The EU’s Digital Sovereignty and Quantum Technologies: To What End? external link

Forthcoming in Law, Innovation and Technology, 2025

Abstract

Digital sovereignty, as a core EU policy objective, conveys the urgency of reducing dependencies, safeguarding European values, and regaining control over data, infrastructure, and technologies through regulation, strategic investments and geopolitical partnerships. However, it is a broad term encompassing different elements, and achieving some form of digital sovereignty remains questionable. This paper argues that digital sovereignty is less about what the term tends to convey and more about legitimising points of control. First, we examine the evolution of sovereignty and resulting regulation in relation to digital infrastructures and technologies. Second, we focus on the less-studied field of quantum technologies, which has become a recent anchor point for EU digital sovereignty policy. We highlight how, underlying the efforts to assert control and attain independence, digital sovereignty operates performatively to construct the European identity and produces tangible effects, such as the allocation of funds towards uncertain technological goals and select European actors.

Digital sovereignty, quantum technologies

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

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

Sganga, C., Geiger, C., Margoni, T., Senftleben, M. & van Eechoud, M.
JIPITEC, vol. 16, iss. : 2, pp: 312-326, 2025

Abstract

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

Copyright, european copyright society, research

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Public accountability and regulatory expectations for AI in journalism: qualitative evidence from focus groups with Dutch citizens

Morosoli, S., Naudts, L., Cools, H., Venkatraj, K., Helberger, N. & Vreese, C.H. de
AI & Society, 2025

Abstract

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to reshape society, its integration into journalism raises critical questions about transparency, accountability, and public trust. Existing AI regulations have largely been developed without meaningful public input, prompting concerns about whether current governance approaches adequately address societal expectations. This study investigates the expectations and concerns of Dutch citizens regarding mandatory AI disclosures in journalism through three focus groups (N = 21). We aimed for a broad sample of participants to ensure diversity in terms of age, gender, and education level. Key questions measured the main concerns about AI-generated content, why participants want to know if they are interacting with AI-generated content and which rights individuals would like to have in this context. The results reveal a preference for participatory regulatory processes and standardized transparency measures, such as the disclosure of sources. The results further underscore the wish to be able to hold news organizations and individual AI users accountable when regulations are breached. The findings can inform news professionals and regulators alike, for example, in the context of the implementation of the AI transparency obligations in the European AI Act.

AI Regulation, Journalism

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Article 77. Powers of authorities protecting fundamental rights external link

Vogiatzoglou, P. & Drechsler, L.
The EU Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act : A Commentary, Wolters Kluwer, 2025, Alphen aan den Rijn, pp: 1096-1106, ISBN: 9789403532271

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Article 74. Market surveillance and control of AI systems in the Union market external link

Drechsler, L. & Vogiatzoglou, P.
The EU Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act: A Commentary, Wolters Kluwer, 2025, Alphen aan den Rijn, pp: 1062-1080, ISBN: 978-94-035-3227-1

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

More Information Law Series Volumes Freely Available external link

Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2025

Copyright, information law, Kluwer Information Law Series

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

GenAI and the Copyright Three-Step Test – Do TDM Exceptions for AI Training Conflict With a Work’s Normal Exploitation? external link

GRUR International, vol. 75, iss. : 1, pp: 1-2, 2025

Abstract

Text and data mining (TDM) for AI training can be regarded as the starting point of a complex process that impacts the market for human literary and artistic creations in different ways. The machine is only capable of mimicking human content after it had the opportunity to derive patterns for its own productions from myriad human creations that served as training resources. Once AI training has been completed and a generative AI (GenAI) system is brought to the market, AI output may support fruitful human/machine collaboration. However, it may also kill demand for the same human creativity that empowered the AI system to become a competitor in the first place. In the terminology of the ubiquitous three-step test in international and European copyright law, this latter challenge raises the question whether copyright exceptions permitting TDM for AI training cause a conflict with a work’s normal exploitation. A closer inspection of the normal exploitation test shows that the chances of demonstrating a relevant conflict are slim in the case of AI training. Rightsholders seeking compensation for displacement effects caused by GenAI systems must resort to the final criterion of the three-step test and argue that the use for AI development unreasonably prejudices their legitimate interests. In practice, this means that copyright holders can hardly employ the three-step test as a tool to erode TDM exemptions altogether. They can only insist on the introduction of appropriate remuneration schemes to avoid unreasonable prejudice in cases of commercial AI training.

Copyright, exploitation, GenAI, Text and Data Mining (TDM), three-step test

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Allocating Access to Quantum Computing: A Legal-Ethical Framework external link

Lane, B., Mittal, A. & Torres-Knoop, A.
Quantum for Good, 2025

quantum technologies

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Human Rights and Intellectual Property Before the European Courts: A Case Commentary on the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights external link

Izyumenko, E. & Geiger, C.
Edward Elgar Publishing, 2025, pp: 876, ISBN: 978103536887

Abstract

This unique reference work serves as a comprehensive guide to how Europe’s top courts – the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights – address the intersection of intellectual property (IP) and human rights. It traces the evolution of the courts’ jurisprudence in these fields and explores how human and fundamental rights including freedom of expression, freedom to conduct a business, and the right to a fair trial can influence copyright, trademarks, patents, and other IP rights.

Human rights, Intellectual property

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Intellectual Property and the Human Right to a Healthy Environment: An Introduction download

Chapter in: E. Izyumenko (ed.), Intellectual Property and the Human Right to a Healthy Environment, Verfassungsbooks, 2025, Berlin, pp: 9-19, ISBN: 9783565044535

Human rights, Intellectual property

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib