OHIM (2016)

Source Details

OHIM (2016)
Title:	Digital Advertising on Suspected Infringing Websites
Author(s):	Office of Harmonization in the Internal Market
Year:	2016
Citation:	OHIM (2016) Digital Advertising on Suspected Infringing Websites
Link(s):	Definitive , Open Access
Key Related Studies:	European Observatory on Infringement of IPRs (2015) BASCAP (2011)
Discipline:	K42: Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law M37: Advertising O34: Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
Linked by:

About the Data
Data Description:	For the study, 1400 webpages that fit the criteria were monitored from across the 28 EU member states. From these, 180 000 ads were collected.
Data Type:	Primary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:	Quantitative Collection Methods Quantitative data/text mining Qualitative Collection Methods Qualitative content/text mining
Data Analysis Methods:	Quantitative Analysis Methods Quantitative content analysis (e.g. text or data mining) Qualitative Analysis Methods Textual Content Analysis Visual / Other Content Analysis
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):	European Union
Cross Country Study?:	Yes
Comparative Study?:	No
Literature review?:	No
Government or policy study?:	Yes
Time Period(s) of Collection:	Six weeks from 29 May to 10 July 2015
Funder(s):	The Office for Harmonization in the Internal market

Abstract

Intellectual property crime significantly impacts the European and global economies, affecting businesses, jobs and tax revenue. A significant contribution to the problem of IP crime is websites suspected of infringing third party IP, for example by offering consumers unauthorised media content. These websites are located throughout the world and operate in a dynamic environment. Enforcement against these websites is critical, but only addresses the worst offenders due to volume, jurisdictional limitations and a dynamic digital environment where websites regularly change domains, or adapt to action against them. This report was commissioned to undertake a ‘snapshot’ study of the digital advertising landscape detailing the scale of the problem of ad-based funding of suspected IP infringing websites affecting the EU market. This report aims to enhance understanding of how digital advertising supports suspected IP infringing websites in the EU and to provide strategic information to assist the development of innovative and effective strategies to tackle the problem.

Main Results of the Study

The study found that the suspected IP infringing websites analysed over a 6 week period that a relatively small group of intermediaries were buying ads for the both the mainstream and the high-risk advertising. The study found that the websites:

• Carried a diversity of advertising, both mainstream and 'high-risk' (malware, fraudulent and adult content).
• Are a brand-rich ad environment with 1,581 unique named Brands identified. Top brands may be unaware that high risk advertising is being carried next to their content.
• Carried 54% high-risk advertisements, placed by less than 5% of the ad-buying intermediaries.
• 75% of the mainstream advertising was placed by a core group of 10% of the ad-buying intermediaries

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

Enforcement against IP infringing websites is critical, but only addresses the worst offenders due to volume, jurisdictional limitations and a dynamic digital environment where websites regularly change domains, or adapt to action against them. Therefore an important complementary strategy adopted by rights holders across the world is ‘Follow the Money’: to tackle the revenue sources providing most suspected IP infringing websites with their financial lifeline. This strategy includes drying up support from advertising and making these websites less commercially viable.

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)

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)

Datasets

Sample size:	180 000
Level of aggregation:	Advertisements
Period of material under study:	Six weeks from 29 May to 10 July 2015

Sample size:	1400
Level of aggregation:	Websites
Period of material under study:	Six weeks from 29 May to 10 July 2015

Sample size:	28
Level of aggregation:	Country
Period of material under study:	Six weeks from 29 May to 10 July 2015