Digital Journalism},

abstract = {In contrast to the extensive debate on the influence of algorithmic news recommenders (ANRs) on individual news diets, the interaction between such systems and journalistic norms and missions remain under-studied. The change in the relationship between journalists and the audience caused by the transition to personalized news delivery has profound consequences for the understanding of what journalism should be. To investigate how media practitioners perceive the impact of ANRs on their professional norms and media organizations’ missions, and how these norms and missions can be integrated into ANR design, this article looks at two quality newspapers from the Netherlands and Switzerland. Using an interview-based approach conducted with practitioners in different departments (e.g. journalists, data scientists, and product managers), it explores how ANRs interact with organization-centred and audience-centred journalistic values. The paper’s findings indicate a varying degree of prominence for specific values between individual practitioners in the context of their perception of ANRs. At the same time, the paper also reveals that some organization-centred (e.g. transparency) and most audience-centred (e.g. usability) values are viewed as prerequisites for successful ANR design by practitioners with different professional backgrounds.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Reda2021b,

title = {What Member States can learn from the AG opinion on Article 17},

author = {Reda, J. and Keller, P.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/07/26/what-member-states-can-learn-from-the-ag-opinion-on-article-17/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-07-27},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@periodical{Sax2021bb,

title = {Opinie: Wie naar Dokter Quin gaat, betaalt de rekening voor technologie-kwakzalverij},

author = {Sax, M.},

url = {https://www.volkskrant.nl/columns-opinie/opinie-wie-naar-dokter-quin-gaat-betaalt-de-rekening-voor-technologie-kwakzalverij~b58b6f64/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-07-20},

journal = {De Volkskrant},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {periodical}

}

@techreport{vanEechoud2021bb,

title = {Data na de dood - juridische aspecten van digitale nalatenschappen},

author = {van Eechoud, M. and Ausloos, J. and Loos, M. and Mak, C. and Reinhartz, B. and Schumacher, L.D. and Pol, L. },

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Data-na-de-dood.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-07-08},

abstract = {Onderzoek in opdracht van het Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties, April 2021, Bijlage bij Kamerstuk 2020-2021, 30696 nr. 52.



Auteurs: M.M.M. van Eechoud, J. Ausloos, M. Loos, C. Mak, B. Reinhartz, L. Schumacher & L. Pol.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@inbook{Irion2021bb,

title = {Panta Rhei: A European Perspective on Ensuring a High Level of Protection of Human Rights in a World in Which Everything Flows},

author = {Irion, K.},

editor = {Burri, M.},

url = {https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/big-data-and-global-trade-law/panta-rhei/B0E5D7851240E0D2F4562B3C6DFF3011},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108919234.015},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-07-05},

booktitle = {Big Data and Global Trade Law},

publisher = {Cambridge University Press},

chapter = {11},

abstract = {Human rights do remain valid currency in how we approach planetary-scale computation and accompanying data flows. Today’s system of human rights protection, however, is highly dependent on domestic legal institutions, which unravel faster than the reconstruction of fitting transnational governance institutions. The chapter takes a critical look at the construction of the data flow metaphor as a policy concept inside international trade law. Subsequently, it explores how the respect for human rights ties in with national constitutionalism that becomes increasingly challenged by the transnational dynamic of digital era transactions. Lastly, the chapter turns to international trade law and why its ambitions to govern cross-border data flows will likely not advance efforts to generate respect for human rights. In conclusion, the chapter advocates for a rebalancing act that recognizes human rights inside international trade law.

},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {inbook}

}

@article{Sax2021b,

title = {Voorbij privacy: manipulatie is het \'{e}chte probleem in gezondheidsapps},

author = {Sax, M.},

url = {https://www.uitgeverijparis.nl/nl/reader/209785/1001582341},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-24},

journal = {Privacy & Informatie},

number = {3},

pages = {117-120},

abstract = {Ze zijn enorm populair en zullen alleen nog maar populairder worden: gezondheidsapps. Er zijn populaire gezondheidsapps met tientallen tot soms honderden miljoenen gebruikers voor van alles en nog wat: dieetadviezen en calorie\"{e}ntellen (MyFitnessPal), meditatie en mindfulness (Headspace), het tracken en onderling vergelijken van sportactiviteiten (Strava), het tracken van je algehele bewegings- en gezondheidspatronen via een wearable (Fitbit), enzovoort. Hun huidige populariteit zal alleen nog maar toenemen, aangezien werkgevers en verzekeraars steeds nadrukkelijker het gebruik van gezondheidsapps aanprijzen. 1 Gezondheid is goed, meer gezondheid is beter. Geweldig toch, die alsmaar toenemende populariteit van gezondheidsapps?},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Hugenholtz2021b,

title = {Auteursrecht en artifici\"{e}le creatie},

author = {Hugenholtz, P. and Quintais, J.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Auteursrecht-2021-2.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-17},

journal = {Auteursrecht},

number = {2},

pages = {47-52},

abstract = {In dit artikel wordt de vraag gesteld of voortbrengselen die met behulp van AI-systemen tot stand zijn gebracht auteursrechtelijk beschermd kunnen zijn. Centraal in deze analyse staat niet de machine, maar de rol van de mens in het door het AI-systeem ondersteunde creatieve proces. Is deze rol voldoende om het resultaat als auteursrechtelijke beschermd werk te kwalificeren? En wie heeft in dat geval te gelden als maker(s)? Deze vragen worden aan de hand van het Unierecht en de jurisprudentie van het HvJ EU beantwoord. Dit artikel is gebaseerd op een studie die in opdracht van de Europese Commissie is verricht en aan de basis ligt van het door de Commissie in het Actieplan IE geformuleerde

beleidsstandpunt over AI-creaties.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Hugenholtz2021bb,

title = {Three Cheers for the DSM Directive’s Rules on Author’s Contracts \textendash and a Cautionary Note from the Netherlands},

author = {Hugenholtz, P.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/06/14/three-cheers-for-the-dsm-directives-rules-on-authors-contracts-and-a-cautionary-note-from-the-netherlands/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-14},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{vanHoboken2021b,

title = {Smartphone platforms as privacy regulators},

author = {van Hoboken, J. and Fahy, R.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Smartphone-platforms-as-privacy-regulators.pdf},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2021.105557},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-10},

journal = {Computer Law & Security Review},

volume = {41},

abstract = {A series of recent developments highlight the increasingly important role of online platforms in impacting data privacy in today's digital economy. Revelations and parliamentary hearings about privacy violations in Facebook's app and service partner ecosystem, EU Court of Justice judgments on joint responsibility of platforms and platform users, and the rise of smartphone app ecosystems where app behaviour is governed by app distribution platforms and operating systems, all show that platform policies can make or break the enjoyment of privacy by users. In this article, we examine these developments and explore the question of what can and should be the role of platforms in protecting data privacy of their users.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Seipp2021,

title = {News media’s dependency on big tech: should we be worried?},

author = {Seipp, T.},

url = {https://policyreview.info/articles/news/news-medias-dependency-big-tech-should-we-be-worried/1562},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-10},

journal = {Internet Policy Review},

note = {Opinion},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@online{Quintais2021-Guidance,

title = {Commission’s Guidance on Art. 17 CDSM Directive: the authorisation dimension},

author = {Quintais, J.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/06/10/commissions-guidance-on-art-17-cdsm-directive-the-authorisation-dimension/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-10},

organization = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {online}

}

@article{Quintais2021,

title = {Commission’s Guidance on Art. 17 CDSM Directive: the authorisation dimension},

author = {Quintais, J.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/06/10/commissions-guidance-on-art-17-cdsm-directive-the-authorisation-dimension/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-10},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Hugenholtz2021,

title = {Annotatie bij Hof van Justitie EU 11 juni 2020 (Brompton Bicycle / Chedech/Get2Get},

author = {Hugenholtz, P.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2021_175.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-04},

journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie},

number = {22},

pages = {3136-3138},

abstract = {Verzoek om een prejudici\"{e}le beslissing krachtens artikel 267 VWEU, ingediend door de tribunal de l’entreprise de Li\`{e}ge (ondernemingsrechtbank Luik, Belgi\"{e}) bij beslissing van 18 december 2018. Intellectuele en industri\"{e}le eigendom, auteursrecht en naburige rechten. Vouwfiets. Bescherming van werken op grond van het auteursrecht. Voor het bereiken van een technisch resultaat noodzakelijke vorm.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Reda2021,

title = {European Commission back-tracks on user rights in Article 17 Guidance},

author = {Reda, J. and Keller, P.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/06/04/european-commission-back-tracks-on-user-rights-in-article-17-guidance/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-04},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Dommering2021bb,

title = {Annotatie Hof van Justitie EU 19 december 2019 (Airbnb Ireland / Hoteli\`{e}re Turenne)},

author = {Dommering, E.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2021_61.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-03},

journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie},

volume = {2021},

number = {20/21},

pages = {2799-2802},

abstract = {Deze zaak (beslist door de Grand Chamber van het Hof) gaat over Airbnb in Frankrijk en gaat over dezelfde problematiek als in de Uberzaken in Spanje en Frankrijk (HvJEU 20 december 2017, zaak C-434/15, NJ 2018, 361 m.nt. E.J. Dommering, resp. HvJEU 10 april 2018, zaak C-320/16, NJ 2019, 3). In die zaken werd beslist dat de Uberdienst weliswaar een ‘dienst in de informatiemaatschappij’ is, zodat de e-commerce richtlijn (richtlijn 2000/31) van toepassing kan zijn, maar toch meer kenmerken van een vervoersdienst heeft, hetgeen ruimte schept voor de lidstaten ze onder de regels voor taxidiensten te brengen. In deze zaak beslist het Hof anders.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{vanHoboken2021,

title = {Regulating Disinformation in Europe: Implications for Speech and Privacy},

author = {van Hoboken, J. and Fahy, R.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Regulating-Disinformation-in-Europe.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-01},

journal = {UC Irvine Journal of International, Transnational, and Comparative Law},

volume = {6},

number = {1},

pages = {9-36},

abstract = {This Article examines the ongoing dynamics in the regulation of disinformation in Europe, focusing on the intersection between the right to

freedom of expression and the right to privacy. Importantly, there has been a recent wave of regulatory measures and other forms of pressure on online platforms to tackle disinformation in Europe. These measures play out in different ways at the intersection of the right to freedom of expression and the right to privacy. Crucially, as governments, journalists, and researchers seek greater transparency and access to information from online platforms to evaluate their impact on the health of their democracies, these measures raise acute issues related to user privacy. Indeed, platforms that once refused to cooperate with governments in identifying users allegedly responsible for disseminating illegal or harmful content are now expanding cooperation. However, while platforms are increasingly facilitating government access to user data, platforms are also invoking data protection law concerns as a shield in response to recent efforts at increased platform transparency. At

the same time, data protection law provides for one of the main systemic regulatory safeguards in Europe. It protects user autonomy concerning datadriven campaigns, requiring transparency for internet audiences about targeting and data subject rights in relation to audience platforms, such as social media companies.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Quintais2021-COLA,

title = {Book review: European Libraries and the Internet: Copyright and Extended Collective Licences, by Ran Tryggvadottir. },

author = {Quintais, J.},

url = {https://kluwerlawonline.com/JournalArticle/Common+Market+Law+Review/58.3/COLA2021061},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-01},

journal = {Common Market Law Review},

volume = {58},

number = {3},

pages = {961 \textendash 964},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@online{Quintais2021f,

title = {Article 12 DSA: Will platforms be required to apply EU fundamental rights in content moderation decisions? },

author = {Quintais, J. and Appelman, N. and Fahy, R.},

url = {https://dsa-observatory.eu/2021/05/31/article-12-dsa-will-platforms-be-required-to-apply-eu-fundamental-rights-in-content-moderation-decisions/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-05-31},

organization = {DSA Observatory},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {online}

}

@inbook{Dommering2021e,

title = {'Staan op de schouders van reuzen'. Waarheidsgetrouw citeren als maatschappelijke verantwoordelijkheid van de wetenschapper},

author = {Dommering, E.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Staan-op-de-schouders-van-reuzen.pdf

https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Plagiarism-in-Academic-Research-and-Education.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-05-28},

pages = {59-69},

note = {Hoofdstuk in 'Plagiaat in onderzoek en onderwijs', red. J. Soeharno & K. Algra, VSNU: Den Haag 2021. Ook beschikbaar in het Engels, zie link hieronder, ''Standing on the shoulders of giants'. Truthful citation is the social responsibility of academics.'},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {inbook}

}

@article{Leerssen2021,

title = {Platform ad archives in Article 30 DSA},

author = {Leerssen, P.},

url = {https://dsa-observatory.eu/2021/05/25/platform-ad-archives-in-article-30-dsa/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-05-25},

journal = {DSA Observatory blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Bod\'{o}2021,

title = {The commodification of trust},

author = {Bod\'{o}, B.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3843707},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-05-17},

journal = {Blockchain & Society Policy Research Lab Research Nodes},

number = {1},

abstract = {Fundamental, wide-ranging, and highly consequential transformations take place in interpersonal, and systemic trust relations due to the rapid adoption of complex, planetary-scale digital technological innovations. Trust is remediated by planetary scale techno-social systems, which leads to the privatization of trust production in society, and the ultimate commodification of trust itself.

Modern societies rely on communal, public and private logics of trust production. Communal logics produce trust by the group for the group, and are based on familiar, ethnic, religious or tribal relations, professional associations epistemic or value communities, groups with shared location or shared past. Public trust logics developed in the context of the modern state, and produce trust as a free public service. Abstract, institutionalized frameworks, institutions, such as the press, or public education, science, various arms of the bureaucratic state create familiarity, control, and insurance in social, political, and economic relations. Finally, private trust producers sell confidence as a product: lawyers, accountants, credit rating agencies, insurers, but also commercial brands offer trust for a fee.

With the emergence of the internet and digitization, a new class of private trust producers emerged. Online reputation management services, distributed ledgers, and AI-based predictive systems are widely adopted technological infrastructures, which are designed to facilitate trust-necessitating social, economic interactions by controlling the past, the present and the future, respectively. These systems enjoy immense economic success, and they are adopted en masse by individuals and institutional actors alike.

The emergence of the private, technical means of trust production paves the way towards the widescale commodification of trust, where trust is produced as a commercial activity, conducted by private parties, for economic gain, often far removed from the loci where trust-necessitating social interactions take place. The remediation and consequent privatization and commodification of trust production has a number of potentially adverse social effects: it may decontextualize trust relationships; it removes trust from the local social, cultural relational contexts; it changes the calculus of interpersonal trust relations. Maybe more importantly as more and more social and economic relations are conditional upon having access to, and good standing in private trust infrastructures, commodification turns trust into the question of continuous labor, or devastating exclusion. By invoking Karl Polanyi’s work on fictious commodities, I argue that the privatization, and commodification of trust may have a catastrophic impact on the most fundamental layers of the social fabric.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Bostyn2021,

title = {Why a COVID IP Waiver Is not a Good Strategy},

author = {Bostyn, S.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3843327},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-05-17},

abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has a profound influence on all aspects of society. The development of successful vaccines in record speed is almost a miracle. But despite the successful development and approval of multiple vaccines, many people still die of this terrible disease, and there is an urgent need to see more vaccines manufactured and distributed across the globe.

The proposed COVID-19 IP waiver has been touted by some to be the perfect solution to a terrible problem. We all agree that there is a terrible problem of insufficient vaccines to inoculate the world population.

An IP waiver is not a good strategy however, to tackle this crisis. There are multiple more effective solution conceivable which do not require a very disruptive IP waiver.

The problem of insufficient supply is much more complicated than a simple IP waiver suggests. This is a complex ecosystem, and there are many moving parts. Moreover, IP rights are only part of the problem relating to more supply of vaccine or therapeutics. In view of the complexities, it will probably take many months to negotiate any kind of IP waiver system that would be acceptable to all WTO member states, if consensus could be reached at all. And the end result is likely to satisfy very few if any countries.

The legality of an IP waiver can be doubted, and it would require retro-active effect, a concept that should be extremely sparingly used.

A multitude of complex issues needs to be sorted out. There are hundreds of patents to navigate. A waiver to the equally patented vaccine platform technology (covering many patents), which may be used to develop any other vaccine, will make those companies who have invested heavily into developing it very nervous indeed, to say the least.

Crucial manufacturing know-how is often not protected by IP rights, but is kept secret, and it will be difficult to force companies to disclose that information, also because one does not know what to ask for.

The present IP waiver proposal also provides for a disclosure of commercially very sensitive information. Companies did not have a chance to adapt their regulatory disclosure strategies to this new reality, which means that information which will be disclosed under the waiver could very well have a major negative impact on future innovation strategies, and may also hamper competitive advantage or leverage.

Market exclusivity is arguably not covered by the IP waiver, which means that separate national statutory intervention will be required to ensure that this market exclusivity is set aside, absent of which the IP waiver cannot have any practical effect.

A quick and determined use of compulsory licensing could be a better way forward, as they have the potential to be a powerful tool. There are inefficiencies in using the instrument however, and invoking them when the need is high will require a relatively long lead time before they sort practical effect. They also require additional statutory intervention to ensure that regulatory exclusivities do not block their practical effect. And they might not necessarily work as well with low and middle-income countries, who would have less leverage in the negotiations.

More efficient solutions can be arrived at by introducing hard clauses into contracts in the context of push and pull mechanisms. Those obligations are much more likely to result in more supply in the shorter to medium term if they are agreed upon long before the vaccine enters the market. It is obviously too late for the contracts that have been concluded in the past, but it should be a template for the future.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Ancel2021,

title = {International Law Association’s Guidelines on Intellectual Property and Private International Law (“Kyoto Guidelines”): Applicable Law},

author = {Ancel, M-E. and Binctin, N. and Drexl, J. and van Eechoud, M. and Ginsburg, J.C. and Kono, T. and Lee, G. and Matulionyte, R. and Treppoz, E. and Moura Vicente, D.},

url = {https://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-12-1-2021/5247/jipitec%20-12_1_2021_applicable_law.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-05-11},

journal = {JIPITEC},

volume = {12},

number = {1},

pages = {44-73},

abstract = {The chapter “Applicable Law” of the International Law Association’s Guidelines on Intellectual Property and Private International Law (“Kyoto Guidelines”) provides principles on the choice of law in international intellectual property matters. The Guidelines confirm the traditional principle of the lex loci protection is for the existence, transferability, scope and infringement of intellectual property rights. The law applicable to the initial ownership of registered rights is governed by the lex loci protection is whereas the law of the closest connection is applied to determine the ownership of copyright. For contracts, freedom of choice is acknowledged. With regard to ubiquitous or multi-state infringement and collective rights management in the field of copyright, the Guidelines suggest innovative solutions. Finally, the chapter contains a Guideline on the law applicable to the arbitrability of disputes.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{onProperty2021,

title = {Annex Guidelines on Intellectual Property and Private International Law (“Kyoto Guidelines”)},

author = {van Eechoud, M. and as part of ILA Committee:},

url = {https://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-12-1-2021/5252},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-05-11},

journal = {JIPITEC},

volume = {12},

number = {1},

pages = {86-93},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Quintais2021e,

title = {The Interplay between the Digital Services Act and Sector Regulation: How Special is Copyright?},

author = {Quintais, J. and Schwemer, S. },

url = {https://privpapers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3841606},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-05-10},

journal = {Working Paper},

abstract = {On 15 December 2020, the European Commission published its proposal for a Regulation on a Single Market for Digital Services (Digital Services Act). It carries out a regulatory overhaul of the 21-year- old horizontal rules on intermediary liability in the Directive and introduces new due diligence obligations for intermediary services.



Our analysis illuminates an important point that has so far received little attention: how would the Digital Services Act’s rules interact with existing sector-specific lex specialis rules? In this paper, we look specifically at the intersection of the Digital Services Act with the regime for online content sharing service providers (OCSSPs) set forth in art. 17 of Directive (EU) 2019/790 on copyright in the Digital Single Market (CDSM Directive). At first glance, these regimes do not appear to overlap as the rules on copyright are lex specialis to the Digital Services Act. A closer look shows a more complex and nuanced picture. Our analysis concludes that the DSA will apply to OCSSPs insofar as it contains rules that regulate matters not covered by art. 17 CDSM Directive, as well as specific rules on matters where art. 17 leaves margin of discretion to Member States. This includes, to varying degrees, rules in the DSA relating to the liability of intermediary providers and to due diligence obligations for online platforms of different sizes. Importantly, we consider that such rules apply even where art. 17 CDSM Directive contains specific (but less precise) regulation on the matter.



From a normative perspective, this might be a desirable outcome, to the extent that the DSA aims to establish “uniform rules for a safe, predictable and trusted online environment, where fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter are effectively protected”. Based on our analysis, we suggest a number of clarifications that might be help achieve that goal. },

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Voorhoof2021,

title = {Freedom of expression, the Media and Journalists: Case-law of the Euopean Court of Human Rights},

author = {Voorhoof, D. and McGonagle, T.},

url = {https://rm.coe.int/iris-themes-vol-iii-2020-edition-en-28-april-2021-/1680a24eee},

isbn = {9789287184351},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-05-06},

abstract = {This e-book provides valuable insights into the European Court of Human Rights’ extensive case-law on freedom of expression and media and journalistic freedoms. The first four editions of the e-book (2013, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2020) have proved hugely successful. The new sixth edition summarises over 339 judgments or decisions by the Court and provides hyperlinks to the full text of each of the summarised judgments or decisions (via HUDOC, the Court's online case-law database). },

note = {IRIS Themes, vol. III, 6th edition, April 2021},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Volgenant2021,

title = {Persvrijheidsmonitor 2020},

author = {Volgenant, O. and McGonagle, T.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Persvrijheidsmonitor-2020.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-05-03},

abstract = {Op maandag 3 mei wordt de Internationale Dag van de Persvrijheid gehouden. Op deze dag wordt de jaarlijkse Persvrijheidsmonitor gepresenteerd met een overzicht van de ontwikkelingen op het gebied van de persvrijheid in Nederland.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@inbook{HusovecQuintais2021-2,

title = {Too Small to Matter? On the Copyright Directive’s bias in favour of big right-holders},

author = {Husovec, M. and Quintais, J.},

editor = {Tuomas Mylly and Jonathan Griffiths},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3835930},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-04-29},

publisher = {Oxford University Press},

abstract = {Copyright law is about recognising the author’s material and non-material interests and setting the incentives for creativity right. The legislative changes in this area increasingly look as if simple linearity governs the world: what we take away from some, we automatically give away in equal part to others. The idea of redistribution is noticeable in recent legislative developments. Art. 17 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive (DSM Directive) is the latest policy intervention to prove this point. According to its logic, imposing stricter liability on some online gatekeepers will automatically improve the position and revenues for all right-holders. This chapter explores the flaws in such an approach by highlighting how the excessive focus of Art. 17 on big right-holders neglects and harms smaller creators.



EU copyright law often uses a technical term of ‘right-holders’ to refer to a wide range of players with legal entitlements in the copyright ecosystem: authors, performers, phonogram producers, film producers, broadcasting organisations and (most recently) press publishers. Obviously, not all right-holders are created equal nor do their legal entitlements flow from identical normative justifications. We argue in this chapter that even the use of this seemingly neutral term can, due to the design of underlying legal solutions, lead to stark inequality between right-holders. Our broader goal is to demonstrate that maximising enforcement by means of Art. 17 of the DSM Directive does not simply maximise the position of every right-holder at the expense of platforms but does so disproportionality for big right-holders. Besides, we show that blind use of ‘right-holder’ and ‘user’ distinction harms the very creators that provision is supposed to protect. },

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {inbook}

}

@article{vanGompel2021,

title = {‘Non, non, rien n’a chang\'{e}’: Over vergoedingsaanspraken voor makers uit hoofde van exploitatiecontracten},

author = {van Gompel, S.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Auteursrecht-2021-1.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-04-29},

journal = {Auteursrecht},

volume = {2021},

number = {1},

pages = {3-9},

abstract = {‘Auteurs en artiesten profiteren nog weinig van Wet Auteurscontractenrecht’,  zo luidt de titel van het persbericht van het WODC bij de publicatie van het evaluatierapport van genoemde wet in oktober 2020. Makers geven onder meer aan dat zij hun aanspraak op een billijke vergoeding (art. 25c lid 1 Aw) of de aanvullende billijke vergoeding bij exploitatiesucces (art. 25d Aw) niet durven in te roepen of te handhaven jegens exploitanten. Het is daarom de vraag of de vergoeding die makers van exploitanten ontvangen voor de contractueel verleende exploitatiebevoegdheid van hun werken wel altijd ‘billijk’ is. Mede in het licht van art. 18 e.v. DSM-richtlijn, die eveneens beogen een passende en evenredige vergoeding voor auteurs en uitvoerende kunstenaars in exploitatiecontracten te waarborgen, bespreekt dit artikel juridische en praktische maatregelen om makers makkelijker in staat te stellen hun vergoedingsaanspraken uit exploitatiecontracten te effectueren.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{vanGompel2021b,

title = {Annotatie bij Rb Amsterdam 10 september 2020 (Left Lane c.s. / Sony Music)},

author = {van Gompel, S.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_Auteursrecht_2021-1.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-04-29},

journal = {Auteursrecht},

number = {1},

pages = {40-42},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Keller2021,

title = {It’s 23 April 2021, so where is the Advocate General opinion in Case C-401/19 Poland v Parliament and Council?},

author = {Keller, P.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/04/23/its-23-april-2021-so-where-is-the-advocate-general-opinion-in-case-c-401-19-poland-v-parliament-and-council/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-04-23},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@periodical{Sax2021bb,

title = {Opinie: Beleid voor CoronaCheck-app ontbreekt jammerlijk},

author = {Sax, M. and Helberger, N. and Strycharz, J.},

url = {https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2021/04/25/beleid-voor-coronacheck-apps-ontbreekt-jammerlijk-a4041219},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-04-23},

journal = {NRC Handelsblad},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {periodical}

}

@online{Quintais2021c,

title = {The Rise of Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) and the Role of Copyright Law \textendash Part II},

author = {Quintais, J. and Bod\'{o}, B. and Giannopoulou, A. and Mezei, P.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/04/22/the-rise-of-non-fungible-tokens-nfts-and-the-role-of-copyright-law-part-ii/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-04-22},

organization = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {online}

}

@online{QuintaisetalNFTPartI,

title = {The Rise of Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) and the Role of Copyright Law \textendash Part I},

author = {Quintais, J. and Bod\'{o}, B. and Giannopoulou, A. and Mezei, P.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/04/14/the-rise-of-non-fungible-tokens-nfts-and-the-role-of-copyright-law-part-i/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-04-14},

organization = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {online}

}

@article{vanEechoud2021b,

title = {A Serpent Eating Its Tail: The Database Directive Meets the Open Data Directive},

author = {van Eechoud, M.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/IIC_2021.pdf},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-021-01049-7},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-04-14},

journal = {IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law },

volume = {52},

number = {4},

pages = {375-378},

abstract = {As part of its broader digital strategy, the European Commission has articulated a data strategy. Its aim is to help grow “the use of, and demand for, data and data-enabled products and services throughout the Single Market”. In the eyes of the EC, promoting wider availability and use of data would stimulate not just “greater productivity and competitive markets, but also improvements in health and well-being, environment, transparent governance and convenient public services”. That is quite a shopping list. The data strategy has ramifications for intellectual property law, especially for the sui generis database right enshrined in the 1996 Database Directive.},

note = {Editorial},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Trapova2021b,

title = {EU copyright law round up \textendash first trimester of 2021},

author = {Trapova, A. and Quintais, J.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/04/06/eu-copyright-law-round-up-first-trimester-of-2021/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-04-07},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Bellanova2021,

title = {Toward a Critique of Algorithmic Violence},

author = {Bellanova, R. and Irion, K. and Lindskov Jacobsen, K. and Ragazzi, F. and Saugmann, R. and Suchman, L.},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olab003},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-29},

journal = {International Political Sociology},

volume = {15},

number = {1},

pages = {121\textendash150},

abstract = {Questions about how algorithms contribute to (in)security are under discussion across international political sociology. Building upon and adding to these debates, our collective discussion foregrounds questions about algorithmic violence. We argue that it is important to examine how algorithmic systems feed (into) specific forms of violence, and how they justify violent actions or redefine what forms of violence are deemed legitimate. Bringing together different disciplinary and conceptual vantage points, this collective discussion opens a conversation about algorithmic violence focusing both on its specific instances and on the challenges that arise in conceptualizing and studying it. Overall, the discussion converges on three areas of concern\textemdashthe violence undergirding the creation and feeding of data infrastructures; the translation processes at play in the use of computer/machine vision across diverse security practices; and the institutional governing of algorithmic violence, especially its organization, limitation, and legitimation.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{vanEechoud2021,

title = {Nieuws in de platformeconomie},

author = {van Eechoud, M.},

url = {https://www.montesquieu-instituut.nl/id/vlhef5g0pisa/nieuws/nieuws_in_de_platformeconomie},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-29},

journal = {De Hofvijver},

volume = {11},

number = {118},

abstract = {De media stond de afgelopen weken bol van het nieuws dat Google en Facebook op grond van een nieuwe Australische wet moeten gaan betalen voor het gebruik van ‘news content’. In de EU hebben we al een paar jaar zo’n wet, in de vorm van een richtlijn (2019/790) die inmiddels in de Wet op de naburige rechten is ge\"{i}mplementeerd. Deze zomer treed de herziene wet in werking en hebben uitgevers van perspublicaties aan het auteursrecht vergelijkbare exclusieve rechten ten aanzien van het online (commercieel) gebruik van hun digitale uitgaven. Net als in Australi\"{e} gebeurde, ging de totstandkoming van de Europese wet gepaard met groot retorisch geweld van zowel de kant van traditionele media als van platformen. Digitale platforms zouden advertentie-inkomsten stelen van kranten en rijk worden over de rug van traditionele media. Persuitgevers zouden voorstander zijn van een de-facto belasting op hyperlinks, gebrek aan innovatiekracht tonen en miskennen hoezeer sociale media en zoekmachines hun bereik exponentieel vergroten, en dat gratis.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@phdthesis{Sax2021bb,

title = {Between Empowerment and Manipulation: The Ethics and Regulation of For-Profit Health Apps},

author = {Sax, M.},

url = {https://dare.uva.nl/search?identifier=52225d37-e7e1-4883-9dab-a3f5d3a063d8},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-26},

abstract = {In the digital society, many of our everyday activities take place within digital choice architectures that become increasingly good at understanding and shaping our behavior. Health apps are a perfect example of this trend: they are easy to download and use and promise user empowerment. By collecting and analyzing user data, health apps promise to be able to ‘get to know’ their users and deliver personalized feedback and suggestions for better health outcomes. But this promise of user empowerment also comes with a risk of user manipulation. Most of the popular health apps are for-profit services. To monetize their userbase, they can rely on the very same user data collection, data analysis, and targeting techniques to shape the behavior of health app users in ways that benefit the health app provider, rather than the users themselves. As it turns out, the very conditions for empowerment largely overlap with the conditions for manipulation.



This dissertation offers an ethical and legal analysis of the tension between empowerment and manipulation in for-profit health apps, and digital choice architectures more generally. Building on ethical theories of personal autonomy and manipulation, the dissertation develops an ethical framework to evaluate the design and commercial practices of health apps. This ethical framework is then used to develop novel interpretations of key concepts in the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD). Based on these novel interpretations of key concepts, it is argued that the UCPD has an important role to play in addressing consumer manipulation. },

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {phdthesis}

}

@article{Senftleben2021,

title = {Ensuring the Visibility and Accessibility of European Creative Content on the World Market: The Need for Copyright Data Improvement in the Light of New Technologies},

author = {Senftleben, M. and Margoni, T. and Antal, D. and Bod\'{o}, B. and van Gompel, S. and Handke, C.W. and Kretschmer, M. and Poort, J. and Quintais, J. and Schwemer, S.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3785272},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-23},

abstract = {In the European Strategy for Data, the European Commission highlighted the EU’s ambition to acquire a leading role in the data economy. At the same time, the Commission conceded that the EU would have to increase its pools of quality data available for use and re-use. In the creative industries, this need for enhanced data quality and interoperability is particularly strong. Without data improvement, unprecedented opportunities for monetising the wide variety of EU creative and making this content available for new technologies, such as artificial intelligence training systems, will most probably be lost. The problem has a worldwide dimension. While the US have already taken steps to provide an integrated data space for music as of 1 January 2021, the EU is facing major obstacles not only in the field of music but also in other creative industry sectors. Weighing costs and benefits, there can be little doubt that new data improvement initiatives and sufficient investment in a better copyright data infrastructure should play a central role in EU copyright policy. A trade-off between data harmonisation and interoperability on the one hand, and transparency and accountability of content recommender systems on the other, could pave the way for successful new initiatives.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@online{Irion2021b,

title = {Formal meeting (oral evidence session): Digital trade and data},

author = {Irion, K.},

url = {https://committees.parliament.uk/event/3859/formal-meeting-oral-evidence-session/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-12},

abstract = {Oral testimony on the UK House of Commons International Trade Committee. The Committee has launched an inquiry into digital trade and data. Digital trade refers to digitally enabled, or digitally delivered, trade in goods and services. Such trade involves the movement of data. 

The Committee’s inquiry will explore a range of issues, including:

• Digital trade and data provisions in Free Trade Agreements

• Concerns around the security and privacy of data

• The environmental impact of digital trade

• Relevant legal frameworks},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {online}

}

@article{Dommering2021c,

title = {Annotatie bij Hof van Justitie EU 16 juli 2020 (Data Protection Commissioner / Facebook Ireland & Schrems)(Schrems II)},

author = {Dommering, E.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2021_24.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-12},

journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie},

volume = {2021},

number = {5/6},

pages = {455-458},

abstract = {Uitlevering persoonsgegevens Ierland/VS in strijd met de AVG omdat veiligheidsdiensten in VS ongecontroleerd toegang hebben tot serviceproviders die deze persoonsgegevens ontvangen.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Dommering2021d,

title = {Annotatie bij Hoge Raad 1 oktober 2019 (nr. 17/01305)},

author = {Dommering, E.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2021_29.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-12},

journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie},

volume = {2021},

number = {5/6},

pages = {550-551},

abstract = {Schending geheimhoudingsplicht lid Antilliaanse parlement.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Dommering2021b,

title = {Annotatie bij EHRM 8 oktober 2019 (Szurovecz / Hongarije)},

author = {Dommering, E.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2021_13.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-11},

journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie},

volume = {2021},

number = {4},

pages = {230-231},

abstract = {Deze zaak gaat over de vrijheid van nieuwsgaring. Een journalist kreeg geen toegang tot vreemdelingencentra in Hongarije. Het EHRM achtte dat in de gegeven omstandigheden in strijd met artikel 10 EVRM. },

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@techreport{Jones-Bos2021,

title = {Evaluatie 2020: Wet op de Inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten 2017},

author = {Jones-Bos, R.V.M. and Bot, Th. P.L. and Dommering, E. and van den Herik, L.J. and Jacobs, B.P.F. and Nagtegaal, W. and Zijlstra, S.E. (Evaluatiecommissie Wiv 2017)},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Rapport_Evaluatie_2020_Wet_op_de_inlichtingen-_en_veiligheidsdiensten_2017.pdf

https://www.tweedekamer.nl/kamerstukken/brieven_regering/detail?id=2021Z01039&did=2021D02502},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-11},

note = {Den Haag: Ministeries BDZK en Defensie, 2021, 180 pp.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@article{Dommering2021,

title = {Annotatie bij EHRM 30 januari 2020 (Breyer/ Duitsland)},

author = {Dommering, E.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2020_431.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-05},

journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie},

number = {51/52},

pages = {7926-7929},

abstract = {In deze uit Duitsland afkomstige zaak staat centraal de uitleg die het Bundesverfassungsgericht (hierna: BVerfG) aan de Duitse telecommunicatiewetgeving heeft gegeven met betrekking tot de opslag van persoonlijke communicatiegegevens. Het gaat om het opslaan van persoonsgegevens op Simkaarten. De zaak vertoont daarom verwantschap met de uitspraak van het HvJEU in de Spaanse zaak Ministerio Fiscal (HvJEU 2 oktober 2018, NJ 2020, nr 232 m. nt. E.J. Dommering), die het EHRM ook onder het relevante recht vermeldt.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@techreport{Helberger2021,

title = {EU Consumer Protection 2.0: Structural Asymmetries in Digital Consumer Markets},

author = {Helberger, N. and Lynskey, O. and Micklitz, H.-W. and Rott, P. and Sax, M. and Strycharz, J.},

url = {https://www.beuc.eu/publications/beuc-x-2021-018_eu_consumer_protection.0_0.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-05},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@inbook{Irion2021c,

title = {Front-running legislatures can foster AI that empowers users of digital technologies},

author = {Irion, K.},

editor = {Nadia El-Imam (ed.)},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/ki-front-running-legislatures-can-foster-ai-that-empowers-users-of-digital-technologies-2/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-05},

pages = {114-15},

organization = {NGI Forward},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {inbook}

}

@article{Poort2021,

title = {Personalised pricing: The demise of the fixed price?},

author = {Poort, J. and Zuiderveen Borgesius, F.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/The-Demise-of-the-Fixed-Price.pdf},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-04},

abstract = {An online seller or platform is technically able to offer every consumer a different price for the same product, based on information it has about the customers. Such online price discrimination exacerbates concerns regarding the fairness and morality of price discrimination, and the possible need for regulation. In this chapter, we discuss the underlying basis of price discrimination in economic theory, and its popular perception. Our surveys show that consumers are critical and suspicious of online price discrimination. A majority consider it unacceptable and unfair, and are in favour of a ban. When stores apply online price discrimination, most consumers think they should be informed about it. We argue that the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) applies to the most controversial forms of online price discrimination, and not only requires companies to disclose their use of price discrimination, but also requires companies to ask customers for their prior consent. Industry practice, however, does not show any adoption of these two principles.},

note = {Forthcoming as chapter 10 in: Kohl, U., & Eisler, J. (eds.), Data-Driven Personalisation in Markets, Politics and Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{SaxAusloos2021,

title = {Getting under your skin(s): A legal-ethical exploration of Fortnite’s transformation into a content delivery platform and its manipulative potential},

author = {Sax, M. and Ausloos, J.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3764489},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-03-01},

journal = {Interactive Entertainment Law Review},

volume = {4},

number = {1},

abstract = {This paper investigates the ethical and legal implications of increasingly manipulative practices in the gaming industry by looking at one of the currently most popular and profitable video games in the world. Fortnite has morphed from an online game into a quasi-social network and an important cultural reference point in the lifeworld of many (young) people. The game is also emblematic of the freemium business model, with strong incentives to design the game in a manner which maximises microtransactions. This article suggests that to properly understand Fortnite’s practices \textendash which we predict will become more widely adopted in the video game industry in the near future \textendash we need an additional perspective. Fortnite is not only designed for hyper-engagement; its search for continued growth and sustained relevance is driving its transformation from being a mere video game into a content delivery platform. This means that third parties can offer non game-related services to players within Fortnite’s immersive game experience. In this paper, we draw on an ethical theory of manipulation (which defines manipulation as an ethically problematic influence on a person’s behaviour) to explore whether the gaming experience offered by Fortnite harbours manipulative potential. To legally address the manipulative potential of commercial video game practices such as the ones found in Fortnite, we turn to European data protection and consumer protection law. More specifically, we explore how the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation and Unfair Commercial Practices Directive can provide regulators with tools to address Fortnite’s manipulative potential and to make Fortnite (more) forthright.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Helberger2021b,

title = {Regulation of news recommenders in the Digital Services Act: empowering David against the Very Large Online Goliath},

author = {Helberger, N. and Drunen, M. van and Vrijenhoek, S. and M\"{o}ller, J.},

url = {https://policyreview.info/articles/news/regulation-news-recommenders-digital-services-act-empowering-david-against-very-large},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-02-26},

journal = {Internet Policy Review},

note = {Opinion},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Quintais2021GRURInt,

title = {How to License Article 17? Exploring the Implementation Options for the New EU Rules on Content-Sharing Platforms under the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive},

author = {Quintais, J. and Husovec, M.},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikaa200





},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikaa200},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-02-18},

journal = {GRUR International - Journal of European and International IP Law},

volume = {70},

number = {4},

pages = {325-348},

abstract = {Article 17 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive is a major internet policy experiment of our decade. The provision fundamentally changes copyright regulation of certain digital platforms. However, the precise nature of Article 17 is far from clear. How does it fit the existing structure of EU copyright law and doctrine? How can the Member States implement it? These are the questions at the heart of this article. To answer them, we start by examining the nature and structure of the right prescribed in Article 17. The exact qualification brings important legal consequences. Among others, it determines the conditions imposed by EU and international law on national implementations. After reviewing different interpretation options, we conclude that Article 17 introduces either a ‘special’ or a ‘new’ sui generis right, both of which allow significant margin of discretion for Member States, especially as regards licensing mechanisms and exceptions.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{QuintaisJutte2021,

title = {The Pelham Chronicles: Sampling, Copyright and Fundamental Rights},

author = {Quintais, J. and Jutte, B.J.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3775599},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpab040},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-02-18},

journal = {Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice},

volume = {16},

number = {3},

pages = {213-225},

abstract = {On 29 July 2019 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU or Court) rendered its long-awaited judgment in Pelham. This judgement was published together, but not jointly, with those on Spiegel Online and Funke Medien. A bit less than a year later, on 30 April 2020, the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof or BGH), which had referred the cases to Luxembourg, rendered its judgments in all three cases. There are obvious parallels between these judgments, and their combined relevance for the interpretation of European copyright law in the light of EU fundamental rights cannot be understated.



This article focuses on Pelham, or the “Metall auf Metall” saga, as it is known in Germany. It analyses the relevant aspects and impact of Pelham in EU copyright law and examines how the BGH implemented the guidance provided by the CJEU. Where relevant, we draw the parallels to Funke Medien and Spiegel Online. Pelham gave the Court the opportunity to define the scope of the related right of reproduction of phonogram producers in art. 2(c) of Directive 2001/29/EC (InfoSoc Directive). The question whether such right enjoys the same scope of protection as the reproduction right for authorial works had made its way through the German courts for a remarkable two decades. This saga included a constitutional complaint, which in 2016 answered the question in the affirmative. The BGH’s preliminary reference to the CJEU was particularly important because on the back of the reproduction question it sought to clarify issues with fundamental rights implications, in particular the scope of the quotation right or defence and its application to musical creativity in the form of sampling.



This article proceeds as follows. After this introduction, we briefly revisit the Pelham saga in its journey through the German and European courts, providing he context to the underlying legal issues (2). We then turn to the interpretation of the scope of the reproduction and distribution rights for phonograms (3) before examining the CJEU’s assessment of the systematic nature of exceptions and limitations (E&Ls) (4). We then discuss the wider implications of Pelham on the role of fundamental right in copyright law (5). We conclude with some doctrinal and practical observations on the wider implications of the “Metall auf Metall”-saga (6). },

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Hilty2021,

title = {Opinion: International Instrument on Permitted Uses in Copyright Law},

author = {Hilty, R.M. and K\"{o}kl\"{u}, K. and Moscon, V. and Correa, C. and Dusollier, S. and Geiger, C. and Griffiths, J. and Grosse Ruse-Khan, H. and Kur, A. and Lin, X. and Markiewics, R. and N\'{e}risson, S. and Peukert, A. and Senftleben, M. and Xalabarder, R. },

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/IIC_2021_opinion.pdf},

doi = {10.1007/s40319-020-00999-8},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-02-04},

journal = {IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law },

volume = {52},

pages = {62-67},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Keller2021b,

title = {Article 17: (Mis)understanding the intent of the legislator},

author = {Keller, P.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/01/28/article-17-misunderstanding-the-intent-of-the-legislator/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-01-28},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@online{Quintais2021KPB,

title = {Trends And Developments In Artificial Intelligence: Challenges To Patent Law},

author = {Quintais, J. and Gervais, D.J. and P.B. Hugenholtz},

url = {http://patentblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/01/27/trends-and-developments-in-artificial-intelligence-challenges-to-patent-law/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-01-27},

organization = {Kluwer Patent Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {online}

}

@misc{Irion2021,

title = {AI Regulation in the European Union and Trade Law: How can accountability of AI and a high level of consumer protection prevail over a trade law discipline on source code?, study commissioned by the Vzbv, Amsterdam: Institute for Information Law, 2021},

author = {Irion, K.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/irion_study_ai_and_trade_21-01-26-2/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-01-26},

abstract = {The Federation of German Consumer Organisations (Verbraucherzentrale Bun-desverband \textendash vzbv) has commissioned this study from the Institute for Information Law (IViR) at the University of Amsterdam, in order to shed light on the cross-border supply of AI technology and its impact on EU consumer rights. In the current negotiations on electronic commerce at the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the EU supports the introduction \textendash in the legal text \textendash of a clause which prohibits the participating countries to introduce \textendash in their national laws \textendash measures that require access to, or transfer of, the source code of software, with some exceptions. This is a cause for concern for experts and rights advocates, as such a clause \textendash if not carefully conditioned \textendash can prevent future EU regulation of AI that may be harmful to consumers. This study concludes that the source code clause within trade law indeed restricts the EU’s right to regulate in the field of AI governance in several important ways.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {misc}

}

@article{Keller2021bb,

title = {Divergence instead of guidance: the Article 17 implementation discussion in 2020 \textendash Part 2},

author = {Keller, P.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/01/22/divergence-instead-of-guidance-the-article-17-implementation-discussion-in-2020-part-2/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-01-22},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Keller2021bb,

title = {Divergence instead of guidance: the Article 17 implementation discussion in 2020 \textendash Part 1},

author = {Keller, P.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2021/01/21/divergence-instead-of-guidance-the-article-17-implementation-discussion-in-2020-part-1/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-01-21},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Janssen2021,

title = {Decentralised Data Processing: Personal Data Stores and the GDPR},

author = {Janssen, H. and Cobbe, J. and Norval, C. and Singh, J.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3570895

https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/IDPL-2021-4.pdf},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/idpl/ipaa016},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-01-04},

journal = {International Data Privacy Law},

volume = {10},

number = {4},

pages = {356-384},

abstract = {When it comes to online services, users have limited control over how their personal data is processed. This is partly due to the nature of the business models of those services, where data is typically stored and aggregated in data centres. This has recently led to the development of technologies aiming at leveraging user control over the processing of their personal data.

Personal Data Stores (“PDSs”) represent a class of these technologies; PDSs provide users with a device, enabling them to capture, aggregate and manage their personal data. The device provides tools for users to control and monitor access, sharing and computation over data on their device. The motivation for PDSs are described as (i) to assist users with their confidentiality and privacy concerns, and/or (ii) to provide opportunities for users to transact with or otherwise monetise their data.

While PDSs potentially might enable some degree of user empowerment, they raise interesting considerations and uncertainties in relation to the responsibilities under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). More specifically, the designations of responsibilities among key parties involved in PDS ecosystems are unclear. Further, the technical architecture of PDSs appears to restrict certain lawful grounds for processing, while technical means to identify certain category data, as proposed by some, may remain theoretical.

We explore the considerations, uncertainties, and limitations of PDSs with respect to some key obligations under the GDPR. As PDS technologies continue to develop and proliferate, potentially providing an alternative to centralised approaches to data processing, we identify issues which require consideration by regulators, PDS platform providers and technologists.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Janssen2021b,

title = {Personal Data Stores: a user-centric privacy utopia?},

author = {Janssen, H. and Cobbe, J. and Singh, J.},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-01-04},

journal = {Internet Policy Review},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {forthcoming},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Sax2021,

title = {Optimization of what? For-profit health apps as manipulative digital environments},

author = {Sax, M.},

url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-020-09576-6},

doi = {10.1007/s10676-020-09576-6},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-01-03},

journal = {Ethics and Information Technology},

abstract = {Mobile health applications (‘health apps’) that promise the user to help her with some aspect of her health are very popular: for-profit apps such as MyFitnessPal, Fitbit, or Headspace have tens of millions of users each. For-profit health apps are designed and run as optimization systems. One would expect that these health apps aim to optimize the health of the user, but in reality they aim to optimize user engagement and, in effect, conversion. This is problematic, I argue, because digital health environments that aim to optimize user engagement risk being manipulative. To develop this argument, I first provide a brief analysis of the underlying business models and the resulting designs of the digital environments provided by popular for-profit health apps. In a second step, I present a concept of manipulation that can help analyze digital environments such as health apps. In the last part of the article, I use my concept of manipulation to analyze the manipulative potential of for-profit health apps. Although for-profit health can certainly empower their users, the conditions for empowerment also largely overlap with the conditions for manipulation. As a result, we should be cautious when embracing the empowerment discourse surrounding health apps. An additional aim of this article is to contribute to the rapidly growing literature on digital choice architectures and the ethics of influencing behavior through such choice architectures. I take health apps to be a paradigmatic example of digital choice architectures that give rise to ethical questions, so my analysis of the manipulative potential of health apps can also inform the larger literature on digital choice architectures.},

note = {Preprint available here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3752597},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Keller2020bb,

title = {Finnish Article 17 implementation proposal prohibits the use of automated upload filters},

author = {Keller, P.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/12/23/finnish-article-17-implementation-proposal-prohibits-the-use-of-automated-upload-filters/},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-12-23},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Ferrari2020b,

title = {Crosshatching Privacy: Financial Intermediaries’ Data Practices Between Law Enforcement and Data Economy},

author = {Ferrari, V.},

url = {https://edpl.lexxion.eu/article/EDPL/2020/4/8

https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/edpl_2020_04.pdf},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.21552/edpl/2020/4/8},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-12-22},

journal = {European Data Protection Law Review},

volume = {6},

number = {4},

pages = {522-535},

abstract = {Financial data are key to various law enforcement processes, including criminal investigations, anti-money laundering strategies and the implementation of national fiscal policies. However, financial data also qualify as personal data. While law enforcement objectives can derogate certain privacy-related legal safeguards, private financial firms should, in principle, comply with the privacy standards upheld by GDPR. Highlighting the most critical trends of the current financial industry (i.e. commercial exploitation of data; international dimension of financial informational networks; use of automated processing and decision-making tools), the present paper analyses how privacy and law enforcement priorities interplay in determining the governance of financial data. We conclude by recognizing that privacy loopholes exist in the current financial industry’s data practices, and that - as payments tend to be increasingly performed in digital manners, exponentially increasing the availability of financial data - privacy-enhancing payment methods should be encouraged and legitimised.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Hugenholtz2020h,

title = {Artikel 18-23 DSM-richtlijn: Exploitatiecontracten},

author = {Hugenholtz, P.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/AMI_2020_6.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-12-18},

journal = {AMI},

volume = {2020},

number = {6},

pages = {187-192},

abstract = {De DSM-richtlijn van 17 april 2019 bevat een zestal bepalingen op het gebied van het auteurscontractenrecht. Artikelen 18 tot en met 23 hebben niet alleen betrekking op de ‘billijke vergoeding van auteurs en uitvoerende kunstenaars in exploitatiecontracten’, zoals het opschrift van titel IV, hoofdstuk 3 van de richtlijn belooft, maar ook op transparantie, geschillenbeslechting en het recht op herroeping van verleende rechten. Hoewel de meeste van deze onderwerpen reeds een plaats hebben gevonden in hoofdstuk 1a van de huidige Auteurswet, noopt de richtlijn op

een aantal punten tot wetswijziging. Dat geldt in het bijzonder voor de transparantieplicht, die in de huidige wet niet voorkomt. In deze bijdrage, onderdeel van een reeks van AMI-artikelen over de DSM-richtlijn, worden de auteurscontractenrechtelijke bepalingen van de richtlijn en de omzetting ervan besproken.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Hugenholtz2020g,

title = {Trends and Developments in Artificial Intelligence: Challenges to Copyright},

author = {Hugenholtz, P. and Quintais, J. and Gervais, D.J.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/12/16/trends-and-developments-in-artificial-intelligence-challenges-to-copyright/},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-12-17},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@techreport{Betzel2020,

title = {Notions of Disinformation and Related Concepts },

author = {Betzel, M. and Fahy, R. and Helberger, N. and Marrazzo, F. and Matv{e}jka, S. and Nyakas, L. and Papp, J.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/ERGA-SG2-Report-2020-Notions-of-disinformation-and-related-concepts.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-12-11},

abstract = {Previous work of the European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA) has shown that the definitions used by the European Commission, Member States and online platforms for the different phenomena of disinformation deviate and should be further clarified in order to ensure a consistent approach. The aim of this Report is to provide for clearer and more uniform definitions of disinformation to ensure optimal guidance to all actors involved and contribute to more consistency within the national approaches. The Report also aims to assist in coming to clearer definitions and ensure more consistency and uniformity regarding the notions of political advertising and issue-based advertising. The information for this report was collected through various means including an examination of existing academic research, interviews with relevant stakeholders, particularly from the civil society and media. The scope of the survey was not limited to the single notion of disinformation but also covered concepts that are usually associated with disinformation such as misinformation, malinformation, fake news, false news, false information, and foreign influence operations. Information was collected on definitions, interpretations, and understandings of disinformation and related concepts available in the legislation and other regulation including (self-regulatory) codes and guidelines of ERGA members and observers. The Report concludes with identifying key relevant elements and characteristics of the notions of disinformation, political advertising, and related concepts, and includes recommendations to assist in coming to clearer definitions regarding disinformation, political advertising and issue-based advertising.},

note = {ERGA report},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@article{Bod\'{o}2020c,

title = {Can scholarly pirate libraries bridge the knowledge access gap? An empirical study on the structural conditions of book piracy in global and European academia},

author = {Bod\'{o}, B. and Antal, D. and Puha, Z.},

url = {https://journals.plos.org/plosone/articl=10.1371/journal.pone.0242509

},

doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0242509},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-12-04},

journal = {PLoS ONE},

volume = {15},

number = {12},

abstract = {Library Genesis is one of the oldest and largest illegal scholarly book collections online. Without the authorization of copyright holders, this shadow library hosts and makes more than 2 million scholarly publications, monographs, and textbooks available. This paper analyzes a set of weblogs of one of the Library Genesis mirrors, provided to us by one of the service’s administrators. We reconstruct the social and economic factors that drive the global and European demand for illicit scholarly literature. In particular, we test if lower income regions can compensate for the shortcomings in legal access infrastructures by more intensive use of illicit open resources. We found that while richer regions are the most intensive users of shadow libraries, poorer regions face structural limitations that prevent them from fully capitalizing on freely accessible knowledge. We discuss these findings in the wider context of open access publishing, and point out that open access knowledge, if not met with proper knowledge absorption infrastructures, has limited usefulness in addressing knowledge access and production inequalities.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Irion2020d,

title = {Panta rhei: A European Perspective on Ensuring a High-Level of Protection of Digital Human Rights in a World in Which Everything Flows},

author = {Irion, K.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3638864},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-11-30},

journal = {Amsterdam Law School Research Paper No. 2020},

number = {38},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@techreport{Hugenholtz2020f,

title = {Trends and Developments in Artificial Intelligence: Challenges to the Intellectual Property Rights Framework: Final Report},

author = {Hugenholtz, P. and Quintais, J. and Gervais, D.J. and Hartmann, C. and Allan, J.},

url = {https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/394345a1-2ecf-11eb-b27b-01aa75ed71a1/language-en

https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Trends_and_Developments_in_Artificial_Intelligence-1.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-11-27},

abstract = {This report examines copyright and patent protection in Europe for AI-assisted outputs in general and in three priority domains: science (in particular, meteorology), media (journalism), and pharmaceutical research. It comprises an assessment of the state of the art of uses of AI in the three focus areas, and a legal analysis of how IP laws currently apply to AI-assisted creative and innovative outputs. The report concludes that the current state of the art in AI does not require or justify immediate substantive changes in copyright and patent law in Europe. The existing concepts of copyright and patent law are sufficiently abstract and flexible to meet the current challenges from AI. In addition, related rights regimes potentially extend to ‘authorless’ AI productions in a variety of sectors, and the sui generis database right may offer protection to AI-produced databases resulting from substantial investment. However, taking into account the practical implications of AI technologies, the report identifies specific avenues for future legal reform (if justified by empirical evidence), offers recommendations for improvements in the application of existing rules (e.g. via guidelines), and highlights the need to study the role of alternative IP regimes to protect AI-assisted outputs, such as trade secret protection, unfair competition and contract law.},

note = {Report written for the European Commission by P.B. Hugenholtz, D. Gervais, J.P. Quintais, C. Hartmann & J. Allan, completed September 2020. ISBN: 97892762244488},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@inbook{Senftleben2020f,

title = {Signs Eligible for Trademark Protection - Dysfunctional Incentives and a Functionality Dilemma in the EU},

author = {Senftleben, M.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3717753

https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Signs_Eligible_for_Trademark_Protection.pdf

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108399456.014},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-11-26},

pages = {209-225},

abstract = {In the European Union (EU), the criteria for determining a sign’s eligibility for trademark protection are harmonized to a large extent. On the one hand, the trademark legislation and office practices in EU Member States have to keep within the harmonized legal framework set forth in the EU Trade Mark Directive (TMD). On the other hand, the European Union Trade Mark Regulation (EUTMR) provides for a set of eligibility criteria that apply to European Union Trade Marks (EUTM) with equal effect throughout the EU territory. As the rules in the Regulation are in line with those in the Directive, the two legislative instruments constitute a robust body of harmonized norms informing the decision on the registration of a sign as a trademark. The harmonizing effect is enhanced by the fact that national courts have to refer questions relating to the application and interpretation of eligibility criteria to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).

As in other regions of the world, the criteria applied to determine eligibility for trademark protection are quite flexible in the EU. The open-ended definition of protectable subject matter leaves room for the extension of trademark protection to non-traditional types of marks, such as shape, sound and colour marks. Trademark offices applying EU trademark law have also accepted, for instance, abstract colours and colour combinations, motion and multimedia marks, melodies and sounds, taste marks, hologram marks and position marks.

The analysis of the trend to register non-traditional marks in the EU outlines the legal framework which the CJEU developed to assess the eligibility of non-traditional types of source identifiers for trademark protection. On this basis, it discusses the objective to safeguard freedom of competition and the legal instruments which the CJEU employs for this purpose: the requirement of providing evidence of the acquisition of distinctive character through use in trade and the categorical exclusion of functional signs from trademark protection. Drawing conclusions, it will become apparent that the basic requirement of distinctive character plays an ambiguous role in the regulation of access to trademark protection for non-traditional marks. It is both an obstacle to trademark protection and an incentive for enhanced investment in non-traditional types of marks.},

note = {Chapter in: Cambridge Handbook on International and Comparative Trademark Law, I. Calboli & J.C. Ginsburg (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2020.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {inbook}

}

@inbook{Senftleben2020g,

title = {Intermediary Liability and Trade Mark Infringement - Proliferation of Filter Obligations in Civil Law Jurisdictions?},

author = {Senftleben, M.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Intermediary_Liability_and_Trade_Mark_Infringement.pdf

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3736919

https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198837138.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780198837138},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-11-26},

pages = {381-403},

abstract = {The erosion of the safe harbour for hosting in the EU Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (CDSM Directive) leads to a remarkable climate change in the field of EU copyright law and the civil law jurisdictions of continental EU Member States. Inevitably, it raises the question of potential repercussions on the safe harbour for hosting and filtering standards in trademark cases. Even though online marketplaces are explicitly exempted from the new copyright rules and the CDSM Directive is not intended to neutralize the safe harbour for hosting in trademark cases, the adoption of a more restrictive approach in copyright law may quicken the appetite of trademark proprietors for similar measures in trademark law.

The extension of the new copyright approach to trademark cases, however, is unlikely to yield satisfactory results.Due to the different conceptual contours of trademark rights, a system mimicking the filtering obligations following from the CDSM Directive would give trademark proprietors excessive control over the use of their trademarks in the digital environment. Such an overbroad system of automated, algorithmic filtering would encroach upon the fundamental guarantee of freedom of expression and freedom of competition. It is likely to have a chilling effect on legitimate descriptive use of trademarks, comparative advertising, advertising by resellers, information about alternative offers in the marketplace, and use criticizing or commenting upon trademarked products.

As a result, consumers would receive less diverse information on goods and services and the free movement of goods and services in the internal market would be curtailed. The reliability of the internet as an independent source of trademark-related information would be put at risk. The analysis, thus, leads to the insight that a proliferation of the new filtering obligations in copyright law is undesirable and should be avoided.},

note = {Chapter in: Oxford Handbook of Online Intermediary Liability, G.F. Frosio (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {inbook}

}

@online{Quintais2020d,

title = {CIPIL Evening Webinar: 'Article 17 and the New EU Rules on Content-Sharing Platforms' },

author = {Quintais, J.},

url = {https://youtu.be/f1tGV_IdueQ },

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-11-17},

abstract = {This presentation addresses the hottest topic in EU copyright law and policy: Article 17 of the new Copyright in the Digital Single Market (CDSM) Directive (2019/790). The CDSM Directive is the culmination of a controversial political and legislative process at EU level. None of its provisions has caused greater debate than Article 17, which introduces a new liability regime for "online content-sharing service providers". These include most user-generated content platforms hosting copyright-protected content accessed daily by millions of individuals in the EU and across the globe. Even before the CDSM Directive is implemented into national law, the issues surrounding Article 17 have already spilled out to the policy and judicial arenas. At the policy level, the debates taking place in a number of Commission-led Stakeholder Dialogues have laid bare many of the unresolved challenges ahead for national legislators and courts. At the judicial level, the Polish government has filed an action for annulment with the CJEU under Article 263 TFEU, focusing on the most problematic aspects of Article 17. This presentation will first place Article 17 into its broader EU policy context of the discussion on the responsibilities of online platforms \textendash from the agenda on "Tackling Illegal Content Online" to the Digital Services Act \textendash and the narrow copyright context regarding the liability of intermediary platforms for third-party content they host. This will be followed by an explanation of the complex mechanics of Article 17 and an identification of some of its fundamental problems. Finally, some tentative proposals will be advanced for how to begin to address such problems, focusing on the core issues of licensing mechanisms and fundamental rights safeguards.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {online}

}

@techreport{vanHoboken2020d,

title = {WODC-onderzoek: Voorziening voor verzoeken tot snelle verwijdering van onrechtmatige online content},

author = {van Hoboken, J. and Appelman, N. and van Duin, A. and Blom, T. and Zarouali, B. and Fahy, R. and Steel, M. and Stringhi, E. and Helberger, N.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/WODC_voorziening_onrechtmatige_content.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-11-12},

abstract = {Dit onderzoek is uitgegeven als onderdeel van het speerpunt van de Minister voor Rechtsbescherming om de positie van slachtoffers van onrechtmatige uitingen op het internet te verbeteren. Aanleiding is dat het voor mensen als te moeilijk ervaren wordt om onrechtmatige online content snel verwijderd te krijgen. Dit rapport biedt inzicht in de juridische en praktische haalbaarheid van een voorziening voor de verwijdering van onrechtmatige online content die mensen persoonlijk raakt. Onrechtmatige content is informatie, door mensen op het internet geplaatst, die in strijd is met het recht, vanwege de schadelijke gevolgen ervan en/of omdat de belangen van anderen daardoor op ernstige wijze worden aangetast. Hierbij moet, bijvoorbeeld, gedacht worden aan bedreigingen, privacy-inbreuken of wraakporno. Het doel van de onderzochte voorziening is om mensen in staat te stellen deze onrechtmatige online content zo snel mogelijk te verwijderen. Het onderzoek focust op onrechtmatige online content die mensen in hun persoon raakt en daarmee onder het recht op priv\'{e}leven uit artikel 8 Europees Verdrag voor de Rechten van de Mens (“EVRM”) valt.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@article{Keller2020d,

title = {CJEU hearing in the Polish challenge to Article 17: Not even the supporters of the provision agree on how it should work},

author = {Keller, P.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/11/11/cjeu-hearing-in-the-polish-challenge-to-article-17-not-even-the-supporters-of-the-provision-agree-on-how-it-should-work/},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-11-11},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Dommering2020i,

title = {Annotatie bij Rb. Den Haag 5 februari 2020 (NJCM c.s. / Staat der Nederlanden - SyRI-wetgeving)},

author = {Dommering, E.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2020_386.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-11-10},

journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie},

number = {45},

pages = {6792-6795},

abstract = {De SyRI-wetgeving voldoet niet aan de in art. 8 lid 2 EVRM gestelde eis dat de inmenging in de uitoefening van het recht op respect voor het priv\'{e}leven noodzakelijk is in een democratische samenleving, dat wil zeggen noodzakelijk, evenredig (proportioneel) en subsidiair in relatie tot het beoogde doel.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@techreport{Drunen2020b,

title = {News Recommenders and Cooperative Explainability: Confronting the contextual complexity in AI explanations},

author = {Drunen, M. van and Ausloos, J. and Appelman, N. and Helberger, N.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Visiepaper-explainable-AI-final.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-11-03},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@techreport{Senftleben2020e,

title = {The Odyssey of the Prohibition on General Monitoring Obligations on the Way to the Digital Services Act: Between Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive and Article 17 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market},

author = {Senftleben, M. and Angelopoulos, C.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3717022},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-10-29},

abstract = {EU law provides explicitly that intermediaries may not be obliged to monitor their service in a general manner in order to detect and prevent the illegal activity of their users. However, a misunderstanding of the difference between monitoring specific content and monitoring FOR specific content is a recurrent theme in the debate on intermediary liability and a central driver of the controversy surrounding it. Rightly understood, a prohibited general monitoring obligation arises whenever content \textendash no matter how specifically it is defined \textendash must be identified among the totality of the content on a platform. The moment platform content must be screened in its entirety, the monitoring obligation acquires an excessive, general nature. Against this background, a content moderation duty can only be deemed permissible if it is specific in respect of both the protected subject matter and potential infringers.



This requirement of 'double specificity' is of particular importance because it prevents encroachments upon fundamental rights. The jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union has shed light on the anchorage of the general monitoring ban in primary EU law, in particular the right to the protection of personal data, the freedom of expression and information, the freedom to conduct a business, and the free movement of goods and services in the internal market. Due to their higher rank in the norm hierarchy, these legal guarantees constitute common ground for the application of the general monitoring prohibition in secondary EU legislation, namely Article 15(1) of the E-Commerce Directive ('ECD') and Article 17(8) of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market ('CDSMD').



With regard to the Digital Services Act (‘DSA’), this result of the analysis implies that any further manifestation of the general monitoring ban in the DSA would have to be construed and applied \textendash in the light of applicable CJEU case law \textendash as a safeguard against encroachments upon the aforementioned fundamental rights and freedoms. If the final text of the DSA does not contain a reiteration of the prohibition of general monitoring obligations known from Article 15(1) ECD and Article 17(8) CDSMD, the regulation of internet service provider liability, duties of care and injunctions would still have to avoid inroads into the aforementioned fundamental rights and freedoms and observe the principle of proportionality. The double specificity requirement plays a central role in this respect.},

note = {Amsterdam: Institute for Information Law & Cambridge: Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@inbook{Fahy2020b,

title = {Netherlands/Research},

author = {Fahy, R. and Appelman, N.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Automating-Society-Report-2020.pdf

https://automatingsociety.algorithmwatch.org/},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-10-29},

pages = {164-175},

abstract = {How are AI-based systems being used by private companies and public authorities in Europe? The new report by AlgorithmWatch and Bertelsmann Stiftung sheds light on what role automated decision-making (ADM) systems play in our lives. As a result of the most comprehensive research on the issue conducted in Europe so far, the report covers the current use of and policy debates around ADM systems in 16 European countries and at EU level.},

note = {Chapter in: Report Automating Society 2020, Chiusi, F., Fischer, S., Kayser-Bril, N. & Spielkamp, M. eds., Berlin: AlgorithmWatch, October 2020.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {inbook}

}

@techreport{vanGompel2020b,

title = {Evaluatie Wet Auteurscontractenrecht: Eindrapport},

author = {van Gompel, S. and Hugenholtz, P. and Poort, J. and Schumacher, L.D. and Visser, D.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/evaluatie_wet_auteurscontractenrecht_2020.pdf

https://www.wodc.nl/wodc-nieuws-2020/auteurscontractenrecht.aspx

https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Evaluatie-ACR-Eindrapport-Summary-and-conclusions.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-10-29},

abstract = {Onderzoek in opdracht van het Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- en Documentatiecentrum (WODC), ministerie van Justitie & Veiligheid.



Van de Wet Auteurscontractenrecht, die ten doel heeft om de contractuele positie van auteurs en uitvoerende kunstenaars te versterken, wordt in de praktijk nog weinig gebruik gemaakt. De Wet, die in 2015 als een nieuw onderdeel van de Auteurswet werd ingevoerd, belooft auteurs en artiesten die met exploitanten in zee gaan een ‘billijke vergoeding', geeft makers de kans om contracten open te breken en verbiedt oneerlijke contractsbepalingen. Auteurs en artiesten blijken maar zelden op de bepalingen van de Wet een beroep te doen. Daarbij lijkt de angst voor verlies aan opdrachten of om op een zwarte lijst te komen een belangrijke rol te spelen. Ook blijkt de door de Wet in het leven geroepen laagdrempelige geschillenprocedure nauwelijks te functioneren. Dit zijn enkele van de conclusies van een praktijkevaluatie van de Wet Auteurscontractenrecht die door onderzoekers van de Universiteit van Amsterdam en de Universiteit Leiden in opdracht van het WODC is uitgevoerd.



See also the summary and conclusions in English at the link below.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@article{Hugenholtz2020e,

title = {Annotatie bij HvJ EU 29 juli 2019, C-469/17 (Funke), C-516/17 (Spiegel) & C-4476/17 (Pelham)},

author = {Hugenholtz, P.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2020_354.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-10-23},

journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie},

number = {43},

pages = {6068-6073},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Senftleben2020,

title = {Institutionalized Algorithmic Enforcement - The Pros and Cons of the EU Approach to UGC Platform Liability},

author = {Senftleben, M.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3565175

https://ecollections.law.fiu.edu/lawreview/vol14/iss2/11/},

doi = {10.25148/lawrev.14.2.11},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-10-20},

journal = {Florida International University Law Review},

volume = {14},

number = {2},

pages = {299-328},

abstract = {Algorithmic copyright enforcement \textendash the use of automated filtering tools to detect infringing content before it appears on the internet \textendash has a deep impact on the freedom of users to upload and share information. Instead of presuming that user-generated content ("UGC") does not amount to infringement unless copyright owners take action and provide proof, the default position of automated filtering systems is that every upload is suspicious and that copyright owners are entitled to ex ante control over the sharing of information online. If platform providers voluntarily introduce algorithmic enforcement measures, this may be seen as a private decision following from the freedom of companies to run their business as they wish. If, however, copyright legislation institutionalizes algorithmic enforcement and imposes a legal obligation on platform providers to employ automated filtering tools, the law itself transforms copyright into a censorship and filtering instrument. Nonetheless, the new EU Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (“DSM Directive”) follows this path and requires the employment of automated filtering tools to ensure that unauthorized protected content does not populate UGC platforms. The new EU rules on UGC licensing and screening will inevitably lead to the adoption of algorithmic enforcement measures in practice. Without automated content control, UGC platforms will be unable to escape liability for infringing user uploads.

To provide a complete picture, however, it is important to also shed light on counterbalances which may distinguish this new, institutionalized form of algorithmic enforcement from known content filtering tools that have evolved as voluntary measures in the private sector. The DSM Directive underlines the necessity to safeguard user freedoms that support transformative, creative remixes and mash-ups of pre-existing content. This feature of the new legislation may offer important incentives to develop algorithmic tools that go beyond the mere identification of unauthorized takings from protected works. It has the potential to encourage content assessment mechanisms that factor the degree of transformative effort and user creativity into the equation. As a result, more balanced content filtering tools may emerge in the EU. Against this background, the analysis shows that the new EU legislation not only escalates the use of algorithmic enforcement measures that already commenced in the private sector years ago. If rightly implemented, it may also add an important nuance to existing content identification tools and alleviate the problems arising from reliance on automated filtering mechanisms.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Senftleben2020d,

title = {Robot Creativity: An Incentive-Based Neighbouring Rights Approach},

author = {Senftleben, M. and Buijtelaar, L.D.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3707741},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-10-13},

journal = {European Intellectual Property Review},

volume = {42},

number = {12},

abstract = {Today texts, paintings and songs need no longer be the result of human creativity. Advanced artificial intelligence (AI) systems are capable of generating creations that can hardly be distinguished from those of authors of flesh and blood. This development raises the question whether AI-generated works could be eligible for copyright protection. In the following analysis, we explore this question. After a discussion of the traditional copyright requirement of human creativity, the rationales underlying copyright protection \textendash in particular the utilitarian incentive theory \textendash will serve as a compass to decide on the grant of protection and delineate the scope of exclusive rights. In addition, the analysis will address the question who the owner of protected AI creations should be. Finally, the discussion of pros and cons of protection will be placed in the broader context of competing policy goals and legal obligations, such as the prospect of enriching the public domain and the question of liability for AI creations that infringe the rights of third parties.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {forthcoming},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@techreport{Cwajg2020,

title = {Transparency Rules in Online Political Advertising: Mapping Global Law and Policy},

author = {Menezes Cwajg, C. and Ausloos, J. and Leerssen, P.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/TransparencyRulesOnlinePoliticalAds2020.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-10-13},

abstract = {In response to the rise of online political microtargeting, governments across the globe are launching transparency initiatives. Most of these aim to shed light on who is buying targeted political ads, and how they are targeted. The present Report offers a comprehensive mapping exercise of this new field of regulation, analysing new laws, proposed or enacted, that impose transparency rules on online political microtargeting.

The Report consists of two components: a global overview, and detailed case study of the United States. The first section begins with a geographical overview by showing where and what initiatives were proposed and enacted, looking in particular at Canada, France, Ireland, Singapore and the United States. It then unpacks these initiatives in greater detail by outlining what requirements they impose in terms of disclosure content, scope of application, and format. The second section of the Report then zooms into the United States, outlining the various initiatives that have been proposed and enacted at state-level.},

note = {This report has been prepared by Carolina Menezes Cwajg. It was written under the academic guidance of Dr. Jef Ausloos and Paddy Leerssen, at IViR and the Information, Communication & the Data Society (ICDS) Initiative at the University of Amsterdam.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@article{Strycharz2020,

title = {Data Protection or Data Frustration? Individual perceptions and attitudes towards the GDPR},

author = {Strycharz, J. and Ausloos, J. and Helberger, N.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/EDPLR_2020_3.pdf},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.21552/edpl/2020/3/10},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-10-13},

journal = {European Data Protection Law Review},

volume = {6},

number = {3},

pages = {407-421},

abstract = {Strengthening individual rights, enhancing control over one’s data and raising awareness were among the main aims the European Commission set for the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In order to assess whether these aims have been met, research into individual perceptions, awareness, and understanding of the Regulation is necessary. This study thus examines individual reactions to the GDPR in order to provide insights into user agency in relation to the Regulation. More specifically, it discusses empirical data (survey with N = 1288) on individual knowledge of, reactions to, and rights exercised under the GDPR in the Netherlands. The results show high awareness of the GDPR and knowledge of individual rights. At the same time, the Dutch show substantial reactance to the Regulation and doubt the effectiveness of their individual rights. These findings point to several issues obstructing the GDPR’s effectiveness, and constitute useful signposts for policy-makers and enforcement agencies to prioritise their strategies in achieving the original aims of the Regulation.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@inbook{Yakovleva2020e,

title = {Privacy and Data Protection in the EU- and US-led Post- WTO Free Trade Agreements},

author = {Yakovleva, S.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Yearbook_International_Economic_Law.pdf},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46955-9_5},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-10-08},

pages = {95-115},

series = {European Yearbook of International Economic Law},

abstract = {The chapter addresses privacy and data protection in FTAs. It takes stock of the evolution of provisions on privacy and data protection in the post-WTO FTAs and FTAs currently under negotiation relying on EU- and US-led FTAs as an empirical basis. The chapter evaluates the trends and patterns of the development of these provisions and provides an outlook for the upcoming negotiations on electronic commerce at the WTO. It highlights the evolution of provisions on privacy and personal data protection in general exceptions, financial and telecommunications chapters, chapters on electronic commerce and digital trade. After identifying trends in the design and wording of these provisions in the EU- and US-led FTAs the chapter concludes that both trading partners tend to prefer their own template for regional FTAs.},

note = {Chapter in: Coherence and Divergence in Services Trade Law, ed. R.T. Hoffmann & M. Krajewski},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {inbook}

}

@article{Yakovleva2020d,

title = {Personal Data Transfers in International Trade and EU Law: A Tale of Two ‘Necessities’},

author = {Yakovleva, S.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/JWIT_2020.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-10-02},

journal = {The Journal of World Investment & Trade},

pages = {1-39},

abstract = {Cross-border flows of personal data have become essential for international trade. EU law restricts transfers of personal data to a degree that is arguably beyond what is permitted under the EU’s WTO commitments. These restrictions may be justified under trade law’s ‘necessity test.’ The article suggests that they may not pass this test. Yet, from an EU law perspective, the right to the protection of personal data is a fundamental right. An international transfer of personal data constitutes a derogation from this right and, therefore, must be consistent with another necessity test, the ‘strict necessity’ test of the derogation clause of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. This article shows how a simultaneous application of the trade law and EU Charter ‘necessities’ to EU restrictions on transfers of personal data creates a Catch-22 situation and sketches the ways out of this compliance deadlock.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Hugenholtz2020d,

title = {De kunstmatige maker: over de gevolgen van het Endstra-arrest voor de bescherming van artifici\"{e}le creaties},

author = {Hugenholtz, P.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/IER_2020_5.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-10-01},

journal = {Intellectuele Eigendom & Reclamerecht (IER)},

number = {5},

pages = {276-280},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Yakovleva2020c,

title = {Kaleidoscopic data-related enforcement in the digital age},

author = {Yakovleva, S. and Geursen, W. and Arnbak, A.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/CMLR_2020.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-10-01},

journal = {Common Market Law Review},

volume = {57},

number = {5},

pages = {1461-1494},

abstract = {The interplay between competition, consumer and data protection law, when applied to data collection and processing practices, may lead to situations where several competent authorities can, independently, carry out enforcement actions against the same practice, or where an authority competent to carry out enforcement in one area of law can borrow the concepts of another area to advance its own goals. The authors call this “kaleidoscopic enforcement”. Kaleidoscopic enforcement may undermine existing coordination mechanisms within specif ic areas, and may lead to both the incoherent enforcement of EU rules applicable to data, and to sub-optimal enforcement. An EU level binding

inter-disciplinary coordination mechanism between competition, consumer and data protection authorities is needed. Now the Commission has announced ambitious plans to enhance the coherent application of EU law in several areas, it is the perfect time to work towards creating such an enforcement mechanism.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Husovec2020c,

title = {How to License Article 17? Exploring the Implementation Options for the New EU Rules on Content-Sharing Platforms},

author = {Husovec, M. and Quintais, J.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3463011},

doi = {10.2139/ssrn.3463011},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-09-29},

abstract = {Article 17 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive is a major Internet policy experiment of our decade. The provision fundamentally changes copyright regulation of certain digital platforms. However, the precise nature of art. 17 is far from clear. How does it fit the existing structure of EU copyright law and doctrine? How can the Member States implement it? These are the questions at the heart of this article. To answer them, we start by examining the nature and structure of the right prescribed in art. 17. The exact qualification brings important legal consequences. Among others, it determines the conditions imposed by EU law and international law on national implementations. After reviewing different interpretation options, we conclude that art. 17 introduces either a special or a new sui generis right, both of which allow significant margin of discretion for Member States, especially as regards licensing mechanisms and exceptions.



[This is a revised and updated version of a working paper first published in October 2019]},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Cobbe2020,

title = {Centering the Law in the Digital State},

author = {Cobbe, J. and Seng Ah Lee, M. and Singh, J. and Janssen, H.},

doi = {10.1109/MC.2020.3006623},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-09-25},

journal = {Computer},

volume = {53},

number = {10},

pages = {47-58},

abstract = {Driven by the promise of increased efficiencies and cost-savings, the public sector has shown much interest in automated decision-making (ADM) technologies. However, the rule of law and fundamental principles of good government are being lost along the way.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Helberger2020f,

title = {Who is the fairest of them all? Public attitudes and expectations regarding automated decision-making},

author = {Helberger, N. and Araujo, T. and Vreese, C.H. de},

url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0267364920300613?dgcid=author},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2020.105456},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-09-15},

journal = {Computer Law & Security Review},

volume = {39},

abstract = {The ongoing substitution of human decision makers by automated decision-making (ADM) systems in a whole range of areas raises the question of whether and, if so, under which conditions ADM is acceptable and fair. So far, this debate has been primarily led by academics, civil society, technology developers and members of the expert groups tasked to develop ethical guidelines for ADM. Ultimately, however, ADM affects citizens, who will live with, act upon and ultimately have to accept the authority of ADM systems.



The paper aims to contribute to this larger debate by providing deeper insights into the question of whether, and if so, why and under which conditions, citizens are inclined to accept ADM as fair. The results of a survey (N = 958) with a representative sample of the Dutch adult population, show that most respondents assume that AI-driven ADM systems are fairer than human decision-makers.



A more nuanced view emerges from an analysis of the responses, with emotions, expectations about AI being data- and calculation-driven, as well as the role of the programmer \textendash among other dimensions \textendash being cited as reasons for (un)fairness by AI or humans. Individual characteristics such as age and education level influenced not only perceptions about AI fairness, but also the reasons provided for such perceptions. The paper concludes with a normative assessment of the findings and suggestions for the future debate and research.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Eskens2020c,

title = {Opinie: Doorsturen telecomdata naar RIVM vereist een beter verhaal},

author = {Eskens, S. and Mil, J. van},

url = {https://fd.nl/opinie/1356879/doorsturen-telecomdata-naar-rivm-vereist-een-beter-verhaal},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-09-12},

journal = {Het Financieele Dagblad},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Helberger2020h,

title = {Macro and Exogenous Factors in Computational Advertising: Key Issues and New Research Directions},

author = {Helberger, N. and Huh, J. and Milne, G. and Strycharz, J.},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2020.1811179},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-09-11},

journal = {Journal of Advertising},

volume = {49},

number = {4},

pages = {377-393},

abstract = {To advance the emerging research field of computational advertising this article describes the new computational advertising ecosystem, identifies key actors within it and interactions among them, and discusses future research agendas. Specifically, we propose systematic conceptualization for the redefined advertising industry, consumers, government, and technology environmental factors, and discuss emerging and anticipated tensions that arise in the macro and exogenous factors surrounding the new computational advertising industry, leading to suggestions for future research directions. From multidisciplinary angles, areas of tension and related research questions are explored from advertising, business, computer science, and legal perspectives. The proposed research agendas include exploring transparency of computational advertising practice and consumer education; understanding the trade-off between explainability and performance of algorithms; exploring the issue of new consumers as free data laborers, data as commodity, and related consumer agency challenges; understanding the relationship between algorithmic transparency and consumers’ literacy; evaluating the trade-off between algorithmic fairness and privacy protection; examining legal and regulatory issues regarding power imbalance between actors in the computational advertising ecosystem; and studying the trade-off between technological innovation and consumer protection and empowerment.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Helberger2020g,

title = {Opinie: corona-app vraagt om meer toezicht op grote techbedrijven},

author = {Helberger, N. and Eskens, S.},

url = {https://www.volkskrant.nl/columns-opinie/opinie-corona-app-vraagt-om-meer-toezicht-op-grote-techbedrijven~b6898138/},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-09-10},

journal = {De Volkskrant},

abstract = {Er is te weinig aandacht voor de rol van Google en Apple bij de invoering van de CoronaMelder, betogen Natali Helberger en Sarah Eskens.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@inbook{Appelman2020b,

title = {Netherlands},

author = {Appelman, N. and Fahy, R.},

url = {https://algorithmwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/ADM-systems-in-the-Covid-19-pandemic-Report-by-AW-BSt-Sept-2020.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-09-01},

abstract = {Contact tracing apps for smartphones, thermal scanners, face recognition technology: high hopes have been placed by both local administrations and national governments in applications and devices like these, aimed at containing the outbreak of the virus. The new publication Automated Decision-Making Systems in the COVID-19 Pandemic: A European Perspective gathers detailed examples of ADM systems in use, compiled by a network of researchers covering 16 countries. It provides an initial mapping and exploration of ADM systems implemented throughout Europe as a consequence of the COVID-19 outbreak.},

note = {Chapter in: F. Chiusi, S. Fischer, & M. Spielkamp (eds.), Automated Decision-Making Systems in the COVID-19 Pandemic: A European Perspective, AlgorithmWatch, 2020},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {inbook}

}

@article{Husovec2020b,

title = {Article 17 of the Copyright Directive: Why the German implementation proposal is compatible with EU law  \textendash Part 2},

author = {Husovec, M. and Quintais, J.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/08/28/article-17-of-the-copyright-directive-why-the-german-implementation-proposal-is-compatible-with-eu-law-part-2/?doing_wp_cron=1598609159.3323481082916259765625},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-08-28},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Husovec2020,

title = {Article 17 of the Copyright Directive: Why the German implementation proposal is compatible with EU law \textendash Part 1},

author = {Husovec, M. and Quintais, J.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/08/26/article-17-of-the-copyright-directive-why-the-german-implementation-proposal-is-compatible-with-eu-law-part-1/},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-08-27},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Eskens2020b,

title = {Opinie: De wettelijke mogelijkheden voor online proctoring door universiteiten zijn zeer beperkt},

author = {Eskens, S.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/TvI_2020_4.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-08-27},

journal = {Tijdschrift voor Internetrecht},

number = {4},

pages = {141-143},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@inbook{Appelman2020,

title = {Techno-optimism and solutionism as a crisis response},

author = {Appelman, N. and Toh, J. and Fahy, R. and van Hoboken, J.},

url = {https://pure.uva.nl/admin/files/49662485/Data_Justice_and_COVID_19.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-08-27},

abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped how social, economic, and political power is created, exerted, and extended through technology. Through case studies from around the world, this book analyses the ways in which technologies of monitoring infections, information, and behaviour have been applied and justified during the emergency, what their side-effects have been, and what kinds of resistance they have met.},

note = {Chapter in L. Taylor, G. Sharma, A. Martin, and S. Jameson (eds.), Data Justice and COVID-19: Global Perspectives, Meatspace Press, 2020)},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {inbook}

}

@techreport{Rougoor2020,

title = {Reserveprijs veiling DAB+-laag 7},

author = {Rougoor, W. and Tieben, B. and Poort, J.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Reserveprijs_veiling_DAB_laag_7.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-08-27},

abstract = {Voor de veiling van DAB+-laag 7 is een reserveprijs wenselijk die laag maar niet triviaal is om niet-serieuze aanvragers te weren zonder serieuze bieders af te schrikken. Op basis van een tentatieve kasstroomanalyse adviseren SEO Economisch Onderzoek en IViR een reserveprijs te hanteren van ten hoogste € 50 duizend per vergunning.



},

note = {Rapport in opdracht van het ministerie van Economische Zaken en Klimaat, SEO Economisch Onderzoek, mei 2020. ISBN 9789052200675.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@inbook{Dreyfuss2020,

title = {Choice of Law in EU Trade Secrecy Cases},

author = {Cooper Dreyfuss, R. and van Eechoud, M.},

url = {https://www.elgaronline.com/view/edcoll/9781788973335/9781788973335.xml},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788973342},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-08-27},

pages = {171-191},

chapter = {10},

abstract = {Chapter in: The Harmonization and Protection of Trade Secrets in the EU: An Appraisal of the EU Directive, J. Schovsbo, T. Minssen & T. Riis eds., Edward Elgar Publishing, 2020. ISBN: 9781788973335.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {inbook}

}

@techreport{McGonagle2020f,

title = {Safety of journalists and the fighting of corruption in the EU},

author = {McGonagle, T. and Fahy, R. and Bouch\`{e}, G. and Rucz, M. and Stapel, S. and Seel, M. and Sangen, A, van der},

url = {https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/655187/IPOL_STU(2020)655187_EN.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-07-30},

abstract = {Journalism and journalists face a growing range of threats, including violence and harassment; the misuse of defamation and other laws against them, and restrictive measures on freedom of information and expression adopted in response to the Covid-19 crisis. States must ensure a safe and favourable environment for journalists to perform their public watchdog function. This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the LIBE Committee, examines the overall chilling effect of crimes and threats against journalists and explores various regulatory and other measures to counter them.



This report was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs.},

note = {Prof. dr. T. McGonagle - Project Leader - European Parliament - Policy Department for Citizen's Rights and Constitutional Affairs - Directorate-General for Internal Policies - July 2020},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@article{Drunen2020,

title = {The post-editorial control era: how EU media law matches platforms’ organisational control with cooperative responsibility},

author = {Drunen, M. van},

url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17577632.2020.1796067},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2020.1796067},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-07-28},

journal = {Journal of Media Law},

volume = {12},

number = {2},

pages = {166-190},

abstract = {This paper argues the AVMSD attaches cooperative responsibility to platforms’ organisational control. Firstly, it explores how the new concept of organisational control differs from the editorial control that has traditionally been central to media law, in particular concerning the greater involvement of other stakeholders active on platforms. Secondly, it analyses the measures the AVMSD requires platforms to take with regard to content on their service in light of their organisational control. Finally, it shows how the AVMSD not only requires platforms to assume responsibility for actions under their direct control, but also to enable users and uploaders to exercise their inherent influence differently. The AVMSD consequently moves away from centralised, and towards cooperative responsibility for platforms. The paper concludes by evaluating the choices the AVMSD makes (and fails to make) in the operationalisation of this new responsibility model.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Buijtelaar2020,

title = {Auteursrecht op robotcreaties? Een analyse op basis van de incentivetheorie},

author = {Buijtelaar, L.D. and Senftleben, M.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/AMI_2020_3_4_77.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-07-24},

journal = {AMI},

number = {3-4},

pages = {77-93},

abstract = {Vandaag de dag zijn teksten, schilderijen en liedjes niet noodzakelijkerwijs het resultaat van menselijke creativiteit. Geavanceerde robotsystemen zijn in staat om output te genereren die nauwelijks te onderscheiden is van de werken van makers van vlees en bloed. Dit doet de vraag rijzen of door robots gegenereerde creaties in aanmerking kunnen komen voor auteursrechtelijke bescherming. In de volgende analyse staat deze vraag centraal. Na een inleidende bespreking van het traditionele vereiste van menselijke creativiteit in het auteursrecht dienen de ratio’s van auteursrechtelijke bescherming \textendash met name de economische incentivetheorie \textendash als maatstaf om over nut en noodzaak van de toekenning van bescherming te beslissen. Voorts wordt aandacht besteed aan de vraag wie de houder van rechten op robotcreaties zou kunnen zijn. Ten slotte vindt een afweging plaats van de voor- en nadelen van bescherming, mede in het licht van de mogelijkheid om robotcreaties vrij te laten en het publieke domein te verrijken.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Hugenholtz2020c,

title = {Annotatie bij Rb Amsterdam 1 november 2019 (Van Uem / De Persgroep)},

author = {Hugenholtz, P.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_AMI_2020_3_4.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-07-24},

journal = {AMI},

number = {3-4},

pages = {101-105},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@online{Irion2020c,

title = {Schrems II and Surveillance: Third Countries’ National Security Powers in the Purview of EU Law, European Law Blog},

author = {Irion, K.},

url = {https://europeanlawblog.eu/2020/07/24/schrems-ii-and-surveillance-third-countries-national-security-powers-in-the-purview-of-eu-law/},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-07-24},

abstract = {On 16 July 2020 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) composed as Grand Chamber delivered its landmark ruling Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland Ltd and Maximillian Schrems (case C-311/18, “Schrems II”). The focus of my commentary will be on the aspect that EU law on cross-border transfers of personal data to a third country is not deferential to national security powers of that third country. This judgment is remarkable provided that electronic surveillance conducted by Member States’ intelligence authorities for the purpose of national security is off limits for EU law and that exceptions in international agreement are fairly regularly made for national security. This contribution will deal with the embedded assessment of a third country’s national security powers under the General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/679, GDPR) and will address the criticism that a third country is held to stricter standards than a Member State of the Union.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {online}

}

@article{Dommering2020h,

title = {Annotatie HvJ EU 2 oktober 2018 (Ministerio Fiscal)},

author = {Dommering, E.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_232.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-07-21},

journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie},

number = {28},

pages = {3753-3754},

abstract = {Toegang tot door elektronische communicatiedienstaanbieder verwerkte persoonsgegevens alleen gerechtvaardigd als het om ernstig delict gaat. Identificatiegegevens op SIMkaart van gestolen mobiele telefoon ook bij lichtere vormen van criminaliteit toegestaan toegestaan omdat deze op zich zelf geen inzicht geven in de priv\'{e} communicatie.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Bod\'{o}2020b,

title = {Mediated trust: A theoretical framework to address the trustworthiness of technological trust mediators},

author = {Bod\'{o}, B.},

url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1461444820939922},

doi = {10.1177/1461444820939922},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-07-17},

journal = {New Media & Society},

abstract = {This article considers the impact of digital technologies on the interpersonal and institutional logics of trust production. It introduces the new theoretical concept of technology-mediated trust to analyze the role of complex techno-social assemblages in trust production and distrust management. The first part of the article argues that globalization and digitalization have unleashed a crisis of trust, as traditional institutional and interpersonal logics are not attuned to deal with the risks introduced by the prevalence of digital technologies. In the second part, the article describes how digital intermediation has transformed the traditional logics of interpersonal and institutional trust formation and created new trust-mediating services. Finally, the article asks as follows: why should we trust these technological trust mediators? The conclusion is that at best, it is impossible to establish the trustworthiness of trust mediators, and that at worst, we have no reason to trust them.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Mahieu2020,

title = {Harnessing the collective potential of GDPR access rights: towards an ecology of transparency},

author = {Mahieu, R. and Ausloos, J.},

url = {https://policyreview.info/articles/news/harnessing-collective-potential-gdpr-access-rights-towards-ecology-transparency/1487},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-07-17},

journal = {Internet Policy Review},

abstract = {The GDPR’s goal of empowering citizens can only be fully realised when the collective dimensions of data subject rights are acknowledged and supported through proper enforcement. The power of the collective use of data subjects’ rights, however, is currently neither acknowledged nor properly enforced. This is the message we sent to the European Commission in response to its call for feedback for its two-year review of the GDPR. In our submission entitled Recognising and Enabling the Collective Dimension of the GDPR and the Right of Access \textendash A call to support the governance structure of checks and balances for informational power asymmetries, we demonstrate the collective potential of GDPR access rights with a long list of real-life examples.},

note = {Opinion},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Volgenant2020,

title = {Kroniek Persrecht 2019},

author = {Volgenant, O. and McGonagle, T.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Mediaforum_2020_3_Volgenant.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-07-17},

journal = {Mediaforum},

volume = {2020},

number = {3},

pages = {87-89},

abstract = {Was 2018 het jaar van de serieuze aanslagen op de gebouwen van De Telegraaf en Panorama en ernstige bedreigingen van individuele journalisten, in 2019 zagen we hoe de beroepsgroep en de overheid daarop reageerden. Het initiatief ‘PersVeilig’ werd gepresenteerd, en in de strafzaken over de twee aanslagen werden verdachten opgepakt en veroordeeld. In 2019 werd \textendash helaas \textendash voor het eerst sinds lange tijd weer een journalist gegijzeld, ondanks het feit dat een jaar eerder het recht op journalistieke bronbescherming wettelijk was verankerd.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Helberger2020e,

title = {Challenging rabbit holes: towards more diversity in news recommendation systems},

author = {Helberger, N. and Bernstein, A. and Schulz, W. and Vreese, C.H. de},

url = {https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/medialse/2020/07/02/challenging-rabbit-holes-towards-more-diversity-in-news-recommendation-systems/},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-07-16},

journal = {LSE Media Blog},

abstract = {Access to diverse sources of news and information is more important than ever in this time of global crisis, yet far too often, people can find themselves diving into ‘rabbit holes’ of information and opinion that are hard to escape. Here, the following authors provide an in depth assessment of how algorithmic recommendation systems for news can play a more constructive role in a diverse media landscape.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Helberger2020d,

title = {The Political Power of Platforms: How Current Attempts to Regulate Misinformation Amplify Opinion Power},

author = {Helberger, N.},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1773888},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-07-14},

journal = {Digital Journalism},

volume = {8},

number = {6},

pages = {842-854},

abstract = {This contribution critically reviews the ongoing policy initiatives in Europe to impose greater societal responsibility on social media platforms. I discuss the current regulatory approach of treating social platforms as mere 'intermediaries' of the speech of others and propose a different perspective. Instead of perceiving platforms as intermediaries and facilitators of the speech of others, I view social media platforms as active political actors in their own right, and wielders of considerable opinion power. I will explain how taking the perspective of opinion power throws a very different, and rather alarming light on the recent regulatory initiatives.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Keller2020c,

title = {Hungary’s fast tracked implementation of Article 5 CDSM directive in response to the pandemic},

author = {Keller, P.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/06/23/hungarys-fast-tracked-implementation-of-article-5-cdsm-directive-in-response-to-the-pandemic/?doing_wp_cron=1593173611.1108019351959228515625},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-06-26},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@techreport{Ausloos2020b,

title = {Operationalizing Research Access in Platform Governance: What to learn from other industries?},

author = {Ausloos, J. and Leerssen, P. and Thije, P. ten},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/GoverningPlatforms_IViR_study_June2020-AlgorithmWatch-2020-06-24.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-06-25},

abstract = {A new study published by AlgorithmWatch, in cooperation with the European Policy Centre and the University of Amsterdam’s Institute for Information Law, shows that the GDPR needn’t stand in the way of meaningful research access to platform data; looks to health and environmental sectors for best practices in privacy-respecting data sharing frameworks.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@article{Ausloos2020c,

title = {Technologiereuzen moeten zeggen hoe ze ons gedrag bepalen en zo dwingen we dat af},

author = {Ausloos, J.},

url = {https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2020/06/25/de-macht-van-technologiereuzen-en-hoe-ze-aan-banden-te-leggen/},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-06-25},

abstract = {Vandaag verschijnt een rapport met aanbevelingen voor de Europese Commissie. Dat zet uiteen hoe onlineplatformen verplicht kunnen worden om aan bepaalde transparantie-eisen te voldoen. Jef Ausloos is hoofdauteur van het rapport en bepleit waarom zo'n kader nodig is. "Transparantie is van cruciaal belang om donkere kantjes in kaart te brengen, zodat we collectief kunnen bepalen waar en hoe we de groeiende macht van onlineplatformen moeten inperken."},

note = {Opinie},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Dommering2020g,

title = {Annotatie bij EHRM 24 januari 2019 (Catt / Verenigd Koninkrijk)},

author = {Dommering, E.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2020_192.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-06-18},

journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie},

number = {24},

pages = {3185-3187},

abstract = {Ten onrechte opneming van een vredesactivist in een databank tegen binnenlands terrorisme. Databank dienst een legitiem doel, maar voortdurend bewaren disproportioneel.},

note = {nr. 192},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Monzer2020,

title = {User Perspectives on the News Personalisation Process: Agency, Trust and Utility as Building Blocks},

author = {Monzer, C. and M\"{o}ller, J. and Helberger, N. and Eskens, S.},

url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21670811.2020.1773291},

doi = {10.1080/21670811.2020.1773291},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-06-16},

journal = {Digital Journalism},

volume = {8},

number = {9},

pages = {1142-1162},

abstract = {With the increasing use of algorithms in news distribution, commentators warn about its possible impacts on the changing relationship between the news media and news readers. To understand the meaning of news personalisation strategies to users, we investigated how they currently experience news personalisation, perceive their role in the personalisation process, and envision increasing the utility of personalised news by giving users more agency and fostering trust. We conducted four focus groups with online news readers in Germany. For the analysis, grounded theory techniques were suitable due to their applicability in reconstructing user perspectives through their own experiences. We found that (1) users fail to distinguish between news personalisation and commercial targeting, which may negatively bias their perception; (2) there is a contradiction in how users perceive themselves as active participants in the process, but lack the means to exercise agency; (3) user concerns extend beyond privacy to what information they receive and their right to personal autonomy\textemdasha solution requires offering users the ability to dynamically adjust their “news interest profiles”; (4) while news personalisation strategies afford new opportunities for introducing reciprocity in the media-audience relationship, negotiating competing logics of journalistic, personal and algorithmic curation remains a challenge.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Yakovleva2020b,

title = {Drie mogelijke boetes van mededingings-, consumenten- en persoonsgegevensautoriteiten voor hetzelfde datagebruik},

author = {Yakovleva, S. and Geursen, W,W, and Arnbak, A.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/MP_2020_164.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-06-09},

journal = {Tijdschrift Mededingingsrecht in de Praktijk},

number = {2},

pages = {30-37},

abstract = {Door de toename van datagebruik door ondernemingen is er sprake van convergentie tussen het mededingings-, consumenten- en gegevensbeschermingsrecht. Er kan dan parallelle handhaving plaatsvinden ten aanzien van \'{e}\'{e}n en dezelfde handeling door dezelfde onderneming door drie verschillende autoriteiten. Dat noemen wij caleidoscopische handhaving. Dat heeft volgens ons verschillende keerzijden, waaronder het risico op overhandhaving door drie afzonderlijke procedures van drie afzonderlijke autoriteiten en mogelijk drie boetes. Wij onderzoeken in dit artikel waarom het ne-bis-in-idem-beginsel niet van toepassing is en het beginsel van eendaadse samenloop evenmin (net als in de recente Marine Harvest gun-jumping zaak), waardoor proportionaliteit overblijft.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@online{Quintais2020c,

title = {Webinar on Public and Regulatory Framework of Online Intermediaries},

author = {Quintais, J. and Mezei, P. and Harkai, I. and Katzenbach, C. and Magalh\~{a}es, J.C. and Schwemer, S. and Riis, T. },

url = {https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9RccSMBSjE&t=5s

https://www.recreating.eu/public-and-regulatory-framework-of-online-intermediaries-workshop/

https://zenodo.org/record/3833714#.XseaZGgzbIW},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-05-22},

abstract = {Recording of the reCreating Europe Online Workshop on Public and Private Regulatory Framework of Online Intermediaries organized on 5 May 2020.

Slides and report of the event also available at the links below.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {online}

}

@article{Ferrari2020,

title = {The regulation of crypto-assets in the EU \textendash investment and payment tokens under the radar},

author = {Ferrari, V.},

url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1023263X20911538},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X20911538},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-05-21},

journal = {Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law},

abstract = {Based on the guidelines issued by the European Securities and Market Authority and by the European Banking Authority, the article deals with the legal qualification of blockchain-based crypto-assets under EU law. Focusing on crypto-assets that function as a) investment instruments (that is, investment tokens) and as b) electronic money (that is, payment tokens), the work outlines shortages and drawbacks in the applicability and enforcement of existing EU legal frameworks regulating investment activities and payment services. With such analysis, the article seeks to inform the ongoing debate within European institutions on the need of regulatory intervention in this area, and it points out pressing questions to be tackled by further research.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@inbook{vanEijk2020,

title = {Telecommunicatierecht},

author = {van Eijk, N.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Handboek_Consumentenrecht_NvE.pdf},

isbn = {9789462512108},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-05-19},

urldate = {2020-05-18},

booktitle = {Handboek Consumentenrecht, red. E.H. Hondius & V. Mak},

pages = {391-402},

publisher = {Uitgeverij Paris},

edition = {5e druk},

chapter = {16},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {inbook}

}

@techreport{vanHoboken2020b,

title = {Het juridisch kader voor de verspreiding van desinformatie via internetdiensten en de regulering van politieke advertenties},

author = {van Hoboken, J. and Appelman, N. and Fahy, R. and Leerssen, P. and McGonagle, T. and van Eijk, N. and Helberger, N.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Rapport_desinformatie_december2019.pdf

https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Kamerbrief_desinformatie.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-05-14},

abstract = {Het onderzoek, uitgevoerd in opdracht van het Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties, analyseert het juridisch kader van toepassing op de verspreiding van desinformatie via online diensten.  Het rapport biedt een uitgebreid overzicht van de relevante Europese en Nederlandse normen en doet aanbevelingen voor de verbetering van dit juridisch kader. Het onderzoek bevat daarnaast ook een analyse van het relevant wettelijke kader in de V.S., het V.K, Frankrijk, Duitsland, Canada en Zweden.  

Het rapport maakt duidelijk hoe de vrijheid van meningsuiting als rode draad door het wettelijke kader loopt. Dit fundamentele recht vormt zowel de buitenste grens voor regulering als een basis voor nieuwe maatregelen, bijvoorbeeld voor de bescherming van pluralisme. Het wettelijk kader van toepassing op desinformatie blijkt zeer breed, bevat verschillende reguleringsniveaus, verschuift afhankelijk van de specifieke context en omvat vele al bestaande normen voor de regulering van specifieke typen desinformatie. Verder blijkt het toezicht op dit wettelijk kader vrij gefragmenteerd te zijn. Op basis van deze analyse komt het rapport tot aan aantal aanbevelingen. De aanbevelingen hebben onder andere betrekking op het gebruik van de term desinformatie als beleidsterm, het omgaan met de spanningen op de verschillende beleidsniveaus, de regulering van internettussenpersonen door middel van transparantie verplichtingen en de samenwerking tussen de verschillende toezichthouders. 

Voorafgaand aan deze eindrapportage is in eind 2019 het interim-rapport gepubliceerd. Dit rapport focuste op de relatie tussen desinformatie en online politieke advertenties. Beide studies zijn onderdeel van het onderzoeksproject ‘Digital Transition of Decision-Making at the Faculty of Law of the University of Amsterdam’  dat zich buigt over vraagstukken gerelateerd aan kunstmatige intelligentie en publieke waarden,  data governance, en online platforms. },

note = {Rapport voor het ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties, Amsterdam, december 2019},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@techreport{vanHoboken2020c,

title = {The legal framework on the dissemination of disinformation through Internet services and the regulation of political advertising},

author = {van Hoboken, J. and Appelman, N. and Fahy, R. and Leerssen, P. and McGonagle, T. and van Eijk, N. and Helberger, N.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Report_Disinformation_Dec2019-1.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-05-14},

abstract = {The study, commissioned by the Dutch government, focusses on the legal framework governing the dissemination of disinformation, in particular through Internet services. The study provides an extensive overview of relevant European and Dutch legal norms relating to the spread of online disinformation, and recommendations are given on how to improve this framework. Additionally, the study includes an analysis of the relevant legal framework in 6 different countries (U.K., U.S., France, Germany, Sweden and Canada).  

The report makes clear how the freedom of expression runs as a central theme through the legal framework, both forming the outer limit for possible regulation and a legal basis to create new regulation (e.g. protecting pluralism). The legal framework governing disinformation online is shown to be very broad, encompassing different levels of regulation, shifting depending on the context and already regulating many different types of disinformation. Further, oversight seems to be fragmented with many different supervisory authorities involved but limited cooperation. Based on this analysis, the report offers several recommendations, such as on the use of disinformation not as a legal term but a policy term, on negotiating the tensions on the different policy levels, on the regulation of internet intermediaries including transparency obligations and on increased cooperation between the relevant supervisory authorities. 

Previously, the interim report focussing on political advertising was published in late 2019. Both these studies have been carried out in the context of the research initiative on the Digital Transition of Decision-Making at the Faculty of Law of the University of Amsterdam, focussing on questions related to AI and public values, data governance and online platforms.},

note = {A report for the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations, Amsterdam, December 2019},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@article{Senftleben2020c,

title = {Flexibility Grave \textendash Partial Reproduction Focus and Closed System Fetishism in CJEU, Pelham},

author = {Senftleben, M.},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-020-00940-z},

doi = {10.1007/s40319-020-00940-z},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-05-12},

journal = {IIC},

volume = {51},

number = {6},

pages = {751-769},

abstract = {In the ongoing discussion about the impact of fundamental rights on EU copyright law, the Pelham judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has received much attention. However, the decision also raises important legal-doctrinal issues. The CJEU employs the harmonized right of reproduction as a vehicle to regulate adaptations of pre-existing source material. Moreover, the Court insists on a balancing of interests within the EU matrix of exclusive rights and limitations. The closed list of limitations in EU copyright law, however, can hardly be expected to offer sufficient breathing space for adaptation scenarios. As the Information Society Directive did not harmonize the right of adaptation, there was no need to include indispensable free adaptation rules that have evolved at the national level, such as the German “free use” doctrine. Instead of embracing national rules of equity and fairness to fill the gap, the CJEU is reluctant to borrow from the legal traditions of EU Member States and misses an important opportunity to provide guidance for the regulation of adaptations outside the sound sampling arena. After an introduction to the German “Metall auf Metall” saga that led to the Pelham decision, the following analysis sheds light on these developments in EU copyright law and discusses problems arising from the approach taken by the CJEU.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@book{Voorhoof2020,

title = {Freedom of Expression, the Media and Journalists: Case-law of the European Court of Human Rights},

author = {Voorhoof, D. and McGonagle, T.},

url = {https://rm.coe.int/iris-themes-vol-iii-ed-2020-en-2/16809e45e7},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-05-08},

abstract = {This e-book provides valuable insights into the European Court of Human Rights’ extensive case-law on freedom of expression and media and journalistic freedoms. The first four editions of the e-book (2013, 2015, 2016 and 2017) have proved hugely successful. The new fifth edition summarises over 315 judgments or decisions by the Court and provides hyperlinks to the full text of each of the summarised judgments or decisions (via HUDOC, the Court's online case-law database). For an optimal navigational experience, one should download the e-book and read the technical tips on p. 3.},

note = {IRIS Themes - Volume III (5th edition), European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {book}

}

@techreport{Bod\'{o}2020,

title = {Money talks? The impact of corporate funding on information law research},

author = {Bod\'{o}, B. and Schwichow, H. von and Appelman, N.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/money-talks-summary-report-final.pdf},

year  = {2020},

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.},

note = {Amsterdam: IViR, Berlin: European Hub of the NoC},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {techreport}

}

@article{Metzger2020,

title = {Selected Aspects of Implementing Article 17 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market into National Law \textendash Comment of the European Copyright Society},

author = {Metzger, A. and Senftleben, M. and Derclaye E. and Dreier, T. and Geiger, C. and Griffiths, J. and Hilty, R. and Hugenholtz, P. and Riis, T. and Rognstad, O.A. and Strowel, A.M. and Synodinou, T. and Xalabarder, R.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3589323},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-05-07},

abstract = {The national implementation of Article 17 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (DSMD) poses particular challenges. Article 17 is one of the most complex \textendash and most controversial \textendash provisions of the new legislative package which EU Member States must transpose into national law by 7 June 2021. Seeking to contribute to the debate on implementation options, the European Copyright Society addresses several core aspects of Article 17 that may play an important role in the national implementation process. It deals with the concept of online content-sharing service providers (OCSSPs) before embarking on a discussion of the licensing and content moderation duties which OCSSPs must fulfil in accordance with Article 17(1) and (4). The analysis also focuses on the copyright limitations mentioned in Article 17(7) that support the creation and dissemination of transformative user-generated content (UGC). It also discusses the appropriate configuration of complaint and redress mechanisms set forth in Article 17(9) that seek to reduce the risk of unjustified content removals. Finally, the European Copyright Society addresses the possibility of implementing direct remuneration claims for authors and performers, and explores the private international law aspect of applicable law \textendash an impact factor that is often overlooked in the debate.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Helberger2020c,

title = {Statement Prof. Dr. Natali Helberger bij Rondetafelgesprek over de Corona-app in de Tweede Kamer op 22 April 2020},

author = {Helberger, N.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Statement_Covid_App_Expertsronde_TK.pdf

https://www.tweedekamer.nl/debat_en_vergadering/commissievergaderingen/details?id=2020A01700},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-04-22},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Flynn2020b,

title = {Implementing User Rights for Research in the Field of Artificial Intelligence: A Call for International Action},

author = {Flynn, S. and Geiger, C. and Quintais, J. and Margoni, T. and Sag, M. and Guibault, L. and Carroll, M.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3578819},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-04-21},

journal = {European Intellectual Property Review},

volume = {2020},

number = {7},

abstract = {Last year, before the onset of a global pandemic highlighted the critical and urgent need for technology-enabled scientific research, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) launched an inquiry into issues at the intersection of intellectual property (IP) and artificial intelligence (AI). We contributed comments to that inquiry, with a focus on the application of copyright to the use of text and data mining (TDM) technology. This article describes some of the most salient points of our submission and concludes by stressing the need for international leadership on this important topic. WIPO could help fill the current gap on international leadership, including by providing guidance on the diverse mechanisms that countries may use to authorize TDM research and serving as a forum for the adoption of rules permitting cross-border TDM projects.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {forthcoming},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Flynn2020c,

title = {Implementing User Rights for Research in the Field of Artificial Intelligence: A Call for Action at International Level},

author = {Flynn, S. and Geiger, C. and Quintais, J.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/04/21/implementing-user-rights-for-research-in-the-field-of-artificial-intelligence-a-call-for-action-at-international-level/

http://infojustice.org/archives/42260},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-04-21},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

abstract = {A version of this post was also published on the InfoJustice website: http://infojustice.org/archives/42260},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@inbook{Senftleben2020b,

title = {From Flexible Balancing Tool to Quasi-Constitutional Straitjacket - How the EU Cultivates the Constraining Function of the Three-Step Test},

author = {Senftleben, M.},

url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3576019},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-04-16},

abstract = {In the international intellectual property (IP) arena, the so-called “three-step test” regulates the room for the adoption of limitations and exceptions (L&Es) to exclusive rights across different fields of IP. Given the openness of the individual test criteria, it is tempting for proponents of strong IP protection to strive for the fixation of the meaning of the three-step test at the constraining end of the spectrum of possible interpretations. As the three-step test lies at the core of legislative initiatives to balance exclusive rights and user freedoms, the cultivation of the test’s constraining function and the suppression of the test’s enabling function has the potential to transform the three-step test into a bulwark against limitations of IP protection.



The EU is at the forefront of a constraining use and interpretation of the three-step test in the field of copyright law. The configuration of the legal framework in the EU is worrisome because it obliges judges to apply the three-step test as an additional control instrument. It is not sufficient that an individual use falls within the scope of a statutory copyright limitation that explicitly permits this type of use without prior authorization. In addition, judges applying the three-step test also examine whether the specific form of use at issue complies with each individual criterion of the three-step test. Hence, the test serves as an instrument to further restrict L&Es that have already been defined precisely in statutory law. Not surprisingly, decisions from courts in the EU have a tendency of shedding light on the constraining aspect of the three-step test and, therefore, reinforcing the hegemony of copyright holders in the IP arena.



The hypothesis underlying the following examination, therefore, is that the EU approach to the three-step test is one-sided in the sense that it only demonstrates the potential of the test to set additional limits to L&Es. The analysis focuses on this transformation of a flexible international balancing tool into a powerful confirmation and fortification of IP protection. For this purpose, the two facets of the international three-step test \textendash its enabling and constraining function \textendash are explored before embarking on a discussion of case law that evolved under the one-sided EU approach. Analyzing repercussions on international lawmaking, it will become apparent that the EU approach already impacted the further development of international L&Es. Certain features of the Marrakesh Treaty clearly reflect the restrictive EU approach.},

note = {Chapter in T. Mylly/J. Griffiths (eds.), The Transformation of Global Intellectual Property Protection, Oxford: Oxford University Press 2020, forthcoming.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {inbook}

}

@article{McGonagle2020e,

title = {Infographic: ‘The Council of Europe and the safety of journalists’},

author = {McGonagle, T.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/CM-Rec20164-Infographic-version-9-April-2020.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-04-09},

abstract = {The infographic, ‘The Council of Europe and the safety of journalists’, visualizes and condenses the detailed information in Committee of Ministers’ Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)4 Committee of Ministers’ Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)4 to member States on the protection of journalism and the safety of journalists and other media actors. The infographic also signposts, and hyperlinks to, the Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists and other valuable Council of Europe resources, including the European Court of Human Rights’ three judgments to date which cite the Recommendation.

The infographic, which was first created in 2019, has been updated in April 2020 to mark the fourth anniversary of the adoption of Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)4 and the fifth anniversary of the launch of the Council of Europe Platform.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Dommering2020e,

title = {Annotatie bij HvJ EU 29 juli 2019 (Fashion ID)},

author = {Dommering, E.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2020_97.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-04-07},

journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie},

number = {13/14},

pages = {1659-1661},

note = {nr. 97},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Dommering2020f,

title = {Annotatie bij HvJ EU 1 oktober 2019 (Planet 49)},

author = {Dommering, E.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2020_98.pdf},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-04-07},

journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie},

number = {13/14},

pages = {1671-1673},

note = {nr. 98},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Bernstein2020,

title = {Diversity, Fairness, and Data-Driven Personalization in (News) Recommender System},

author = {Bernstein, A. and Vreese, C.H. de and Helberger, N. and Schulz, W. and Zweig, K.A.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/dagrep_v009_i011_p117_19482.pdf},

doi = {10.4230/DagRep.9.11.117},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-04-02},

journal = {Dagstuhl Reports},

volume = {9},

number = {11},

pages = {117-124},

abstract = {As people increasingly rely on online media and recommender systems to consume information,

engage in debates and form their political opinions, the design goals of online media and news

recommenders have wide implications for the political and social processes that take place online

and offline. Current recommender systems have been observed to promote personalization and

more effective forms of informing, but also to narrow the user’s exposure to diverse content.

Concerns about echo-chambers and filter bubbles highlight the importance of design metrics that

can successfully strike a balance between accurate recommendations that respond to individual

information needs and preferences, while at the same time addressing concerns about missing out

important information, context and the broader cultural and political diversity in the news, as

well as fairness. A broader, more sophisticated vision of the future of personalized recommenders

needs to be formed\textendasha vision that can only be developed as the result of a collaborative effort by

different areas of academic research (media studies, computer science, law and legal philosophy,

communication science, political philosophy, and democratic theory). The proposed workshop

will set first steps to develop such a much needed vision on the role of recommender systems

on the democratic role of the media and define the guidelines as well as a manifesto for future

research and long-term goals for the emerging topic of fairness, diversity, and personalization in

recommender systems.},

note = {Report from Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop 19482},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Irion2020bb,

title = {Pitching trade against privacy: reconciling EU governance of personal data flows with external trade},

author = {Irion, K. and Yakovleva, S. },

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/idpl/ipaa003},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-04-01},

journal = {International Data Privacy Law},

volume = {10},

number = {3},

pages = {201-221},

abstract = {This article positions EU’s external governance of personal data flows against the backdrop of the international controversy on digital trade versus strict privacy laws. Now that the EU has defined its position on horizontal provisions on cross-border data flows and personal data protection, it is both timely and essential to reassess its strategy on the international transfers of personal data in the purview of its future trade agreements. For its own normative approach and regulatory autonomy, the EU has a pivotal role to play in shaping the interface between trade and privacy before the ‘free trade leviathan’ can restrict the policy choices not only of individual states but also of the EU itself. Our contribution aims to break through the present compartmentalization of privacy scholarship and trade lawyers because it situates personal data flows in both disciplines.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Borgesius2020b,

title = {Rien ne va plus: Reclame en onlinekansspelen},

author = {Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. and Zimin, A. and Power, L. and Poort, J.},

url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/SEW_2020_3_auteursversie.pdf

https://www-uitgeverijparis-nl.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/nl/reader/206589/1001465434},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-03-31},

journal = {SEW},

number = {3},

pages = {116-126},

abstract = {Binnenkort zijn onlinekansspelen toegestaan in Nederland. Na de opening van de markt is te verwachten dat aanbieders van onlinekansspelen intensief reclame gaan maken. Dit artikel bespreekt de juridische context van kansspelreclame, wat voor beperkingen aan reclame mogelijk zijn, en wat de verwachte effecten zijn op met name kansspelverslaving.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Helberger2020b,

title = {Four tales of sci-fi and information law},

author = {Helberger, N. and Poort, J. and Makhortykh, M.},

url = {https://policyreview.info/node/1457/pdf},

doi = {10.14763/2020.1.1457},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-03-30},

journal = {Internet Policy Review},

volume = {9},

number = {1},

abstract = {Feel like living in a dystopia? Take a deep breath, get a strong coffee, and let us challenge your ideas of where reality ends, and sci-fi begins…},

note = {Editorial},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Bouch\`{e}2020b,

title = {Belgian court asks CJEU whether seeding is communicating to the public},

author = {Bouch\`{e}, G.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/03/30/belgian-court-asks-cjeu-whether-seeding-is-communicating-to-the-public/},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-03-30},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Borgesius2020,

title = {Strengthening legal protection against discrimination by algorithms and artificial intelligence},

author = {Zuiderveen Borgesius, F.},

url = {https://doi-org.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/10.1080/13642987.2020.1743976},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-03-29},

journal = {The International Journal of Human Rights},

abstract = {Algorithmic decision-making and other types of artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to predict who will commit crime, who will be a good employee, who will default on a loan, etc. However, algorithmic decision-making can also threaten human rights, such as the right to non-discrimination. The paper evaluates current legal protection in Europe against discriminatory algorithmic decisions. The paper shows that non-discrimination law, in particular through the concept of indirect discrimination, prohibits many types of algorithmic discrimination. Data protection law could also help to defend people against discrimination. Proper enforcement of non-discrimination law and data protection law could help to protect people. However, the paper shows that both legal instruments have severe weaknesses when applied to artificial intelligence. The paper suggests how enforcement of current rules can be improved. The paper also explores whether additional rules are needed. The paper argues for sector-specific \textendash rather than general \textendash rules, and outlines an approach to regulate algorithmic decision-making.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Stapel2020b,

title = {Stichting Brein versus Safe Harbour: The Ongoing Battle Between Intermediaries and Right Holders},

author = {Stapel, S.},

url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/03/27/stichting-brein-versus-safe-harbour-the-ongoing-battle-between-intermediaries-and-right-holders/},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-03-27},

journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Giannopoulou2020,

title = {Algorithmic systems: the consent is in the detail?},

author = {Giannopoulou, A.},

url = {https://policyreview.info/node/1452/pdf},

doi = {10.14763/2020.1.1452},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-03-24},

journal = {Internet Policy Review},

volume = {9},

number = {1},

abstract = {Applications of algorithmically informed decisions are becoming entrenched in society, with data processing being their main process and ingredient. While these applications are progressively gaining momentum, established data protection and privacy rules have struggled to incorporate the particularities of data-intensive information societies. It is a truism to point out the resulting misalignment between algorithmic processing of personal data and the data protection regulatory frameworks that strive for meaningful control over personal data. However, the challenges to the (traditional) role and concept of consent are particularly manifest. This article examines the transformation of consent models in order to assess how the concept and the applied models of consent can be reconciled in order to correspond not only to the current regulatory landscapes but also to the exponential growth of algorithmic processing technologies. This particularly pressing area of safeguarding a basic aspect of individual control over personal data in the algorithmic era is interlinked with practical implementations of consent in the technology used and with adopted interpretations of the concept of consent, the scope of application of personal data, as well as the obligations enshrined in them. What makes consent effective as a data protection tool and how can we maintain its previous glory within the current technological challenges?},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}