Het juridisch kader voor de verspreiding van desinformatie via internetdiensten en de regulering van politieke advertenties

Het juridisch kader voor de verspreiding van desinformatie via internetdiensten en de regulering van politieke advertenties external link

van Hoboken, J., Appelman, N., Fahy, R., Leerssen, P., McGonagle, T., van Eijk, N. & Helberger, N.

2020

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.

Links

https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Rapport_desinformatie_december2019.pdf https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Kamerbrief_desinformatie.pdf

democratie, desinformatie, frontpage, internetdiensten, Mediarecht, politieke advertenties, Regulering, Vrijheid van meningsuiting

RIS

TY  - RPRT
AU  - van Hoboken, J.
AU  - Appelman, N.
AU  - Fahy, R.
AU  - Leerssen, P.
AU  - McGonagle, T.
AU  - van Eijk, N.
AU  - Helberger, N.
PY  - 0514
DA  - 2020-05-14
T1  - Het juridisch kader voor de verspreiding van desinformatie via internetdiensten en de regulering van politieke advertenties
UR  - https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Rapport_desinformatie_december2019.pdf
https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Kamerbrief_desinformatie.pdf
AB  - 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.
K1  - democratie
K1  - desinformatie
K1  - frontpage
K1  - internetdiensten
K1  - Mediarecht
K1  - politieke advertenties
K1  - Regulering
K1  - Vrijheid van meningsuiting
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Report{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.},
	year = {0514},
	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.},
	keywords = {democratie, desinformatie, frontpage, internetdiensten, Mediarecht, politieke advertenties, Regulering, Vrijheid van meningsuiting},
}

Save .bib

Flexibility Grave – Partial Reproduction Focus and Closed System Fetishism in CJEU, Pelham external link

Senftleben, M.

IIC, vol. 51, num: 6, pp: 751-769, 2020

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.

Links

Auteursrecht, frontpage, Naburige rechten, Pelham, soundsampling

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Senftleben, M.
PY  - 0512
DA  - 2020-05-12
T1  - Flexibility Grave – Partial Reproduction Focus and Closed System Fetishism in CJEU, Pelham
JO  - IIC
VL  - 51
NV  - 6
SP  - 751-769
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-020-00940-z
DO  - https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-020-00940-z
AB  - 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.
K1  - Auteursrecht
K1  - frontpage
K1  - Naburige rechten
K1  - Pelham
K1  - soundsampling
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Senftleben2020c,
	title = {Flexibility Grave – Partial Reproduction Focus and Closed System Fetishism in CJEU, Pelham},
	author = {Senftleben, M.},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-020-00940-z},
	year = {0512},
	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 = {Auteursrecht, frontpage, Naburige rechten, Pelham, soundsampling},
}

Save .bib

Freedom of Expression, the Media and Journalists: Case-law of the European Court of Human Rights external link

Voorhoof, D. & McGonagle, T.

0508

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.

Links

https://rm.coe.int/iris-themes-vol-iii-ed-2020-en-2/16809e45e7

EHRM, frontpage, Journalistiek, jurisprudentie, Mediarecht, Vrijheid van meningsuiting

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Selected Aspects of Implementing Article 17 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market into National Law – Comment of the European Copyright Society external link

Metzger, A., Senftleben, M., Derclaye E., Dreier, T., Geiger, C., Griffiths, J., Hilty, R., Hugenholtz, P.B., Riis, T., Rognstad, O.A., Strowel, A.M., Synodinou, T. & Xalabarder, R.

2020

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 – and most controversial – 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 – an impact factor that is often overlooked in the debate.

Links

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3589323

algorithmic enforcement, applicable law, collective copyright management, content hosting, Content moderation, copyright contract law, EU copyright law, filtering mechanisms, Freedom of expression, Licensing, notice-and-takedown, private international law, transformative use, user-generated content

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Metzger, A.
AU  - Senftleben, M.
AU  - Derclaye E.
AU  - Dreier, T.
AU  - Geiger, C.
AU  - Griffiths, J.
AU  - Hilty, R.
AU  - Hugenholtz, P.B.
AU  - Riis, T.
AU  - Rognstad, O.A.
AU  - Strowel, A.M.
AU  - Synodinou, T.
AU  - Xalabarder, R.
PY  - 0507
DA  - 2020-05-07
T1  - Selected Aspects of Implementing Article 17 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market into National Law – Comment of the European Copyright Society
UR  - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3589323
AB  - 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 – and most controversial – 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 – an impact factor that is often overlooked in the debate.
K1  - algorithmic enforcement
K1  - applicable law
K1  - collective copyright management
K1  - content hosting
K1  - Content moderation
K1  - copyright contract law
K1  - EU copyright law
K1  - filtering mechanisms
K1  - Freedom of expression
K1  - Licensing
K1  - notice-and-takedown
K1  - private international law
K1  - transformative use
K1  - user-generated content
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Metzger2020,
	title = {Selected Aspects of Implementing Article 17 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market into National Law – 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.B. and Riis, T. and Rognstad, O.A. and Strowel, A.M. and Synodinou, T. and Xalabarder, R.},
	year = {0507},
	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 – and most controversial – 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 – an impact factor that is often overlooked in the debate.},
	keywords = {algorithmic enforcement, applicable law, collective copyright management, content hosting, Content moderation, copyright contract law, EU copyright law, filtering mechanisms, Freedom of expression, Licensing, notice-and-takedown, private international law, transformative use, user-generated content},
}

Save .bib

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

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

2020

Abstract

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

Links

https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/money-talks-summary-report-final.pdf

corporate funding, frontpage, information law, research

RIS

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

Save .RIS

Bibtex

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

Save .bib

Blocking Orders: Assessing Tensions with Human Rights

Izyumenko, E.

Oxford Handbook of Online Intermediary Liability, Oxford University Press, 2020, ISBN: 9780198837138

RIS
Bibtex

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Intermediary Liability and Fundamental Rights external link

Geiger, C., Frosio, G. & Izyumenko, E.

Oxford Handbook of Online Intermediary Liability, Oxford University Press, 2020, ISBN: 9780198837138

Links

https://global.oup.com/academic/product/oxford-handbook-of-online-intermediary-liability-9780198837138?cc=nl&lang=en&#

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Statement Prof. Dr. Natali Helberger bij Rondetafelgesprek over de Corona-app in de Tweede Kamer op 22 April 2020 external link

Helberger, N.

2020

Links

https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Statement_Covid_App_Expertsronde_TK.pdf https://www.tweedekamer.nl/debat_en_vergadering/commissievergaderingen/details?id=2020A01700

frontpage, Informatierecht, mobile health apps

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Implementing User Rights for Research in the Field of Artificial Intelligence: A Call for Action at International Level external link

Flynn, S., Geiger, C. & Quintais, J.

Abstract

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

Links

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

Artificial intelligence, Auteursrecht, frontpage

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Implementing User Rights for Research in the Field of Artificial Intelligence: A Call for International Action external link

Flynn, S., Geiger, C., Quintais, J., Margoni, T., Sag, M., Guibault, L. & Carroll, M.

European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 2020, num: 7, 2020

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.

Links

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3578819

Artificial intelligence, Auteursrecht, frontpage, machine learning, tdm, Text and Data Mining (TDM)

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Flynn, S.
AU  - Geiger, C.
AU  - Quintais, J.
AU  - Margoni, T.
AU  - Sag, M.
AU  - Guibault, L.
AU  - Carroll, M.
PY  - 0421
DA  - 2020-04-21
T1  - Implementing User Rights for Research in the Field of Artificial Intelligence: A Call for International Action
JO  - European Intellectual Property Review
VL  - 2020
NV  - 7
UR  - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3578819
AB  - 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.
K1  - Artificial intelligence
K1  - Auteursrecht
K1  - frontpage
K1  - machine learning
K1  - tdm
K1  - Text and Data Mining (TDM)
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

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.},
	year = {0421},
	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 = {Artificial intelligence, Auteursrecht, frontpage, machine learning, tdm, Text and Data Mining (TDM)},
}

Save .bib

Top Keywords

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

RIS

Bibtex

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex