Kretschmer, Deazley, Edwards, Erickson, Schafer and Zizzo (2014)
Contents
Source Details
| Kretschmer, Deazley, Edwards, Erickson, Schafer and Zizzo (2014) | |
| Title: | The European Commission’s public consultation on the review of EU copyright rules: a response by the CREATe Centre |
| Author(s): | Kretschmer, M., Deazley, R., Edwards, L., Erickson, K., Schafer, B., Zizzo, D. J. |
| Year: | 2014 |
| Citation: | Kretschmer, M., Deazley, R., Edwards, L., Erickson, K., Schafer, B., & Zizzo, D. J. (2014). The European Commission's Public Consultation on the Review of EU Copyright Rules: A Response by the CREATe Centre. European Intellectual Property Review, 36(9), 547-553. |
| Link(s): | Open Access |
| Key Related Studies: | |
| Discipline: | |
| Linked by: | |
| About the Data | |
| Data Description: | Data is based off of copyright evidence among various disciplines and subject matter. It is summarized in response to a consultation seeking input from the community regarding a structured survey. |
| Data Type: | Secondary data |
| Secondary Data Sources: | |
| Data Collection Methods: | |
| Data Analysis Methods: | |
| Industry(ies): | |
| Country(ies): | |
| Cross Country Study?: | No |
| Comparative Study?: | No |
| Literature review?: | No |
| Government or policy study?: | Yes |
| Time Period(s) of Collection: |
|
| Funder(s): |
|
Abstract
The European Commission consulted between December 5, 2013 and March 5, 2014 on a wide-ranging review of EU copyright rules. This response by the CREATe Centre attempts to make two contributions: (1) the process of policy formation matters for the evolution of the EU legal framework, and so we offer a short critique of the consultation format; (2) we summarise available evidence in seven thematic areas where CREATe has developed or is developing research (term of protection, libraries and archives, disabilities, text and data mining, user-generated content, fair remuneration for authors and performers, and respect for rights). CREATe understands evidence here as empirically grounded, but open to historical and comparative approaches.
Main Results of the Study
- Though most economists and intellectual property scholars contend the term of copyright protection excessive, the recent extension for sound recordings from 50 to 70 years presents an opportunity to investigate whether the extended term does, in fact, support arguments made in favor of the 70-year term. * Much of the questions in the consultation do not adequately consider the unique issues dealt with by an archive; rather they are focused on copyright rules as they impact the use of and access to library collections. * Making optional the disability exception creates the danger of impeding free movement for EU citizens with disabilities. In addition, more attention should be paid to citizens with mental health problems and learning disabilities. * A Hargreaves-like exemption should be implemented as part of an EU regulatory instrument, but consideration should also be given to taking text mining entirely out of the copyright arena. * Unlawful file sharing evidence is predominantly supported by studies focusing on music files. There is further evidence to suggest that such welfare implications may not apply equally to all types of media, including movies and software and especially videogames, books or TV content. Policy decisions based upon evidence generated by music files should not be applied to all mediums in general.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
The previously mentioned main propositions are all based policy.
Coverage of Study
Datasets
{{{Dataset}}}
