Difference between revisions of "Wesselingh, Cristina and Tweeboom (2013)"

From Copyright EVIDENCE
m (1 revision imported)
m (Saved using "Save and continue" button in form)
Line 29: Line 29:
 
|Method of Analysis=Quantitative Analysis Methods, Regression Analysis
 
|Method of Analysis=Quantitative Analysis Methods, Regression Analysis
 
|Industry=Film and motion pictures; Sound recording and music publishing;
 
|Industry=Film and motion pictures; Sound recording and music publishing;
|Country=The Netherlands;
+
|Country=Netherlands;
 
|Cross-country=No
 
|Cross-country=No
 
|Comparative=No
 
|Comparative=No
 +
|Government or policy=No
 +
|Literature review=No
 
|Funded By=Not stated;
 
|Funded By=Not stated;
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 16:24, 22 August 2016

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

Wesselingh, Cristina and Tweeboom (2013)
Title: To block or not to block?
Author(s): Wesselingh, E. M., Cristina, A. S., Tweeboom, N. M. G.
Year: 2013
Citation: Wesselingh, E. M., Cristina, A., & Tweeboom, N. (2013). To Block or Not to Block?. Available at SSRN 2273453.
Link(s): Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: A pilot survey was conducted with 23 students of the Academy of ICT & Media at The Hague University. Results were used to tighten the survey questions.

The survey was issued digitally and through personal contact. 302 surveys were suitable for further analysis (15 digital, 287 paper surveys). Most respondents were between the ages 18-23, with 143 male and 159 female.

Researchers also interviewed a number of stakeholders (XS4all, Foundation Brein, Dutch Consumers Association) through semi-structured interviews.

Data Type: Primary 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?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • Not stated
Funder(s):
  • Not stated

Abstract

An investigation into whether or not young people studying in higher education in the Netherlands have modified their download behaviour, in the light of a legal obligation to block The Pirate Bay (TPB) by Dutch Internet Service Providers (ISPs). In the lawsuit, it is argued that a blockade by the ISPs would be an effective measure to stop downloading from The Pirate Bay. In this study the target group was asked if they think that their download behaviour is modified by the blockade.

Main Results of the Study

  • Most respondents answered they download because it is free (240), while a minority does it to try first before making a purchase, or due to non-availability of legal alternatives.
  • The survey showed that the download behavior of young people in the Netherlands has not statistically significantly changed since the imposition of a blockade of The Pirate Bay.
  • The blockade of The Pirate Bay alone is not effective because:
    • a large portion of young people downloading from illegal sources use one of the many available alternatives;
    • a large portion of young people downloading from The Pirate Bay has found ways to circumvent the blockade.
  • A minority is downloading less as a result of the blockade because it as become more difficult (but is still downloading from illegal sources).


Policy Implications as Stated By Author

  • From the previous studies and this research it can be concluded that the measure of blocking only the Pirate Bay site itself is not effective; additional measures are necessary.



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

Sample size: 302
Level of aggregation: University students
Period of material under study: Not stated