Mireille van Eechoud
This past decade has seen a veritable surge of development of ‘soft law’ private international instruments for intellectual property. A global network has been formed made up of academics and practitioners who work on the intersection of these domains. This article examines the synthesizing work of the International Law Association’s Committee on intellectual property and private international law. Now that its draft Guidelines on jurisdiction, applicable law and enforcement are at an advanced stage, what can be said about consensus and controversy about dealing with transborder intellectual property disputes in the information age? What role can principles play in a world where multilateral rulemaking on intellectual property becomes ever deeply politicized and framed as an issue of trade? Arguably, private international law retains it facilitating role and will continue to attract the attention of intellectual property law specialists as a necessary integral part of regulating transborder information flows.
NJBlog, 6 december 2016.
NJB Blog, 25 oktober 2016.
Paper for Open Data Research Symposium Madrid 2016
This paper analyzes the status of legal information under international and national copyright laws. It argues that the current uncertainties with respect to the copyright status of primary legal materials (legislation, court decisions) and secondary legal materials such as parliamentary records and other official texts relevant to the interpretation of law, constitute a barrier to access and use. The time has come for reform of the international copyright system in WIPO. International law should recognize explicitly that primary and secondary legal materials are public domain and thus not subject to copyright or related rights. This will bring outdated copyright norms across the world up to date with current developments: the trend towards universal recognition of the right to access government information as part of human rights, the UN’s sustainable development goals with respect to access to law, and the rapid growth of open government policies worldwide, supported by the Open Government Partnership (OGP).
Het Hof van Justitie heeft bij de uitleg van Richtlijn 96/9/EG betreffende de rechtsbescherming van databanken het begrip 'databank' zelden onder een vergrootglas gelegd. Meer aandacht ging uit naar het vereiste van substantile investering en naar de reikwijdte van het recht om opvraging en hergebruik van data te verbieden. Nu ligt er een uitspraak die het criterium dat de gegevensverzameling uit zelfstandige elementen moet bestaan, uitholt. Gaan we naar een databankrecht op alle 'informatie'?
Overbrenging van de afbeelding van een beschermd werk van een papieren poster op canvas valt onder het distributierecht van art. 4 Auteursrechtrichtlijn 2001/29/EG. Poortvliet-doctrine. Geen sprake van uitputting als drager is vervangen. Beloning voor distributie moet in een redelijke verhouding staan tot de economische waarde van de exploitatie van het beschermde voorwerp. Auteursrechtrichtlijn harmoniseert niet het recht van bewerking.
Open data are held to contribute to a wide variety of social and political goals, including strengthening transparency, public participation and democratic accountability, promoting economic growth and innovation, and enabling greater public sector efficiency and cost savings. However, releasing government data that contain personal information may threaten privacy and related rights and interests. In this paper we ask how these privacy interests can be respected, without unduly hampering benefits from disclosing public sector information. We propose a balancing framework to help public authorities address this question in different contexts. The framework takes into account different levels of privacy risks for different types of data. It also separates decisions about access and re-use, and highlights a range of different disclosure routes. A circumstance catalogue lists factors that might be considered when assessing whether, under which conditions, and how a dataset can be released. While open data remains an important route for the publication of government information, we conclude that it is not the only route, and there must be clear and robust public interest arguments in order to justify the disclosure of personal information as open data.
The EU Directive on Re-use of Public Sector Information of 2013 (the PSI Directive) is a key instrument for open data policies at all levels of government in Member States. It sets out a general framework for the conditions governing the right to re-use information resources held by public sector bodies. It includes provisions on non-discrimination, transparent licensing and the like. However, what the PSI Directive does not do is give businesses, civil society or citizens an actual claim to access. Access is of course a prerequisite to (re)use. It is largely a matter for individual Member States to regulate what information is in the public record. This article explores what the options for the EC are to promote alignment of rights to information and re-use policy. It also flags a number of important data protection problems that have not been given serious enough consideration, but have the potential to paralyze open data policies.
iLINC (ICT Law Incubators Network), September 2015.
iLINC (ICT Law Incubators Network), Work Package 3, September 2015.
iLINC Law Incubator Brief, 2015.
Standaardlicenties zoals Creative Commons zijn een belangrijk middel voor overheidsorganen om het (her)gebruik van overheidsinformatie te stimuleren. De uitoefening van het privaatrechtelijke auteurs- en databankenrecht versterkt zo de publiekrechtelijk geregelde openbaarheid van bestuur. Kan dat zo blijven als het initiatiefwetsvoorstel Open Overheid wet wordt? Het voorstel zet de verhouding tussen openbaarheidswetgeving en intellectuele eigendomsrechten op scherp. Dit artikel beziet de voorgenomen wetswijzigingen in het licht van de tweewegenleer, het leerstuk dat bepaalt hoe privaatrechtelijk overheidshandelen mag worden ingezet voor publieke doelen.
ALAI Conference 2015, Bonn (Germany) 18-20 June 2015.
In: The Work of Authorship, M.M.M. van Eechoud (ed.), Amsterdam: AUP 2014, p. 7-17.
The goal of this introduction is to ‘set the stage’ so to speak for the various explorations that follow, of notions of collaborative authorship and original works in academic thought, societal practice and as legal norms. To provide especially the readership not familiar with copyright lawmaking with a useful backdrop, what follows is a characterisation of the current state of copyright law in Europe. I shall briefly describe the role of the EU as primary actor in copyright reform. We can then sketch what the pertinent questions are on authorship and copyright subject-matter, a.k.a. original intellectual creations, and how the authors of each chapter have addressed these. The contributions in this volume all borrow from different disciplines. This introduction concludes with some observations on the many voices in academia that speak on creative practices, and on their relative proximity to copyright scholarship. Although technology and economics will continue to drive developments in intellectual property law, humanities research can (and should) have real impact on the quality of law and legal interpretation.
In: The Work of Authorship, M.M.M. van Eechoud (ed.), Amsterdam: AUP 2014, p. 145-173.
My focus in this piece is on the interplay between the legal concepts of work, copy and adaptation in light of the now ubiquitous ‘new’ forms or genres of works that online networks enabled. Can European copyright law accommodate the increased fluidity of some of these work genres? What avenues might be taken to attenuate the gap between legal and social practices? Is a more flexible system of limitations enough? Or do we need a wholesale rethink of the work concept? Might a more relaxed notion of copying and especially of adapting suffice? What would that mean for the kind of copyright infringement analysis courts engage in? My ambition is to explore potential avenues for reform, and in doing so take on board some insights from non-legal disciplines, notably genre and adaptations studies.
LAPSI/Openlaws workshop, 4 September 2014.
The EC funded openlaws.eu project and the LAPSI thematic network project joined forces for a workshop on open legal data for Europe. About 25 participants from academia, government, business and civil society discussed whtat the drivers are for opening up legal data for re-use in different jurisdictions and what barriers (perceived or real) exist. The outcome of the discussion will feed into the on-going work in the LAPSI network on legal barriers to re-use, and in the vision for Big Open Legal Data that will be developed as part of Openlaws.eu.
Rede uitgesproken bij de aanvaarding van het ambt van hoogleraar Informatierecht, in het bijzonder met betrekking tot het recht inzake toegang tot informatie, aan de Faculteit der Rechtgeleerdheid van de Universiteit van Amsterdam op vrijdag 23 mei 2014.
Nederland doet mee in het Open Government Partnership, een club landen die de ambitie delen om transparantie in de publieke sector te vergroten. Het recente eerste actieplan benadrukt vooral de noodzaak om meer informatie actief openbaar te maken, en dat te doen op een manier die data herbruikbaar maakt. Daar vroeg de Tweede Kamer eind 2012 al om toen het de motie-Voortman aannam. Wat draagt het wetsvoorstel open overheid daaraan bij?
Het corpus uitspraken van het Hof van Justitie EU over grensoverschrijdende inbreuken op intellectuele eigendomsrechten groeit gestaag. Maar een werkelijk samenhangend antwoord op de vraag welke rechter bevoegd is en welk recht toepasselijk is valt nog niet te bespeuren. De arresten Football Dataco en Pinckney – de eersten over databankenrecht en auteursrecht inbreuk op internet – getuigen van twee verschillende benaderingen. Een materieelrechtelijke bij Football Dataco, in het voetspoor van merkinbreukzaak L’Oréal/eBay. En een meer traditionele internationaal privaatrechtelijke aanpak bij Pinckney, in de lijn van Wintersteiger. Waar gaat het Hof heen?
European Max Planck Group on Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property: J. Basedow, P. de Miquel Asensio, G. Dinwoodie, J. Drexl, C. Heinze, A. Kur, A. Metzger, A. Peukert, P. Torremans, M. van Eechoud, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013, 560 p.
The Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP) Principles address issues of private law for disputes involving intellectual property rights. They were produced by a Max Planck Institute research project, in which the authors of this work were heavily involved. The Principles are intended to provide a model European framework to respond to the increasing need for guidance on the applicable law. They represent a significant body of work which will help to inform developing practice on applicable law and conflict throughout the field. This new work presents the Principles, alongside article-by-article commentary and notes, which analyse thoroughly the context of the rule within the Principles, as well as within the existing legal solutions at the national, European and international level. It also explores the policy considerations underlying the rule, enabling a better understanding of why the Principles adopt the solutions laid out in the rules. Useful references are provided to the relevant legal provisions and cases dealing with the respective issues of intellectual property and private international law.
This paper was written in the context of the European Commission funded thematic network on Legal Aspects of Public Sector Information ('LAPSI'). The reliance on national access norms is an important feature of the EU’s re-use framework, of which Directive 2003/98/EC on the re-use of public sector information is a central feature. It impacts the kinds of policy choices that can be expected to be effective in stimulating commercial and non-commercial re-use of public sector information by private actors (businesses, civil society organizations, individual citizens, etc.). In this paper we assess in more detail the relationship between the PSI Directive and (statutory) rights of access and duties to disclose information under national laws and European law (the latter especially in the area of environmental law). The conclusion is that despite the fact that access to information is increasingly recognized internationally as a fundamental right, the nuts and bolts of it will remain squarely a national affair for the foreseeable future, environmental information excepted. This makes it especially important that EU re-use policies and instruments enable public sector bodies in Member States to work within their existing access infrastructure, in terms of local divisions of competences, procedures and control over pro-active dissemination of information. If the requirements imposed under EU re-use law do not align with local freedom of information laws, it may produce a negative effect on transparency. Not only that, it may also adversely affect conditions for fostering (commercial) re-use.
The Painer judgment from 1 December 2011 (Case C-145/10) signals a departure from the strict formalist-territorial approach to jurisdiction in intellectual property matters. The Court of Justice of the EU says that joining defendants under art. 6(1) Brussels Regulation is not precluded ‘solely because actions against several defendants for substantially identical copyright infringements are brought on national legal grounds which vary according to the Member States concerned’. The Advocate General took to heart the criticism unleashed by the Courts Roche judgment on multiple defendants jurisdiction, citing among others the position of the European Max Planck Group on Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP). The Court follows suit.
Freedom of information law is, first and foremost, an instrument that helps to effectuate democratic control of public administration, by giving citizens rights to access government held information. But access rights are also associated with broader benefits. Government data has economic value beyond the public sector, as it can be used for private sector provision of information services and products. Enhancing commercial exploitation of public sector information has, in recent years, become part of national and European economic policy. Access for both democratic and economic purposes has implications for how intellectual property rights in government information are exercised. This chapter explores the role of copyright policy in light of the objectives and principles behind freedom of information law and the regulatory framework for the reuse of public sector information. More specifically, it queries whether open content licenses, such as Creative Commons (CC), are indeed as attractive an instrument for the management of intellectual property in government information as they appear to be.
Aanbieden van meubels via website. Rechtsmacht en toepasselijk recht bij inbreuk op auteursrecht en merkrecht. Onrechtmatig handelen in Nederland als website op Nederland is gericht.
Hoofdstuk 1: The European Concern with Copyright and Related Rights;
Hoofdstuk 9:The Last Frontier: Territoriality;
Nobody likes today’s copyright law. Widespread unauthorized use of copyright material proliferates with impunity, while citizens and users protest that intrusive copyright and related rights law stifle cultural expression. Equipment manufacturers and intermediaries complain about yet more ’security’ features that complicate their products and services and encumber marketing, while content owners desperately want enforcement to work. And of course it is crucial that whatever regulatory instruments come into play must not age prematurely in Internet time. The European Union faces the daunting challenge of articulating coherent copyright policies that satisfy these contradictory multiple demands. Yet the legal framework must conform to the European Union’s remit of fostering economic growth in a common market, while respecting the national traditions of its still growing family of Member States. Clearly, an extraordinary balancing act is called for if justice is to be done to all of the private and public interests affected. So how has the European acquis communautaire scored on these issues so far? In this groundbreaking study the Institute for Information Law of the University of Amsterdam brings its extensive academic expertise to bear on this question. The authors scrutinize the present law as laid down in the seven copyright and related rights directives, against the background of the relevant international standards of the Berne Convention, the TRIPs agreement, and the WIPO Internet Treaties. They map out in detail the degree to which certain areas of copyright have been harmonized as they expose the gaps and inconsistencies in the acquis and the urgent unresolved issues that persist. They identify the EU’s ambitions in relation to its present and future competences (following the Lisbon Reform) to regulate copyright, and to its Better Regulation agenda. Following a comprehensive analysis of almost two decades of regulatory intervention, they move on to the salient current trends that point toward a more coherent and balanced European copyright law.
In: Harmonizing European Copyright Law: The Challenges of Better Lawmaking, Information Law Series, nr. 19, Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International 2009.
The Creative Commons model seems an attractice instrument for public sector bodies that seek to enhance transparent access to their information, be it for purposes of democratic accountability or re-use for economic or other uses. This study examined that hypothesis and highlights the major opportunities and pitfalls of the Creative Commons model for public sector information. It assesses where there is a match between the creative commons model and the principles of freedom of information law and the Public Sector Information Directive (EC Directive 2003/98 on the re-use of public sector information) as implemented in the new chapter V-A of the Dutch Freedom of Information Act (Wet Openbaarheid van Bestuur). The assessment was made not only at the more principled, abstract level, but also at the level of the individual licensing terms. It is preceded by an analysis of government information as subject of intellectual property rights, under the Dutch Copyright Act and the Database Act.
The European Max-Planck Group for Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP) analyses in these comments the effects on intellectual property contracts of the proposed Rome I regulation on the law applicable to contractual obligations. CLIP argues that the European legislator should not introduce a rule on the law applicable tot contracts relating to intellectual property rights in Art. 4 of the future Rome I-Regulation, or introduce at least a more flexible one.
In consequence of ECJ judgments C-4/03 - GAT v. LuK and C-539/03 - Roche Nederland v. Primus, handed down on 13 July 2005, it appears no longer feasible for a national court to allow for consolidation of claims against a person infringing parallel intellectual property rights registered in different Member States, and/or to accept a joinder of claims against multiple defendants engaged in concerted actions. It is feared that this will entail considerable impediments for an efficient enforcement of intellectual property rights, in particular of patents. In these comments, the European Max-Planck Group for Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP) suggests the adverse affects of the ECJ's rulings should be cured. This can be done by revising the drafting of article 22(4) and article 6 of the Brussels Regulation on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (44/2001).
Rapport aan de Europese Commissie, DG Interne Markt, februari 2007. Zie ook Part II: Country Reports on the Implementation of Directive 2001/29/EC in the Member States, G. Westkamp, Queen Mary Intellectual Property Research Institute, februari 2007.
This study, commissioned by the European Commission, examines the application of Directive 2001/29/EC in the light of the development of the digital market. Its purpose is to consider how Member States have implemented the Directive into national law and to assist the Commission in evaluating whether the Directive, as currently formulated, remains the appropriate response to the continuing challenges faced by the stakeholders concerned, such as rights holders, commercial users, consumers, educational and scientific users. As set out in specifications of the study set out by the Commission, its aim is "to assess the role that the Directive has played in fostering the digital market for goods and services in the four years since its adoption". The impact of the Directive on the development of digital (chiefly online) business models, therefore, will be the focal point of our enquiry throughout this study.
In: Openbaarheid in het internettijdperk: de invloed van ICT op juridische concepten van openbaarheid, Den Haag: Sdu Uitgevers 2006.
Rapport aan de Europese Commissie, DG Interne Markt, november 2006, 308 p.
Zie ook de executive summary.
Study carried out by the Institute for Information Law for the European Commission (DG Internal Market). Chapters 1 and 2 describe and examine the existing 'acquis communautaire' in the field of copyright and related (neighbouring) rights, with special focus on inconsistencies and unclarities. Chapters 3-6 deal with distinct issues that were identified a priori by the European Commission as meriting special attention: possible extension of the term of protection of phonograms (Chapter 3), possible alignment of the term of protection of co-written musical works (Chapter 4), the problems connected to multiple copyright ownership, including the issue of 'orphan works' (Chapter 5), and copyright awareness among consumers (Chapter 6). Chapter 7 provides an overall assessment of the benefits and drawbacks of the fifteen years of harmonisation of copyright and related rights in the EU and dwells on regulatory alternatives.
Kortlopend onderzoek ten behoeve van de Nederlandse standpuntbepaling ten aanzien van het voorstel voor een Richtlijn tot oprichting van een infrastructuur voor ruimtelijke informatie in de Gemeenschap (INSPIRE).
The EU are in the advanced stages of legislating conflict of laws rules for torts, with the adoption by the Council of a common position on the proposed Rome II regulation on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations. In this contribution, a critical look is taken at this private international law instrument and its impact on the broadcasting and media industries. The legislative background and objectives of Rome II are set out, followed by an introduction to its general rules. Special attention is paid to questions of intellectual property, unfair competition and violations of interests in personality (including defamation).
Conventional wisdom in international copyright doctrine has it that the law of the country for whose territory protection is claimed governs copyright issues - whether it concerns existence, scope, duration, ownership, transfer or infringement. The Berne Convention of 1886 and other international copyright treaties do not lay down the lex protectionis as conflict rule, contrary to what is often assumed. This paper addresses the drawbacks of the lex protectionis for the initial ownership issue. It assesses alternative conflict rules that can increase legal certainty, while giving due respect to the diversity in national allocation regimes. There is a case to be made for the development of creator-oriented conflict rules for initial ownership issues, particularly if they also serve legal certainty by identifying a single governing law. Such rules may be construed using the main allocation principles of modern European private international law theory.
In: ICT regulering anno 2002. Reis om de wereld in acht landen en zestien onderwerpen, Tilburg: Centrum voor Bestuur, Recht en Informatisering KUB 2002, p. 45-53.
Rapport in opdracht van het Ministerie van Economische Zaken ten behoeve van de ICT-toets 2002. Bijdrage over de stand van wetgeving(sinitiatieven) op wereld- en Europees niveau en in Nederland, Canada, Duitsland, Frankrijk, Japan, Verenigd Koninkrijk, Verenigde Staten en Zweden op het gebied van intellectuele eigendom in de digitale omgeving, m.n. wat betreft auteursrecht, naburige rechten en octrooien op software en bedrijfsmethoden.