Doseva, Schmid-Petri, Schillmöller, Heckmann (2022)

From Copyright EVIDENCE
Revision as of 17:29, 28 September 2023 by Joséphine Sangaré (PGR) (talk | contribs)
(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

Doseva, Schmid-Petri, Schillmöller, Heckmann (2022)
Title: Uploaders’ perceptions of the German implementation of the EU copyright reform and their preferences for copyright regulation
Author(s): Steliyana Doseva, Hannah Schmid-Petri, Jan Schillmöller, Dirk Heckmann
Year: 2022
Citation: Doseva, S. & Schmid-Petri, H. & Schillmöller, J. & Heckmann, D. (2022). Uploaders' perceptions of the German implementation of the EU copyright reform and their preferences for copyright regulation. Internet Policy Review, 11(4).
Link(s): Definitive , Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: Comments submitted during the German lawmaking process implementing the EU Directive; qualitative interviews with uploaders
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:
Funder(s):

Abstract

“The adoption of the EU copyright reform was controversially discussed by the public, leading to protests across Europe, especially against the introduction of upload filters. This interdisciplinary study examines how differently organised uploaders perceive copyright regulation at a time when the reform is being transposed into national law, and what further demands on regulation they have. The analysis combines qualitative interviews (n = 19) with a content analysis of comments submitted on the national draft law (n = 17). Our findings show that uploaders consider state regulations through upload filters to be restrictive toward freedom of expression. They appreciate the intention behind the implementation of the German law to prevent upload filters, but they do not consider the measures effective in practise, and demand more participation and transparency in the legislative process.”

Main Results of the Study

The study examines opinions from different groups of content creators uploading their content to YouTube. It looks at the ‘triangular’ relationship between the right holder, the uploader, and the platform. Reflecting different levels of professionalisation, the study finds most uploaders recognise and support copyright regulations. However, the design of the new law was found to be unreflective of the reality of uploading content. There was more knowledge present regarding YouTube’s own regulations although these regulations implement national law, i.e. applying an upload filter. The location of content filtering authority with a private platform provider was not raised as a concern by the users despite a general fear of overblocking caused by undistinctive filter applications and flagging mechanisms.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

The authors conclude with proposing a clarification of key legal terms to achieve more transparency and distinctiveness to enforce copyright protection.

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)
Green-tick.png
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)
Green-tick.png
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}}}