Akester (2009)

From Copyright EVIDENCE

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Akester (2009)
Title: Technological accommodation of conflicts between freedom of expression and DRM: the first empirical assessment
Author(s): Akester, P.
Year: 2009
Citation: Akester, P. (2009). Technological accommodation of conflicts between freedom of expression and DRM: the first empirical assessment. Available at SSRN 1469412.
Link(s): Definitive , Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: Nine different questionnaires were created for different players: (1) libraries, (2) the visually impaired and partially sighted, (3) private users, (4) lecturers, (5) students/researchers, (6) DRM developers, (7) content owners, (8) the European Commission and (9) the UK Intellectual Property Office. Primarily the questions were forced choice, followed by comments, and some open answer. Interviews were also conducted with industry leaders.

Twenty six interviews with industry stakeholders. Twenty four questionnaires from film makers. One hundred and seventy four questionnaires from content consumers.

Data Type: Primary and Secondary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: Yes
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: No
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • 2007
Funder(s):
  • The financial support for this project was given by the Leverholm Trust and the Herchel Smith Intellectual Property Research Fund, Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge

Abstract

Copyright incentives and rewards to producers of works have been able to exist alongside other values, such as freedom of expression. However, changes in the way information products are being disseminated raises questions as to whether those values remain compatible with the new modes of dissemination. So far, studies devoted to digital rights management (DRM) and copyright exceptions have noted, theoretically, its legal implications. This research filled an existing gap by unveiling, through empirical lines of enquiry, (1) whether certain acts which are permitted by law are being adversely affected by the use of DRM and (2) whether technology can accommodate conflicts between freedom of expression and DRM - linking, thus, policy conclusions to empirical findings. The survey concluded that some beneficiaries of privileged exceptions are being adversely affected by the use of DRM and practical solutions are required. Thus, it is proposed that, in the short term, with the help of the empirical findings and recommendations of this study, the EC Commission submits a proposal for two amendment of Article 6(4) of the Information Society Directive, as follows: (1) A definition of the expression ‘appropriate measures’ should be inserted in Article 6(4) of the Information Society Directive, stating that for the purposes of that Directive such measures require the establishment of a procedure to enable expeditious access to works by beneficiaries of privileged exceptions, leading to the creation of standardized access to works portals across EC Member States. The existence of access to works portals would be made possible by a DRM deposit system, according to which the means to enable beneficiaries of privileged exceptions to benefit from them would be deposited and made available through access to works portals, in specified circumstances. (2) It should be added to Article 6(4) of the Information Society Directive that where access to works by beneficiaries of privileged exceptions is not facilitated, the protection of privileged exceptions (given their connection to core freedoms) prevails over the protection of DRM, even where works are supplied online on agreed contractual terms.

Main Results of the Study

This study, by questionnaires and interviews, found some organisations and individuals who are beneficiaries of privileged exceptions are adversely affected by DRM. In order to ensure that legally privileged exceptions (e.g., for librarians, lecturers, and students) to copyright can be exercised, amendments to the Information Society Directive are recommended.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

Article 6(4) of the Information Society Directive should be amended as follows:

(1) A definition of the expression ‘appropriate measures’ should be inserted in Article 6(4) of the Information Society Directive, stating that for the purposes of that Directive such measures require the establishment of a procedure to enable expeditious access to works by beneficiaries of privileged exceptions, leading to the creation of standardized access to works portals across EC Member States. The existence of access to works portals would be made possible by a DRM deposit system, according to which the means to enable beneficiaries of privileged exceptions to benefit from them would be deposited and made available through access to works portals, in specified circumstances. (2) It should be added to Article 6(4) of the Information Society Directive that where access to works by beneficiaries of privileged exceptions is not facilitated, the protection of privileged exceptions (given their connection to core freedoms) prevails over the protection of DRM, even where works are supplied online on agreed contractual terms.


Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Green-tick.png
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Green-tick.png
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Green-tick.png
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Datasets

Sample size: 174
Level of aggregation: Questionnaires
Period of material under study: 2007


Sample size: 24
Level of aggregation: Questionnaires
Period of material under study: 2007


Sample size: 26
Level of aggregation: Interviews
Period of material under study: 2007