https://www.copyrightevidence.org/wiki/index.php?title=Fiala_and_Husovec_(2018)&feed=atom&action=historyFiala and Husovec (2018) - Revision history2024-03-29T13:15:01ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.34.2https://www.copyrightevidence.org/wiki/index.php?title=Fiala_and_Husovec_(2018)&diff=13081&oldid=prevNatacha at 08:29, 25 May 20202020-05-25T08:29:34Z<p></p>
<table class="diff diff-contentalign-left" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #222; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #222; text-align: center;">Revision as of 08:29, 25 May 2020</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l2" >Line 2:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 2:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Source={{Source</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Source={{Source</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Name of Study=Fiala and Husovec (2018)</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Name of Study=Fiala and Husovec (2018)</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'>−</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Author=<del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">Lenka </del>Fiala; Husovec, M.;</div></td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Author=Fiala<ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">, L.</ins>; Husovec, M.;</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Title=Using Experimental Evidence to Design Optimal Notice and Takedown Process</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Title=Using Experimental Evidence to Design Optimal Notice and Takedown Process</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Year=2018</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Year=2018</div></td></tr>
</table>Natachahttps://www.copyrightevidence.org/wiki/index.php?title=Fiala_and_Husovec_(2018)&diff=13078&oldid=prevNatacha at 08:24, 25 May 20202020-05-25T08:24:50Z<p></p>
<table class="diff diff-contentalign-left" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #222; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #222; text-align: center;">Revision as of 08:24, 25 May 2020</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l2" >Line 2:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 2:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Source={{Source</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Source={{Source</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Name of Study=Fiala and Husovec (2018)</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Name of Study=Fiala and Husovec (2018)</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'>−</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Author=Lenka Fiala; <del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">Martin Hosovec</del>;</div></td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Author=Lenka Fiala; <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">Husovec, M.</ins>;</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Title=Using Experimental Evidence to Design Optimal Notice and Takedown Process</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Title=Using Experimental Evidence to Design Optimal Notice and Takedown Process</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Year=2018</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Year=2018</div></td></tr>
</table>Natachahttps://www.copyrightevidence.org/wiki/index.php?title=Fiala_and_Husovec_(2018)&diff=12579&oldid=prevAThomas at 09:02, 20 April 20202020-04-20T09:02:04Z<p></p>
<table class="diff diff-contentalign-left" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #222; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #222; text-align: center;">Revision as of 09:02, 20 April 2020</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l8" >Line 8:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 8:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Abstract=“Whether it is copyright infringement or hate speech, Internet intermediaries like Facebook, Twitter or YouTube are expected to enforce the law by removing illegal content. The legal scheme under which a lot of such delegated enforcement takes place is often referred to as notice & takedown. According to theory and empirical evidence, this scheme leads to many false positives due to over-notification by concerned parties, over-compliance by providers, and under-assertion of rights by affected content creators. We re-create these problems in a laboratory and then test a mechanism to address two of them: the over-compliance by providers, and the lack of complaints by the content creators. We show that our proposed solution of an independent ADR mechanism significantly reduces over-compliance by providers. At the same time, it increases complaints by the content creators who are successful in their complaints, but primarily in cases in which it is easier to evaluate who is right.”</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Abstract=“Whether it is copyright infringement or hate speech, Internet intermediaries like Facebook, Twitter or YouTube are expected to enforce the law by removing illegal content. The legal scheme under which a lot of such delegated enforcement takes place is often referred to as notice & takedown. According to theory and empirical evidence, this scheme leads to many false positives due to over-notification by concerned parties, over-compliance by providers, and under-assertion of rights by affected content creators. We re-create these problems in a laboratory and then test a mechanism to address two of them: the over-compliance by providers, and the lack of complaints by the content creators. We show that our proposed solution of an independent ADR mechanism significantly reduces over-compliance by providers. At the same time, it increases complaints by the content creators who are successful in their complaints, but primarily in cases in which it is easier to evaluate who is right.”</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Link=https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3218286</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Link=https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3218286</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'>−</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Reference=Urban and Quilter (2006); Seng (2015); Husovec (2016); Urban et al. (2017);</div></td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Reference=Urban and Quilter (2006);Seng (2015);Husovec (2016);Urban et al. (2017);</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'>−</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Plain Text Proposition=The baseline model of notice-and-takedown (as it exists in it’s current form) resulted in nearly half of all decisions by providers being incorrect. Furthermore, creators who challenged these decisions quickly found that this mechanism was ineffective (as providers would not change their decision), and thereafter became apathetic. In combination, this model resulted in disproportionate over-enforcement and loss of profits for the creator.</div></td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Plain Text Proposition=The baseline model of notice-and-takedown (as it exists in it’s current form) resulted in nearly half of all decisions by providers being incorrect. Furthermore, creators who challenged these decisions quickly found that this mechanism was ineffective (as providers would not change their decision), and thereafter became apathetic. In combination, this model resulted in disproportionate over-enforcement and loss of profits for the creator.Upon introducing an alternative dispute mechanism option to the model, mistakes are demonstrably lower (reducing from 35% to 19%), which the authors ascribe to the “credible threat” of independent review. In this model, creators are also more likely to punish and complain to providers, with nearly all of the unsuccessful complaints being referred to alternative dispute resolution (94%). Consequently, and where the referral finds incorrect decisions, the number of mistakes by providers are lowered further (10%).</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'>−</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div> </div></td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|FundamentalIssue=1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'>−</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Upon introducing an alternative dispute mechanism option to the model, mistakes are demonstrably lower (reducing from 35% to 19%), which the authors ascribe to the “credible threat” of independent review. In this model, creators are also more likely to punish and complain to providers, with nearly all of the unsuccessful complaints being referred to alternative dispute resolution (94%). Consequently, and where the referral finds incorrect decisions, the number of mistakes by providers are lowered further (10%).</div></td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|EvidenceBasedPolicy=A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right),E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'>−</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|FundamentalIssue=1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare<del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">,</del></div></td><td colspan="2"> </td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'>−</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|EvidenceBasedPolicy=A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right), E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)<del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">,</del></div></td><td colspan="2"> </td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Discipline=C91: Laboratory; Individual Behavior, D02: Institutions: Design; Formation; and Operations, K42: Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Discipline=C91: Laboratory; Individual Behavior, D02: Institutions: Design; Formation; and Operations, K42: Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Intervention-Response=The authors suggest that, based on the success of the alternative dispute resolution model, a similar independent complaints mechanism should be introduced by law. They note that, as fees may be considerable, an NGO or governmental body could fund (fully or partially) the new mechanism in order to incentivise creators.</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Intervention-Response=The authors suggest that, based on the success of the alternative dispute resolution model, a similar independent complaints mechanism should be introduced by law. They note that, as fees may be considerable, an NGO or governmental body could fund (fully or partially) the new mechanism in order to incentivise creators.</div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l22" >Line 22:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 20:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Method of Analysis=Descriptive statistics (counting; means reporting; cross-tabulation), Correlation and Association</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Method of Analysis=Descriptive statistics (counting; means reporting; cross-tabulation), Correlation and Association</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Industry=Creative, arts and entertainment;</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Industry=Creative, arts and entertainment;</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'>−</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Country=Global; Netherlands<del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">;</del></div></td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Country=Global;<ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">The </ins>Netherlands</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Cross-country=No</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Cross-country=No</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Comparative=No</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Comparative=No</div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l29" >Line 29:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 27:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Funded By=TILEC; CentERLab;</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>|Funded By=TILEC; CentERLab;</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>}}</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'>−</td><td style="color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">|Dataset=</del></div></td><td colspan="2"> </td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>}}</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #222; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>}}</div></td></tr>
</table>AThomashttps://www.copyrightevidence.org/wiki/index.php?title=Fiala_and_Husovec_(2018)&diff=11745&oldid=prevAThomas: Created page with "{{MainSource |Source={{Source |Name of Study=Fiala and Husovec (2018) |Author=Lenka Fiala; Martin Hosovec; |Title=Using Experimental Evidence to Design Optimal Notice and Take..."2018-08-16T13:58:37Z<p>Created page with "{{MainSource |Source={{Source |Name of Study=Fiala and Husovec (2018) |Author=Lenka Fiala; Martin Hosovec; |Title=Using Experimental Evidence to Design Optimal Notice and Take..."</p>
<p><b>New page</b></p><div>{{MainSource<br />
|Source={{Source<br />
|Name of Study=Fiala and Husovec (2018)<br />
|Author=Lenka Fiala; Martin Hosovec;<br />
|Title=Using Experimental Evidence to Design Optimal Notice and Takedown Process<br />
|Year=2018<br />
|Full Citation=Fiala, L. and Husovec, M. (2018) Using Experimental Evidence to Design Optimal Notice and Takedown Process (July 23, 2018). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3218286<br />
|Abstract=“Whether it is copyright infringement or hate speech, Internet intermediaries like Facebook, Twitter or YouTube are expected to enforce the law by removing illegal content. The legal scheme under which a lot of such delegated enforcement takes place is often referred to as notice & takedown. According to theory and empirical evidence, this scheme leads to many false positives due to over-notification by concerned parties, over-compliance by providers, and under-assertion of rights by affected content creators. We re-create these problems in a laboratory and then test a mechanism to address two of them: the over-compliance by providers, and the lack of complaints by the content creators. We show that our proposed solution of an independent ADR mechanism significantly reduces over-compliance by providers. At the same time, it increases complaints by the content creators who are successful in their complaints, but primarily in cases in which it is easier to evaluate who is right.”<br />
|Link=https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3218286<br />
|Reference=Urban and Quilter (2006); Seng (2015); Husovec (2016); Urban et al. (2017);<br />
|Plain Text Proposition=The baseline model of notice-and-takedown (as it exists in it’s current form) resulted in nearly half of all decisions by providers being incorrect. Furthermore, creators who challenged these decisions quickly found that this mechanism was ineffective (as providers would not change their decision), and thereafter became apathetic. In combination, this model resulted in disproportionate over-enforcement and loss of profits for the creator.<br />
<br />
Upon introducing an alternative dispute mechanism option to the model, mistakes are demonstrably lower (reducing from 35% to 19%), which the authors ascribe to the “credible threat” of independent review. In this model, creators are also more likely to punish and complain to providers, with nearly all of the unsuccessful complaints being referred to alternative dispute resolution (94%). Consequently, and where the referral finds incorrect decisions, the number of mistakes by providers are lowered further (10%).<br />
|FundamentalIssue=1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare,<br />
|EvidenceBasedPolicy=A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right), E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts),<br />
|Discipline=C91: Laboratory; Individual Behavior, D02: Institutions: Design; Formation; and Operations, K42: Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law<br />
|Intervention-Response=The authors suggest that, based on the success of the alternative dispute resolution model, a similar independent complaints mechanism should be introduced by law. They note that, as fees may be considerable, an NGO or governmental body could fund (fully or partially) the new mechanism in order to incentivise creators.<br />
|Description of Data=The study uses an experimental model in the form of a sequential game (styled as a maze), with yes/no answers. There is a “provider” (who analyses the maze under a strict time limit) and “creator” (who has longer time to evaluate, and is ultimately the party who suffers any losses as determined by the provider). This model emulates the notice-and-takedown relationship, with further stages assessing the effectiveness of punishing the provider, revising decisions, and complaints procedures. The model was tested on 80 participants, with the aim of demonstrating that an independent alternative dispute resolution mechanism is the most effective way of resolving issues with notice-and-takedown procedures.<br />
|Data Year=Spring 2018<br />
|Data Type=Primary data<br />
|Method of Collection=Experimental (Laboratory)<br />
|Method of Analysis=Descriptive statistics (counting; means reporting; cross-tabulation), Correlation and Association<br />
|Industry=Creative, arts and entertainment;<br />
|Country=Global; Netherlands;<br />
|Cross-country=No<br />
|Comparative=No<br />
|Government or policy=No<br />
|Literature review=No<br />
|Funded By=TILEC; CentERLab;<br />
}}<br />
|Dataset=<br />
}}</div>AThomas