Akester (2009)
Contents
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. |
| Data Type: | |
| 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: |
|
| Funder(s): |
|
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
Datasets
| Sample size: | Not stated"Not stated" is not a number. |
| Level of aggregation: | Individual |
| Period of material under study: | Not stated |
