Bar-Ziv (2021)

From Copyright EVIDENCE
Revision as of 19:18, 21 July 2023 by Weiwei YI (PGR) (talk | contribs) (Saved using "Save and continue" button in form)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education Libraries, archives, museums and other cultural activities

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing Video game publishing 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

Bar-Ziv (2021)
Title: A Content Analysis Approach to Intellectual Property Research
Author(s): Bar-Ziv, S.
Year: 2021
Citation: Bar-Ziv, S. (2021). A content analysis approach to intellectual property research. In I. Calboli & M. L. Montagnani (Eds.), Handbook on Intellectual Property Research (pp. 31-46). Oxford University Press.
Link(s): Definitive , Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: The research examined all legal cases concerning online copyright infringement filed in Israel from 2010 to 2013.” All files were found through their classification in Net Hamishpat (which is Israel’s electronic file management system enabled since 2010) and are handled to the author by the court administration. Files are from different courts, but all were under the category “Intellectual Property”.
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?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • 2010-2013
Funder(s):

Abstract

This document demonstrates how content analysis can be applied in legal studies to systematically analyse court documents and what are the benefits. It presents a study using content analysis to examine online copyright enforcement cases in Israeli courts from 2010-2013. The analysis found that only a small proportion of cases reached full legal procedures and precedent-setting rulings. Most cases settled out of court. The lack of substantive judgments creates uncertainty in applying copyright law online, with potential for over-enforcement of claims absent court testing. In the end, the author stressed that content analysis facilitates empirical examination of legal texts to gain insights into how law operates in practice.

Main Results of the Study

Scope of Enforcement Activity: Only 40% of the cases involve online copyright infringement. The number of cases related to online copyright infringement filed from 2010 to 2013 is negligible compared to all cases handled by the courts during those years. Prominent Players: The legal system poses barriers to justice, including knowledge, access to legal advice, time, and financial resources. Corporations are more likely to access the legal process compared to private individuals. 52% of defendants in online copyright infringement cases were companies, 43% were private individuals, and only 5% were other types of defendants like associations. Role of Fair Use in Judicial Enforcement: Most defendants (52%) in online copyright infringement cases did not claim fair use. Only 11% of defendants raised fair use claims. 37% of cases did not involve fair use claims due to mediation, compromise proceedings, ex parte judgments, or other reasons. Enforcement Process Results: Judicial Oversight: Legal procedures for enforcing online copyright had limited supervision. 55% of cases involved a legal procedure ending in a judicial decision. 21% of cases were handled outside the courtroom without court approval. 4% of cases were conducted unilaterally by one party. 20% of cases had no judgment. Enforcement Process Results: Settlement Proceedings in Judicial Process: 82% of rulings resulted from agreements or compromises reached outside the courtroom. Only 18% of cases ended with a judicial decision on material issues. 9% of cases had rulings in favor of the defendant, and 9% had rulings for the appellant.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

The study does not make any explicit policy recommendations.



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)?
Green-tick.png
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)
Green-tick.png

Datasets

{{{Dataset}}}