Search

What happens when a breakdown in relations results in mutually possessed objectives becoming harder to achieve? This article explores the consequences of the UK's withdrawal from the EU for intellectual property (IP) law and policy. Compared with other fields such as Economic and Monetary Union and the development of the EU's ‘social chapter’, the UK has been a supportive and proactive player in internal market integration, particularly pertaining to IP protection. As a result of ‘Brexit’, the EU may find that the impetus for further harmonization and integration in this field is lost, such as with the EU unitary patent. However, the consequences for the UK are likely to be more severe – a loss of influence, both over laws that govern it and in exporting IP norms internationally, as well as a loss of access to certain protections, agencies and market sectors that are within the UK's economic interests.\ud

The protection of cyberspace has become one of the highest security priorities of governments worldwide. The EU is not an exception in this context, given its rapidly developing cyber security policy. Since the 1990s, we could observe the creation of three broad areas of policy interest: cyber-crime, critical information infrastructures and cyber-defence. One of the main trends transversal to these areas is the importance that the private sector has come to assume within them. In particular in the area of critical information infrastructure protection, the private sector is seen as a key stakeholder, given that it currently operates most infrastructures in this area. As a result of this operative capacity, the private sector has come to be understood as the expert in network and information systems security, whose knowledge is crucial for the regulation of the field. Adopting a Regulatory Capitalism framework, complemented by insights from Network Governance, we can identify the shifting role of the private sector in this field from one of a victim in need of protection in the first phase, to a commercial actor bearing responsibility for ensuring network resilience in the second, to an active policy shaper in the third, participating in the regulation of NIS by providing technical expertise. By drawing insights from the above-mentioned frameworks, we can better understand how private actors are involved in shaping regulatory responses, as well as why they have been incorporated into these regulatory networks.

The purpose of this paper is to trace the development of the EU’s policies regarding the combatting of counterfeiting and in particular the establishment of the European Observatory on Counterfeiting and Piracy (later renamed the European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights). This paper will demonstrate how ‘hard’ legal regimes for the management of online sales of counterfeit items have been significantly limited by the lack of effective data on the scale of the phenomenon, as well as the reluctance of Internet platforms to tackle online infringements. Through the empowerment of the Observatory and its transferal to the European agency the Office of Harmonisation of the Internal Market (OHIM) however, the EU has managed to establish its position as a cyber-security actor able to tackle online infringements of intellectual property rights. Through research into and identification of best practices concerning the quantification of counterfeit sales, information collection and sharing, and in facilitating coordination and cooperation between networks of private and public sector actors, the Observatory has taken on a key role in establishing online networks for proactively countering the sale and distribution of counterfeit products online. In this way, the Commission’s facilitation of a network governance model has led to the development of a more effective means of combatting the threat posed by physical goods that are distributed via digital means.

The protection of cyberspace has become one of the highest security priorities of governments worldwide. The EU is not an exception in this context, given its rapidly developing cyber security policy. Since the 1990s, we could observe the creation of three broad areas of policy interest: cyber-crime, critical information infrastructures and cyber-defence. One of the main trends transversal to these areas is the importance that the private sector has come to assume within them. In particular in the area of critical information infrastructure, the private sector is seen as a key stakeholder, given that it currently governs most infrastructures in this area. As a result, the private sector has come to be understood as the expert in network and information systems security, whose knowledge is crucial for the regulation of the field. Adopting a Regulatory Capitalism framework, complemented by insights from Network Governance, we can identify the shifting role of the private sector in this field from one of a victim in need of protection in the first phase, to a commercial actor bearing responsibility for ensuring network resilience in the second, to an active policy shaper in the third, participating in the regulation of NIS by providing technical expertise. By drawing insights from the above-mentioned frameworks, we can better understand how private actors are involved in shaping regulatory responses, as well as why they have been incorporated into these regulatory networks.

While socio-cultural and historical differences in the EU Member States and China have resulted in two distinct regimes for human embryonic stem cell research, with the EU considered somewhat conservative and China significantly liberal in approach, the laws governing patenting of innovations derived from stem cell research in both legal regimes appear to be remarkably similar. How is it that two divergent systems have nevertheless converged on a restrictive approach to patenting in this field of research? This paper will demonstrate the way in which different institutional pressures and objectives have resulted in similar practices: - while deliberative decision-making within the context of representative liberal democracy resulted in the EU placing morality-based limitations on economically- driven hESC patenting, China’s elite-driven processes within the context of ‘authoritarian deliberation’ instead adopted morality-based limitations both as an indicator of demonstrating standards of best practice as a means of encouraging research and investment, and as the result of institutional learning. Therefore, despite different institutional designs and policy-making approaches, the EU and China have converged on remarkably similar hESC patent regimes.

This article seeks to demonstrate that the newly proposed Portability Regulation, intended to permit access to online works legally available in one Member State when the user travels to another Member State, represents a cautious first step towards significant copyright reform in the EU. While there are some ambiguities in the proposal that require scrutiny, the Commission has nevertheless made its first concrete step towards addressing issues of territoriality in copyright law.\ud

The symbols, signs, and traces of copyright and related intellectual property laws that appear on everyday texts, objects, and artifacts have multiplied exponentially over the past 15 years. Digital spaces have revolutionized access to content and transformed the ways in which content is porous and malleable. In this volume, contributors focus on copyright as it relates to culture. The editors argue that what «counts» as property must be understood as shifting terrain deeply influenced by historical, economic, cultural, religious, and digital perspectives. Key themes addressed include issues of how: • Culture is framed, defined, and/or identified in conversations about intellectual property; • The humanities and other related disciplines are implicated in intellectual property issues; • The humanities will continue to rub up against copyright (e.g., issues of authorship, authorial agency, ownership of texts); • Different cultures and bodies of literature approach intellectual property, and how competing dynasties and marginalized voices exist beyond the dominant U.S. copyright paradigm. Offering a transnational and interdisciplinary perspective, Cultures of Copyright offers readers – scholars, researchers, practitioners, theorists, and others – key considerations to contemplate in terms of how we understand copyright’s past and how we chart its futures.

Internet ha permès als creadors de jocs amateurs col·laborar en projectes independentment de la seva situació geogràfica. L'èxit de productes com Minecraft, i fins i tot CounterStrike, demostra que els desenvolupadors «independents» poden crear productes de lleure tan populars i amb tant d'èxit com els desenvolupadors consolidats i amb grans pressupostos. Tanmateix, molts consumidors estan més interessats en productes vells que en els nous -reviure experiències passades jugant a videojocs antics que ja no són disponibles al mercat. Amb la creació d'emuladors, i la còpia d'imatges ROM (dades que permeten jugar a videojocs emulats, com Super Mario Bros. a la Super Nintendo), es poden distribuir jocs amb valor nostàlgic i s'hi pot jugar i tornar a jugar fàcilment. A més, això permet la conservació de contingut antic (legacy content) que si no fos així podria acabar arxivat a la «paperera de la història». No obstant això, independentment de l'esforç i la inventiva que impliquen la creació de programari d'emulació, i l'esforç que implica copiar dades ROM per a poder jugar a jocs antics, són completament legals aquestes activitats? El propòsit d'aquest article és considerar la compatibilitat d'aquests projectes amb les normes preexistents de les lleis de propietat intel·lectual, comparant i contrastant els enfocaments dels règims de propietat intel·lectual dels EUA i la UE a l'hora de tractar emuladors i ROM. L'article analitzarà la qüestió sota la legislació preexistent i respecte a jurisprudència rellevant, amb la intenció d'arribar a conclusions sobre si els règims existents de legislació de drets d'autor són compatibles i concilien satisfactòriament el dret de les productores de videojocs de pretendre una remuneració justa pel seu treball amb el desig dels entusiastes de preservar i reviure una forma de cultura creativa., The Internet has made it possible for amateur game creators to collaborate on projects irrespective of geographical location. The success of projects such as Minecraft, and even CounterStrike, demonstrates that 'indie' developers can create entertainment products just as popular and successful as mainstream developers with huge budgets. However, many individuals instead are more interested in the old than the new - reliving past experiences through the playing of old videogames that are no longer commercially sold. Through the creation of emulators, and the ripping of ROM images (data that allows for the playing of an emulated videogame, such as Super Mario Bros. on the Super Nintendo), games with nostalgic value can be easily distributed, played and replayed. In addition, this allows for the preservation of legacy content that may otherwise be consigned to the 'dustbin of history'. However, irrespective of the effort and ingenuity that goes into the creation of emulation software, and the effort involved in ripping ROM data to make old games playable, are these pursuits entirely legal? The purpose of this paper is to consider the compatibility of such projects with pre-existing norms of intellectual property law, comparing and contrasting the approaches of US and EU IP regimes in their handling of emulators and ROMS. The paper will analyse the issue under pre-existing legislation and with regard to relevant case law, seeking to draw conclusions on whether the existing regimes in copyright law are compatible and satisfactorily balance the right of videogame publishers to seek fair remuneration for their work with the desire by enthusiasts to preserve and relive a form of creative culture., Internet ha posibilitado a los creadores de juegos amateurs colaborar en proyectos independientemente de su localización geográfica. El éxito de productos como Minecraft, e incluso CounterStrike, demuestra que los desarrolladores «independientes» pueden crear productos de entretenimiento tan populares y exitosos como los desarrolladores consolidados y con grandes presupuestos. Sin embargo, muchos consumidores están más interesados en lo viejo que en lo nuevo -revivir experiencias pasadas, jugando a viejos videojuegos que ya no están disponibles en el mercado. Mediante la creación de emuladores, y la copia de imágenes ROM (datos que permiten jugar a videojuegos emulados, como Super Mario Bros, en la Super Nintendo), se pueden distribuir juegos con valor nostálgico y se puede jugar y volver a jugar con ellos fácilmente. Además, esto permite la conservación de contenido antiguo (legacy content) que de otro modo podría acabar archivado en la «papelera de la historia». No obstante, independientemente del esfuerzo y la inventiva que implica la creación de software de emulación, y el esfuerzo que supone copiar datos ROM para poder jugar a juegos antiguos, ¿son estas actividades completamente legales? El propósito de este artículo es considerar la compatibilidad de estos proyectos con las normas preexistentes de propiedad intelectual, comparando y contrastando los enfoques de los regímenes de EE. UU. y la UE a la hora de tratar emuladores y ROM. El artículo analizará la cuestión bajo la legislación preexistente y en relación con la jurisprudencia relevante, con la intención de llegar a conclusiones en cuanto a si los regímenes existentes de derechos de autor son compatibles y concilian satisfactoriamente el derecho de las productoras de videojuegos de pretender una remuneración justa por su trabajo con el deseo de los entusiastas de preservar y revivir una forma de cultura creativa.

Internet ha posibilitado a los creadores de juegos amateurs colaborar en proyectos independientemente de su localización geográfica. El éxito de productos como Minecraft, e incluso CounterStrike, demuestra que los desarrolladores «independientes» pueden crear productos de entretenimiento tan populares y exitosos como los desarrolladores consolidados y con grandes presupuestos. Sin embargo, muchos consumidores están más interesados en lo viejo que en lo nuevo -revivir experiencias pasadas, jugando a viejos videojuegos que ya no están disponibles en el mercado. Mediante la creación de emuladores, y la copia de imágenes ROM (datos que permiten jugar a videojuegos emulados, como Super Mario Bros, en la Super Nintendo), se pueden distribuir juegos con valor nostálgico y se puede jugar y volver a jugar con ellos fácilmente. Además, esto permite la conservación de contenido antiguo (legacy content) que de otro modo podría acabar archivado en la «papelera de la historia».\ud \ud \ud \ud No obstante, independientemente del esfuerzo y la inventiva que implica la creación de software de emulación, y el esfuerzo que supone copiar datos ROM para poder jugar a juegos antiguos, ¿son estas actividades completamente legales? El propósito de este artículo es considerar la compatibilidad de estos proyectos con las normas preexistentes de propiedad intelectual, comparando y contrastando los enfoques de los regímenes de EE. UU. y la UE a la hora de tratar emuladores y ROM. El artículo analizará la cuestión bajo la legislación preexistente y en relación con la jurisprudencia relevante, con la intención de llegar a conclusiones en cuanto a si los regímenes existentes de derechos de autor son compatibles y concilian satisfactoriamente el derecho de las productoras de videojuegos de pretender una remuneración justa por su trabajo con el deseo de los entusiastas de preservar y revivir una forma de cultura creativa.\ud

Defence date: 12 December 2011 Examining Board: Professor Giovanni Sartor, European University Institute (Supervisor Internal); Professor Heike Schweitzer, University of Mannheim (Internal); Professor Roberto Caso, University of Trento (External); Professor Bernt Hugenholtz, University of Amsterdam (External) PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digital archive of EUI PhD theses The pan-European licensing of digital music for the non-commercial consumer is a highly topical issue in copyright law at the present time. Whereas the EU continues to strive for the further harmonisation of the internal market, markets for digital services remain an exception, where barriers are artificially raised, rather than brought down. Yet why is harmonisation in this area so difficult to achieve? This thesis seeks to explain the reasons why creating a harmonised market for digital services is difficult to achieve by approaching the question in a multi-disciplinary way. It focuses not only on how the harmonisation of other aspects of copyright law have led to the development of laws which actually hinder the development of online services, but also on why copyright law has developed in such a restrictive manner, by focusing on the role of industry lobbyists and policy makers in the development of contemporary ‘digital’ copyright law. These findings are considered in light of economic analysis of the copyright system, in order to demonstrate why the continued increases in levels of protection and terms of duration of copyright are not only unsupported by economic evidence, but actually appear to hinder the development of new technologies and systems of distribution, making it increasingly difficult to create a single market for digital media distribution. Finally, this thesis will consider the role of collecting societies both online and offline, and how these institutions lead to a further fragmentation of a single market for digital media. While their existence in the physical monitoring of performances may be considered as a ‘necessary evil’, their existence in online distribution markets do not appear to be supported by either law or economic evidence. The thesis will therefore conclude by considering whether further changes to copyright law should be reconsidered in light of the negative impact that they may have on not only consumers, but creative artists themselves.