Difference between revisions of "Danbury (2016)"
m (Saved using "Save and continue" button in form) |
m (Saved using "Save and continue" button in form) |
||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
|Authentic Link=https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/sites/www.law.cam.ac.uk/files/images/www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/documents/copyright_and_news/danbury_publishers_right_report.pdf | |Authentic Link=https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/sites/www.law.cam.ac.uk/files/images/www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/documents/copyright_and_news/danbury_publishers_right_report.pdf | ||
|Link=https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/sites/www.law.cam.ac.uk/files/images/www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/documents/copyright_and_news/danbury_publishers_right_report.pdf | |Link=https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/sites/www.law.cam.ac.uk/files/images/www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/documents/copyright_and_news/danbury_publishers_right_report.pdf | ||
+ | |FundamentalIssue=4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption), 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors), | ||
+ | |EvidenceBasedPolicy=A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right), D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability), | ||
|Data Type=Secondary data | |Data Type=Secondary data | ||
|Method of Collection=Case Study | |Method of Collection=Case Study | ||
Line 24: | Line 26: | ||
|Funded By=Arts and Humanities Research Council; | |Funded By=Arts and Humanities Research Council; | ||
}} | }} | ||
− | |Dataset= | + | |Dataset={{Dataset |
+ | |Sample Size=15 | ||
+ | |Level of Aggregation=Copyright cases, | ||
+ | }} | ||
}} | }} |
Revision as of 11:11, 16 February 2017
Contents
Source Details
Danbury (2016) | |
Title: | Is an EU publishers’ right a good idea? Final report on the AHRC project: Evaluating potential legal responses to threats to the production of news in a digital era |
Author(s): | Danbury, R. |
Year: | 2016 |
Citation: | Danbury, R. (2016). Is an EU publishers’ right a good idea? Final report on the AHRC project: Evaluating potential legal responses to threats to the production of news in a digital era, https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/sites/www.law.cam.ac.uk/files/images/www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/documents/copyright_and_news/danbury_publishers_right_report.pdf |
Link(s): | Definitive , Open Access |
Key Related Studies: | |
Discipline: | |
Linked by: | Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (2016) |
About the Data | |
Data Description: | |
Data Type: | 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?: | Yes |
Time Period(s) of Collection: | |
Funder(s): |
|
Abstract
This is a discussion about commercial news production, and copyright-related laws in Europe. It is a response to the consultation opened by the European Commission in March 2016 about whether to create an EU-wide neighbouring right, in the copyright family of intellectual property rights, that will benefit publishers. It examines four arguments for a news publishers’ right. These are:
• it will provide a necessary incentive to the commercial production of news, an activity that is valuable to a democratic society; • commercial news publishers are treated unequally by EU copyright law, and a publishers’ right will resolve this; • online re-distributors of published news are free riding on the effort of commercial news publishers, and a publishers’ right can be expected to restrain this; • commercial news publishers have a natural right to the news they publish, and such rights are being breached by online re-distributors of news: a publishers’ right can be expected to protect them.
Main Results of the Study
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
Coverage of Study
Datasets
Sample size: | 15 |
Level of aggregation: | Copyright cases |
Period of material under study: |