Difference between revisions of "Copyright Evidence"

From Copyright EVIDENCE
(48 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
__NOTOC__
+
<!-- hide TOC -->__NOTOC____NOTITLE__
{| class="infobox" style="width:28em;" cellpadding="3"
+
<!--        BANNER ACROSS TOP OF PAGE        -->
 +
{| id="mp-topbanner" style="width:100%; background:#f9f9f9; margin:1.2em 0 6px 0; border:1px solid #ddd;"
 +
| style="width:40%; color:#000;" |
 +
<!--        "WELCOME TO COPYRIGHT EVIDENCE" AND ARTICLE COUNT        -->
 +
{| style="width:*; border:none; background:none;"
 +
| style="width:*; text-align:center; white-space:wrap; color:#000;" |
 +
<div style="font-size:162%; border:none; margin:0; padding:.1em; color:#000;">Welcome to the [[Copyright Evidence]] Wiki</div>
 +
<div style="top:+0.2em; font-size:95%;">The open platform that collects evidence about copyright's role in society</div>
 +
<div id="articlecount" style="font-size:85%;">[[All_Studies|{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]]| format=count}}]] studies have been [[Special:Statistics| fully catalogued]]</div>
 +
|}
 +
<!--        PORTAL LIST ON RIGHT-HAND SIDE        -->
 +
| style="width:13%; font-size:95%;" |
 +
:[[File:Book on.png|20px]]<span class="plainlinks"> [http://www.copyrightevidence.org/evidence-wiki/index.php/Publishing_of_books,_periodicals_and_other_publishing Books]</span>
 +
:[[File:Broadcasting on.png|20px]]<span class="plainlinks"> [http://www.copyrightevidence.org/evidence-wiki/index.php/Programming_and_broadcasting Broadcasting]</span>
 +
:[[File:Education on.png|20px]]<span class="plainlinks"> [http://www.copyrightevidence.org/evidence-wiki/index.php/Cultural_education Education]</span>
 +
| style="width:13%; font-size:95%;" |
 +
:[[File:Film on.png|20px]]<span class="plainlinks"> [http://www.copyrightevidence.org/evidence-wiki/index.php/Film_and_motion_pictures Films]</span>
 +
:[[File:Music on.png|20px]]<span class="plainlinks"> [http://www.copyrightevidence.org/evidence-wiki/index.php/Sound_recording_and_music_publishing Music]</span>
 +
:[[File:Photography on.png|20px]]<span class="plainlinks"> [http://www.copyrightevidence.org/evidence-wiki/index.php/Photographic_activities Photography]</span>
 +
| style="width:13%; font-size:95%;" |
 +
:[[File:Software on.png|20px]]<span class="plainlinks"> [http://www.copyrightevidence.org/evidence-wiki/index.php/Software_publishing_(including_video_games) Software]</span>
 +
:[[File:Television on.png|20px]]<span class="plainlinks"> [http://www.copyrightevidence.org/evidence-wiki/index.php/Television_programmes Television]</span>
 +
:[[File:Blue square.png|20px]]<span class="plainlinks"> {{#drilldownlink:category=Industries|single|link text=All industries|tooltip=All Industries}}</span>
 +
|}
 +
 
 +
<!--        TODAY'S FEATURED CONTENT        -->
 +
{| id="mp-upper" style="width: 100%; margin:4px 0 0 0; background:none; border-spacing: 0px;"
 +
<!--        TODAY'S FEATURED ARTICLE; DID YOU KNOW        -->
 +
| class="MainPageBG" style="width:55%; border:1px solid #cef2e0; background:#f5fffa; vertical-align:top; color:#000;" |
 +
{| id="mp-left" style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; background:#f5fffa;"
 +
| style="padding:2px;" | <h2 id="mp-tfa-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#cef2e0; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">{{#ifexpr:{{formatnum:{{PAGESIZE:Wikipedia:Today's featured article/{{#time:F j, Y}}}}|R}}>150|From today's featured article|Introducing ''Copyright Evidence'' <span style="font-size:85%; font-weight:normal;"></span>}}</h2>
 +
|-
 +
| style="color:#000;" | <div id="mp-tfa" style="padding:2px 5px">[[Copyright Evidence]] is a digital resource developed by CREATe at the University of Glasgow. The purpose of the Wiki is to categorise existing empirical studies on copyright to inform public debate and policy based on rigorous evidence. Among others, the evidence is catalogued by country, industry and research method, offering an in-depth view of existing findings. The evidence from empirical studies can be complemented with new results from CREATe research databases, such as those related to online consumption behaviour ([http://create.ac.uk/omeba/ OMeBa]), litigation of IP cases ([http://copyrightcentral.arts.gla.ac.uk/litexp/ Litigation Explorer]) and real-time infringement on file sharing networks ([http://create.ac.uk/ipwatchr IPWatchr]).
 +
</div>
 +
|-
 +
| style="padding:2px;" | <h2 id="mp-dyk-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#cef2e0; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">More about ''Copyright Evidence''</h2>
 +
|-
 +
| style="color:#000; padding:2px 5px 5px;" | <div id="mp-dyk">[[Copyright Evidence]] intends to establish a body of evidence that allows better decision making in a contested policy field. Competing claims can be assessed and challenged transparently using underlying data and methods. Robustness and limitations of findings are carefully collected and are available here for all to reference.
 +
 
 +
This project is a form of dynamic literature review in a rapidly changing technological, business and socio-legal landscape. Only very recently, new research methods in combination with the development of big data techniques, which are richer both in size and in depth, have allowed researchers to test empirically [[:Category:Fundamental Issues|key theoretical propositions]] and forced them to build theories which are consistent with observation. This generated the need to evaluate political decisions and design [[:Category:Evidence Based Policies|policy interventions based on evidence]].
 +
 
 +
This open online platform builds on an innovative research philosophy and examines copyright from an interdisciplinary perspective, while it also facilitates bringing evidence to the debate from studies in fields that were previously overlooked. Relevant empirical work spreads across conventional [[:Category:Methods|methodological]] and [[:Category:Disciplines|disciplinary]] boundaries and it does not need to have "copyright" in the title.
 +
 +
A crucial dimension of the existing evidence examines different stages of production (e.g. creation, innovation, diffusion, distribution), in various creative industries (e.g. [[Sound recording and music publishing|music]], [[Film and motion pictures|film and motion pictures]], [[Television programmes|TV programmes]], [[Software publishing (including video games)|computer software]], [[Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing|books]]), and estimates the effects of copyright on diverse agents in each sector, such as creators, investors, distributors, users or society as a whole. The fact that the impact of copyright law differs across various actors, industries and demographic groups, implies the need for more specific policies (for instance, even though the [[Ofcom_(2011)|Ofcom (2011)]] survey provides evidence of heterogeneous consumption patterns, this remains an understudied aspect in most of the existing studies).
 +
 +
The transition to a global digital economy is associated with new challenges for enforcement authorities, for copyright law and for new business models. Imaginative use of the increasing volume of data is crucial for the design of more effective policies at the national and international level. Importantly, the effects of copyright protection and infringement for welfare, creativity and innovation require that policy decision making be consistent with rigorous empirical analysis.
 +
</div>
 +
|-
 +
| style="padding:2px;" | <h2 id="mp-tfa-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#cef2e0; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">{{#ifexpr:{{formatnum:{{PAGESIZE:Wikipedia:Today's featured article/{{#time:F j, Y}}}}|R}}>150|From today's featured article|'''I. Fundamental issues about the copyright incentive''' <span style="font-size:85%; font-weight:normal;"></span>}}</h2>
 +
|-
 +
| style="color:#000;" | <div id="mp-tfa" style="padding:2px 5px">
 +
 
 +
[[1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare|1. Relationship between protection and economic performance]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare]]| format=count}})
 +
 
 +
[[2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?|2. Relationship between creative process, incentives and legal rules]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?]]| format=count}})
 +
 
 +
[[3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)|3. Contracts, harmony and conflict of interests between creators and investors]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)]]| format=count}})
 +
 
 +
[[4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)|4. Effects of protection on industry structure]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)]]| format=count}})
 +
 
 +
[[5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)|5. Understanding consumption and use]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)]]| format=count}})
 +
 
 +
</div>
 +
|-
 +
| style="padding:2px;" | <h2 id="mp-tfa-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#cef2e0; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">{{#ifexpr:{{formatnum:{{PAGESIZE:Wikipedia:Today's featured article/{{#time:F j, Y}}}}|R}}>150|From today's featured article|'''II. Copyright policy issues''' <span style="font-size:85%; font-weight:normal;"></span>}}</h2>
 +
|-
 +
| style="color:#000;" | <div id="mp-tfa" style="padding:2px 5px">
 +
 
 +
[[A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)|A. Nature and scope of exclusive rights]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)]]| format=count}})
 +
 
 +
[[B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)|B. Exceptions ]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)]]| format=count}})
 +
 
 +
[[C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)|C. Mass digitisation / orphan works]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)]]| format=count}})
 +
 
 +
[[D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)|D. Licensing and business models]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)]]| format=count}})
 +
 
 +
[[E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)|E. Fair remuneration]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)]]| format=count}})
 +
 
 +
[[F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)|F. Enforcement ]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)]]| format=count}})
 +
 
 +
</div>
 
|-
 
|-
| colspan=2 style="text-align:center; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline;" | Welcome to Copyright Evidence
+
|}
 +
| style="border:1px solid transparent;" |
 +
<!--        IN THE NEWS; ON THIS DAY        -->
 +
| class="MainPageBG" style="width:45%; border:1px solid #cedff2; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top; padding-top:5px"|
 +
 
 +
<div align="center">[[File:Propose-study.png|160px|link=Special:FormEdit/CandidateStudy|]][[File:Userguide.png|160px|link=File:WikiManual.pdf|]]</div>
 +
 
 +
{| id="mp-right" style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;"
 
|-
 
|-
| colspan=2 style="text-align:left;" | '''{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]]| format=count}}''' studies are currently recorded
+
| style="padding:2px;" | <h2 id="mp-itn-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#cedff2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Example Visualisation</h2> [[File:Network_vis.png|link=http://www.copyrightevidence.org/evidence-wiki/index.php/Visualisation_Tools|center|400px| Example Semantic and Visualisation]]
 +
<div style="text-align:center">''This network graph illustrates citation links between key related studies contained in the Evidence Wiki.''</div>
 +
<div>Create your own visualisations:</div>
 +
* <span class="plainlinks">[http://www.copyrightevidence.org/evidence-wiki/index.php/Example_Visualisations Example Semantic Visualisations]
 +
* <span class="plainlinks">[http://www.copyrightevidence.org/evidence-wiki/index.php/Visualisation_Tools Open Visualisation Tools]
 
|-
 
|-
| style="text-align:left; width:1em;" | '''Semantic drilldown''':
+
| style="padding:2px;" | <h2 id="mp-otd-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#cedff2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Featured Study</h2>
| {{#drilldownlink:category=Studies|single|link text=Dynamically filter the recorded studies according to a range of semantic criteria|tooltip=Semantic Drilldown}}
 
 
|-
 
|-
| colspan=2 style="background-color:#fff; border:1px solid lightgray; margin:20px 0px 20px 0px;" | '''Random article''':
+
| style="background-color:#fff; border:1px solid lightgray;" | {{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] |?Has full citation| order=random | limit=1 |format=template|template=Source/RandomArticle|searchlabel=}}
{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] |?Has full citation| order=random | limit=1 |format=template|template=Source/RandomArticle|searchlabel=}}
 
 
|-
 
|-
| colspan=2 style="text-align:left;" | '''Methodology (Collection)'''
+
| style="padding:2px;" | <h2 id="mp-otd-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#cedff2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Semantic Drilldown</h2>
*[[Quantitative Collection Methods]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Quantitative Collection Methods]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Survey Research (quantitative; e.g. sales/income reporting)]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Survey Research (quantitative; e.g. sales/income reporting)]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Experimental (Laboratory)]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Experimental (Laboratory)]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Experimental (Field)]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Experimental (Field)]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Experimental (Natural)]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Experimental (Natural)]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Web analytic (online user trace data)]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Web analytic (online user trace data)]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Quantitative data/text mining]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Quantitative data/text mining]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Longitudinal Study]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Longitudinal Study]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Snowball sampling]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Snowball sampling]] | format=count}})''
 
*[[Qualitative Collection Methods]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Qualitative Collection Methods]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Survey Research (qualitative; e.g. consumer preferences)]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Survey Research (qualitative; e.g. consumer preferences)]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Case Study]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Case Study]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Ethnography]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Ethnography]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Life History]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Life History]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Unstructured Interview]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Unstructured Interview]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Semi-Structured Interview]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Semi-Structured Interview]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Structured Interview]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Structured Interview]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Archival Research]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Archival Research]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Focus Groups]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Focus Groups]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Historical Methods]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Historical Methods]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Card Sorting]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Card Sorting]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Document Research]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Document Research]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Qualitative content/text mining]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Qualitative content/text mining]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Visual Ethnography]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Visual Ethnography]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Participant Observation]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of collection::Participant Observation]] | format=count}})''
 
 
|-
 
|-
| colspan=2 style="text-align:left;" | '''Methodology (Analysis)'''
+
| This feature allows users to browse all studies in the Wiki. See all studies categorised by country, industry, research method, and more.  {{#drilldownlink:category=Studies|single|link text=Click here to try it.|tooltip=Semantic Drilldown}}
 +
|-
 +
| style="padding:2px;" | <h2 id="mp-otd-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#cedff2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Methodology (Analysis)</h2>
 +
|-
 +
|
 
*[[Quantitative Analysis Methods]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Quantitative Analysis Methods]] | format=count}})''
 
*[[Quantitative Analysis Methods]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Quantitative Analysis Methods]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Cluster analysis]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Cluster analysis]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Cluster analysis]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Cluster analysis]] | format=count}})''
Line 55: Line 123:
 
**[[Factor Analysis]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Factor Analysis]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Factor Analysis]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Factor Analysis]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Decision Tree Method]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Decision Tree Method]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Decision Tree Method]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Decision Tree Method]] | format=count}})''
 +
 
*[[Qualitative Analysis Methods]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Qualitative Analysis Methods]] | format=count}})''
 
*[[Qualitative Analysis Methods]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Qualitative Analysis Methods]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Textual Content Analysis]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Textual Content Analysis]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Textual Content Analysis]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Textual Content Analysis]] | format=count}})''
Line 65: Line 134:
 
**[[Grounded Theory]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Grounded Theory]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Grounded Theory]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Grounded Theory]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Abduction/Retroduction]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Abduction/Retroduction]] | format=count}})''
 
**[[Abduction/Retroduction]] ''({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has method of analysis::Abduction/Retroduction]] | format=count}})''
 +
 
|-
 
|-
| colspan=2 style="text-align:left;" | '''Industry Sectors'''
 
{|
 
{{#ask:[[Category:Industries]]
 
|format=template
 
|template=Industry/ListIndustries
 
|limit=25
 
|link=none
 
|offset=0
 
}}
 
 
|}
 
|}
|-
 
 
|}
 
|}
''Welcome to the '''Copyright Evidence Wiki''' developed and maintained by CREATe at the University of Glasgow.''
+
<!--        TODAY'S FEATURED LIST        -->
 +
<!--        TODAY'S FEATURED PICTURE        -->
 +
{| id="mp-lower" style="margin:4px 0 0 0; width:100%; background:none; border-spacing: 0px;"
 +
| class="MainPageBG" style="width:100%; border:1px solid #ddcef2; background:#faf5ff; vertical-align:top; color:#000;" |
 +
{| id="mp-bottom" style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; background:#faf5ff; color:#000;"
 +
| style="padding:2px;" | <h2 id="mp-tfp-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#ddcef2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #afa3bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em">Editorial Information<span style="font-size:85%; font-weight:normal;"></span></h2>
  
[[File:Propose-study.png|200px|link=Special:FormEdit/CandidateStudy]] [[File:Define-study.png|200px|link=Form:Source]] [[File:View-studies.png|200px|link=All Studies]]
+
'''Managing Editors'''
  
{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has country::United Kingdom]] [[Has sector::Music]]
+
*Theo Koutmeridis (economics) [lead editor]
|?Has sample size
+
*Kris Erickson (media & communications)
| format=table }}
+
*Martin Kretschmer [chair of editorial board]
  
'''CopyrightEvidence.org''' intends to establish a body of evidence that allows better navigation in a contested policy field. Competing claims can be assessed and challenged transparently if the underlying data and methods are revealed. Robustness and limitations of findings are meticulously collected and are available here for all to see.
 
  
This project is offering a form of a dynamic literature review in a rapidly changing technological, business and socio-legal landscape, as the evidence related to copyright is consistently and transparently updated to account for the most recent findings. Only very recently, new research methods in combination with the development of big data, which are richer both in size and in depth, have allowed researchers to test empirically [[:Category:Fundamental Issues|key theoretical propositions]] and forced them to build theories which are consistent with observation. This generated the need to evaluate political decisions and design [[:Category:Evidence Based Policies|policy interventions based on evidence]].
+
'''Selection Methodology'''
  
This open online platform builds on an innovative research philosophy and examines copyright from an interdisciplinary perspective, while it also facilitates bringing evidence to the debate from studies in fields that were previously overlooked. Relevant empirical work spreads across conventional [[:Category:Methods|methodological]] and [[:Category:Disciplines|disciplinary]] boundaries and it does not need to have "copyright" in the title.
+
Guidelines for the cataloguing of copyright evidence where developed following a CREATe workshop on 20 October 2014, attended by Sayantan Ghosal (Dpt of Economics, University of Glasgow), Georg v Graevenitz (Queen Mary University of London & CREATe Fellow in Innovation Economics), Morten Hviid (Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia) and Ruth Towse (Bournemouth University & CREATe Fellow in Cultural Economics). Further consultations have taken place with Chris Buccafusco (New York University), Smita Kheria (University of Edinburgh), Joost Poort (Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam & CREATe Fellow in Economics of copyright and media industries) and Steven Watson (Lancaster University).  
 
A crucial dimension of the existing evidence examines different stages of production (e.g. creation, innovation, diffusion, distribution), in various creative industries (e.g. [[Sound recording and music publishing|music]], [[Film and motion pictures|film and motion pictures]], [[Television programmes|TV programmes]], [[Software publishing (including video games)|computer software]], [[Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing|books]]), and estimates the effects of copyright on diverse agents in each sector, such as creators, investors, distributors, users or society as a whole. Heterogeneity seems to be a key common element across several studies. The fact that the impact of copyright law differs across various agents, industries and different demographic groups, implies the need for more specific policies (for instance, even though the [[Ofcom_(2011)|Ofcom (2011)]] survey provides evidence for heterogeneous effects, this remains an understudied aspect in most of the existing studies).
 
 
The transition to a global digital economy is associated with new challenges for enforcement authorities, for copyright law and for new business models. Imaginative use of the increasing volume of data is crucial for the design of more rational policies at the national and international level. Importantly, the effects of copyright protection or infringement on welfare, creativity and innovation demand the theories that developed over the past decades to be consistent with rigorous empirical analysis.
 
  
 +
The initial selection of 500 studies was drawn from four sources:
  
== Fundamental issues about the copyright incentive ==
+
#A [http://www.create.ac.uk/publications/determinants-and-welfare-implications-of-unlawful-file-sharing-a-scoping-review/ scoping review of the "piracy" literature] commissioned by CREATe from Watson, Fleming and Zizzo, published in 2014. This used a review technique from the medical sciences to identify more than 50,000 academic sources that were potentially relevant for assessing unlawful file sharing, covering music, film, television, video games, software and books. During the review process, the sources were narrowed down to 206 articles which examined human behaviour.
 +
#[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/JELJOUR_Results.cfm?form_name=journalbrowse&journal_id=1649836 Working papers and pre-prints published in the SSRN e-journal Intellectual Property: Empirical Studies] (edited by Christopher J. Buccafusco and David L. Schwartz). 710 papers published between November 1996 and July 2015 were narrowed down to 132 studies relevant to copyright law. These were further reviewed by the core editorial team of the Wiki (Koutmeridis, Erickson, Kretschmer) if they contained “sufficient empirical material” that warranted coding. “Sufficient empirical material” could be quantitative or qualitative. Our working definition excluded anecdotal or journalistic treatment, though single case studies were acceptable if the methodology was articulated and justified. A total of 103 studies were selected and catalogued from this SSRN source.
 +
#Expert literature reviews conducted by Handke (2011), Kretschmer (2012) and Kheria (2013). They were used to fill some of the gaps left by the “piracy” review, in particular relating to creator perspectives. A total of 81 studies will be catalogued under this method.
 +
#50 governmental reports on intellectual property/copyright policy, proposed by CREATe doctoral candidates Kenny Barr and Megan Blakely, and reviewed by the core editorial team of the Wiki (Koutmeridis, Erickson, Kretschmer).
  
 +
The initial selection of studies was pragmatic. The aim was to set a standard of review, and allocate limited resources for coding. The Wiki format is designed to enable user participation, and any gaps in the evidence should be filled by interested parties who may submit studies as candidates for coding, and/or volunteer to code these according to the template developed by the team.
  
===[[1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare|Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare]]| format=count}})===
+
An editorial review process will be devised that will be open, yet robust enough to prevent capturing of the Wiki platform by any specific interests. For this purpose, an editorial board will be constituted, following the public launch of the Wiki, on 2 September 2015, as part of the 10th Annual Conference of the European Policy for Intellectual Property Association (EPIP 2015).
  
{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare]]
+
The text which appears in the main page has been commissioned and reviewed by the editorial team. In particular, the initial texts for 'evidence-based copyright policy' have been written by Kris Erickson and Elena Cooper (B. Exceptions) and by Theodore Koutmeridis (F. Enforcement).
|?Has full citation=Citation
 
|?Creation date=Created
 
|format=table
 
|limit=5
 
|offset=0
 
|class=front-page-table sortable wikitable smwtable jquery-tablesorter
 
}}
 
  
===[[2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?|Relationship between creative process and protection - What motivates creators (e.g. attribution, control, remuneration, time allocation)? What is the link between legal rules and the kind goods produced (e.g. adaptation, sampling, co-authorship, user creation)?]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?]]| format=count}})===
 
  
{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?]]
+
'''How to use and cite ''The Copyright Evidence Wiki'''''
|?Has full citation=Citation
 
|?Creation date=Created
 
|format=table
 
|limit=5
 
|offset=0
 
|class=front-page-table sortable wikitable smwtable jquery-tablesorter
 
}}
 
  
===[[3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)|Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (contracts between creators and investors, collective bargaining and licensing)]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)]]| format=count}})===
+
The material collected on CopyrightEvidence.org is offered on a free and open basis. The resource may be cited in the following way:
  
{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)]]
+
Koutmeridis, T., Erickson, K., & Kretschmer, M. (Eds.). (2015). ''The Copyright Evidence Wiki: Empirical Evidence for Copyright Policy''. www.CopyrightEvidence.org. CREATe Centre: University of Glasgow. Accessed dd/mm/yyyy.
|?Has full citation=Citation
 
|?Creation date=Created
 
|format=table
 
|limit=5
 
|offset=0
 
|class=front-page-table sortable wikitable smwtable jquery-tablesorter
 
}}
 
  
===[[4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)|Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies, competition, economics of superstars, business models, technology adoption)]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)]]| format=count}})===
+
When citing, we suggest including the date when the platform was accessed, as the content is subject to revisions.
 +
|}
 +
|}
 +
<!--        Footer Bar        -->
 +
{| id="mp-topbanner" style="width:100%; background:#fff; margin:1.2em 0 6px 0; border:1px solid #ddd;"
  
{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)]]
+
|[[File:Create logo.jpg|link=http://www.create.ac.uk/|220px|center]]
|?Has full citation=Citation
+
|[[File:Rcuklogo.jpg|link=http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/|220px|center]]
|?Creation date=Created
+
|[[File:GULogo.jpg|link=http://www.glasgow.ac.uk/|220px|center]]
|format=table
 
|limit=5
 
|offset=0
 
|class=front-page-table sortable wikitable smwtable jquery-tablesorter
 
}}
 
  
===[[5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)|Understanding consumption/use  (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour, user-generated content, social media)]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)]]| format=count}})===
+
|}
 
+
''This is a project of the CREATe copyright research centre at the University of Glasgow. With support from Research Councils UK.''
{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with fundamental issue::5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)]]
 
|?Has full citation=Citation
 
|?Creation date=Created
 
|format=table
 
|limit=5
 
|offset=0
 
|class=front-page-table sortable wikitable smwtable jquery-tablesorter
 
}}
 
 
 
==Evidence-based copyright policy==
 
 
 
===[[A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)|Nature and Scope of exclusive rights]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)]]| format=count}})===
 
 
 
{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)]]
 
|?Has full citation=Citation
 
|?Creation date=Created
 
|format=table
 
|limit=5
 
|offset=0
 
|class=front-page-table sortable wikitable smwtable jquery-tablesorter
 
}}
 
 
 
===[[B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)|Exceptions (innovation/public policy aims; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial purposes)]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)]]| format=count}})===
 
 
 
{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)]]
 
|?Has full citation=Citation
 
|?Creation date=Created
 
|format=table
 
|limit=5
 
|offset=0
 
|class=front-page-table sortable wikitable smwtable jquery-tablesorter
 
}}
 
 
 
===[[C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)|Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use, extended collective licensing)]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)]]| format=count}})===
 
 
 
{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)]]
 
|?Has full citation=Citation
 
|?Creation date=Created
 
|format=table
 
|limit=5
 
|offset=0
 
|class=front-page-table sortable wikitable smwtable jquery-tablesorter
 
}}
 
 
 
===[[D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)|Licensing and Business models (collecting societies, meta data, exchanges/hubs, windowing, crossborder availability)]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)]]| format=count}})===
 
 
 
{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)]]
 
|?Has full citation=Citation
 
|?Creation date=Created
 
|format=table
 
|limit=5
 
|offset=0
 
|class=front-page-table sortable wikitable smwtable jquery-tablesorter
 
}}
 
 
 
===[[E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)|Fair remuneration (levies, copyright contracts)]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)]]| format=count}})===
 
 
 
{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)]]
 
|?Has full citation=Citation
 
|?Creation date=Created
 
|format=table
 
|limit=5
 
|offset=0
 
|class=front-page-table sortable wikitable smwtable jquery-tablesorter
 
}}
 
 
 
===[[F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)|Enforcement (quantifying infringement, criminal sanctions, intermediary liability, graduated response, litigation and court data, commercial/non-commercial distinction, education and awareness)]] ({{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)]]| format=count}})===
 
 
 
{{#ask: [[Category:Studies]] [[Has relationship with evidence based policy::F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)]]
 
|?Has full citation=Citation
 
|?Creation date=Created
 
|format=table
 
|limit=5
 
|offset=0
 
|class=front-page-table sortable wikitable smwtable jquery-tablesorter
 
}}
 
==Editorial Information==
 
 
 
===Editors===
 
*Theo Koutmeridis (economics) [lead editor]
 
*Kris Erickson (media & communications)
 
*Martin Kretschmer [chair of editorial board]
 
 
 
===Methodology===
 
Guidelines for the cataloguing of copyright evidence where developed following a CREATe workshop on 20 October 2014, attended by Sayantan Ghosal (Dpt of Economics, University of Glasgow), Georg v Graevenitz (Queen Mary University of London & CREATe Fellow in Innovation Economics), Morten Hviid (Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia) and Ruth Towse (Bournemouth University & CREATe Fellow in Cultural Economics). Further consultations have taken place with Chris Buccafusco (New York University), Smita Kheria (University of Edinburgh), Joost Poort (Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam & CREATe Fellow in Economics of copyright and media industries) and Steven Watson (Lancaster University).
 
 
 
 
 
The initial selection of 500 studies was drawn from four sources:
 
 
 
#A [http://www.create.ac.uk/publications/determinants-and-welfare-implications-of-unlawful-file-sharing-a-scoping-review/ scoping review of the "piracy" literature] commissioned by CREATe from Watson, Fleming and Zizzo, published in 2014. This used a review technique from the medical sciences to identify more than 50,000 academic sources that were potentially relevant for assessing unlawful file sharing, covering music, film, television, video games, software and books. During the review process, the sources were narrowed down to 206 articles which examined human behaviour.
 
#[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/JELJOUR_Results.cfm?form_name=journalbrowse&journal_id=1649836 Working papers and pre-prints published in the SSRN e-journal Intellectual Property: Empirical Studies] (edited by Christopher J. Buccafusco and David L. Schwartz). 710 papers published between November 1996 and July 2015 were narrowed down to 132 studies relevant to copyright law. These were further reviewed by the core editorial team of the Wiki (Koutmeridis, Erickson, Kretschmer) if they contained “sufficient empirical material” that warranted coding. “Sufficient empirical material” could be quantitative or qualitative. Our working definition excluded anecdotal or journalistic treatment, though single case studies were acceptable if the methodology was articulated and justified. A total of 103 studies were selected and catalogued from this SSRN source.
 
#Expert literature reviews conducted by Handke (2011), Kretschmer (2012) and Keria (2013) to fill some of the gaps left by the “piracy” review, in particular relating to creator perspectives. A total of 81 studies will be catalogued under this method.
 
#50 governmental reports on intellectual property/copyright policy, proposed by CREATe doctoral candidates Kenny Barr and Megan Blakely, and reviewed by the core editorial team of the Wiki (Koutmeridis, Erickson, Kretschmer).
 
 
 
 
The initial selection of studies was pragmatic. The aim was to set a standard of review, and allocate limited resources for coding. The Wiki format is designed to enable user participation, and any gaps in the evidence should be filled by interested parties who may submit studies as candidates for coding, and/or volunteer to code these according to the template developed by the team.
 
 
 
An editorial review process will be devised that will be open, yet robust enough to prevent capturing of the Wiki platform by any specific interests. For this purpose, an editorial board will be constituted, following the public launch of the Wiki, on 2 September 2015, as part of the 10th Annual Conference of the European Policy for Intellectual Property Association (EPIP 2015).
 

Revision as of 14:33, 14 November 2016

Welcome to the Copyright Evidence Wiki
The open platform that collects evidence about copyright's role in society
909 studies have been fully catalogued
Book on.png Books
Broadcasting on.png Broadcasting
Education on.png Education
Film on.png Films
Music on.png Music
Photography on.png Photography
Software on.png Software
Television on.png Television
Blue square.png All industries

Introducing Copyright Evidence

Copyright Evidence is a digital resource developed by CREATe at the University of Glasgow. The purpose of the Wiki is to categorise existing empirical studies on copyright to inform public debate and policy based on rigorous evidence. Among others, the evidence is catalogued by country, industry and research method, offering an in-depth view of existing findings. The evidence from empirical studies can be complemented with new results from CREATe research databases, such as those related to online consumption behaviour (OMeBa), litigation of IP cases (Litigation Explorer) and real-time infringement on file sharing networks (IPWatchr).

More about Copyright Evidence

Copyright Evidence intends to establish a body of evidence that allows better decision making in a contested policy field. Competing claims can be assessed and challenged transparently using underlying data and methods. Robustness and limitations of findings are carefully collected and are available here for all to reference.

This project is a form of dynamic literature review in a rapidly changing technological, business and socio-legal landscape. Only very recently, new research methods in combination with the development of big data techniques, which are richer both in size and in depth, have allowed researchers to test empirically key theoretical propositions and forced them to build theories which are consistent with observation. This generated the need to evaluate political decisions and design policy interventions based on evidence.

This open online platform builds on an innovative research philosophy and examines copyright from an interdisciplinary perspective, while it also facilitates bringing evidence to the debate from studies in fields that were previously overlooked. Relevant empirical work spreads across conventional methodological and disciplinary boundaries and it does not need to have "copyright" in the title.

A crucial dimension of the existing evidence examines different stages of production (e.g. creation, innovation, diffusion, distribution), in various creative industries (e.g. music, film and motion pictures, TV programmes, computer software, books), and estimates the effects of copyright on diverse agents in each sector, such as creators, investors, distributors, users or society as a whole. The fact that the impact of copyright law differs across various actors, industries and demographic groups, implies the need for more specific policies (for instance, even though the Ofcom (2011) survey provides evidence of heterogeneous consumption patterns, this remains an understudied aspect in most of the existing studies).

The transition to a global digital economy is associated with new challenges for enforcement authorities, for copyright law and for new business models. Imaginative use of the increasing volume of data is crucial for the design of more effective policies at the national and international level. Importantly, the effects of copyright protection and infringement for welfare, creativity and innovation require that policy decision making be consistent with rigorous empirical analysis.

I. Fundamental issues about the copyright incentive

II. Copyright policy issues

Propose-study.pngUserguide.png

Example Visualisation

Example Semantic and Visualisation
This network graph illustrates citation links between key related studies contained in the Evidence Wiki.
Create your own visualisations:

Featured Study

Mendis, Secchi and Reeves (2015) Mendis, D., et al. (2015). A Legal and Empirical Study into the Intellectual Property Implications of 3D Printing.

Semantic Drilldown

This feature allows users to browse all studies in the Wiki. See all studies categorised by country, industry, research method, and more. Click here to try it.

Methodology (Analysis)

Editorial Information

Managing Editors

  • Theo Koutmeridis (economics) [lead editor]
  • Kris Erickson (media & communications)
  • Martin Kretschmer [chair of editorial board]


Selection Methodology

Guidelines for the cataloguing of copyright evidence where developed following a CREATe workshop on 20 October 2014, attended by Sayantan Ghosal (Dpt of Economics, University of Glasgow), Georg v Graevenitz (Queen Mary University of London & CREATe Fellow in Innovation Economics), Morten Hviid (Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia) and Ruth Towse (Bournemouth University & CREATe Fellow in Cultural Economics). Further consultations have taken place with Chris Buccafusco (New York University), Smita Kheria (University of Edinburgh), Joost Poort (Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam & CREATe Fellow in Economics of copyright and media industries) and Steven Watson (Lancaster University).

The initial selection of 500 studies was drawn from four sources:

  1. A scoping review of the "piracy" literature commissioned by CREATe from Watson, Fleming and Zizzo, published in 2014. This used a review technique from the medical sciences to identify more than 50,000 academic sources that were potentially relevant for assessing unlawful file sharing, covering music, film, television, video games, software and books. During the review process, the sources were narrowed down to 206 articles which examined human behaviour.
  2. Working papers and pre-prints published in the SSRN e-journal Intellectual Property: Empirical Studies (edited by Christopher J. Buccafusco and David L. Schwartz). 710 papers published between November 1996 and July 2015 were narrowed down to 132 studies relevant to copyright law. These were further reviewed by the core editorial team of the Wiki (Koutmeridis, Erickson, Kretschmer) if they contained “sufficient empirical material” that warranted coding. “Sufficient empirical material” could be quantitative or qualitative. Our working definition excluded anecdotal or journalistic treatment, though single case studies were acceptable if the methodology was articulated and justified. A total of 103 studies were selected and catalogued from this SSRN source.
  3. Expert literature reviews conducted by Handke (2011), Kretschmer (2012) and Kheria (2013). They were used to fill some of the gaps left by the “piracy” review, in particular relating to creator perspectives. A total of 81 studies will be catalogued under this method.
  4. 50 governmental reports on intellectual property/copyright policy, proposed by CREATe doctoral candidates Kenny Barr and Megan Blakely, and reviewed by the core editorial team of the Wiki (Koutmeridis, Erickson, Kretschmer).

The initial selection of studies was pragmatic. The aim was to set a standard of review, and allocate limited resources for coding. The Wiki format is designed to enable user participation, and any gaps in the evidence should be filled by interested parties who may submit studies as candidates for coding, and/or volunteer to code these according to the template developed by the team.

An editorial review process will be devised that will be open, yet robust enough to prevent capturing of the Wiki platform by any specific interests. For this purpose, an editorial board will be constituted, following the public launch of the Wiki, on 2 September 2015, as part of the 10th Annual Conference of the European Policy for Intellectual Property Association (EPIP 2015).

The text which appears in the main page has been commissioned and reviewed by the editorial team. In particular, the initial texts for 'evidence-based copyright policy' have been written by Kris Erickson and Elena Cooper (B. Exceptions) and by Theodore Koutmeridis (F. Enforcement).


How to use and cite The Copyright Evidence Wiki

The material collected on CopyrightEvidence.org is offered on a free and open basis. The resource may be cited in the following way:

Koutmeridis, T., Erickson, K., & Kretschmer, M. (Eds.). (2015). The Copyright Evidence Wiki: Empirical Evidence for Copyright Policy. www.CopyrightEvidence.org. CREATe Centre: University of Glasgow. Accessed dd/mm/yyyy.

When citing, we suggest including the date when the platform was accessed, as the content is subject to revisions.

Create logo.jpg
Rcuklogo.jpg
GULogo.jpg

This is a project of the CREATe copyright research centre at the University of Glasgow. With support from Research Councils UK.