Permission error

From Copyright Evidence
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{MainSource |Source={{Source |Name of Study=Erickson (2014) |Author=Erickson, K.; |Title=User Illusion: Ideological Construction of ‘User- Generated Content’ in the EC Co...")
 
(No difference)

Latest revision as of 11:47, 6 October 2019




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

Erickson (2014)
Title: User Illusion: Ideological Construction of ‘User- Generated Content’ in the EC Consultation on Copyright
Author(s): Erickson, K.
Year: 2014
Citation: Erickson, K. (2014) User Illusion: Ideological Construction of ‘User- Generated Content’ in the EC Consultation on Copyright. Internet Policy Review 4(3). DOI:10.14763/2014.4.331
Link(s): Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: The study selects 203 written responses from submissions to the European Commission’s consultation process on the review of copyright rules. 93 responses were from authors and their representatives, 32 from platforms and service providers, and 78 from user organisations. The study focusses on responses to a question concerning copyright and user-generated content and uses critical discourse analysis to determine how stakeholders constructed meaning in regards the user/content relationship.
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:
  • 5 December 2013 - 5 March 2014
Funder(s):

Abstract

"Recent policy consultations by the UK Intellectual Property Office, the US Patent and Trademark Office and the European Commission (EC) have highlighted the importance of user-generated content in debates to reform copyright. User-generated content (UGC) –often combining existing copyright material with transformative creativity –remains a contested terrain, with no clear or widely accepted definition. This paper examines how various stakeholders in the 2014 EC consultation on copyright attempted to shape the definition of UGC in order to suit their interests, sometimes aligning or conflicting with other stakeholder groups. Data from 203 written responses by registered stakeholders (authors, platform intermediaries and users) were subjected to a discourse analysis methodology. Key arguments and policy preferences from each stakeholder group are identified and discussed."

Main Results of the Study

Users are ascribed varying levels of agency, creativeness and productiveness depending on whether their activities are perceived as threatening or positive by the stakeholder group:

• Rightsholders highlight the potential of user-generated content to as a threat to both their moral rights (by decontextualising the new content from the original work) and licensing revenue (where users monetise their content).

• Platform owners view user-generated content more positively, highlighting its economic value and importance to freedom of expression.

• Users view user-generated content as largely non-commercial and non-infringing (largely aligning with the views of platform owners).

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

The study concludes that the “lack of a stable definition of user-generated content may be politically advantageous for all stakeholders” by drawing audience attention to particular qualities of user-generated content whilst ignoring others. A more stable, objective definition of online creativity will be necessary to respond to the issue of online copyright.



Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
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)
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Green-tick.png
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)
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)
Green-tick.png

Datasets