1. Copyright and Fair Use:
Transnational Troubles
Leonhard Dobusch
Freie Universität Berlin – School of Business & Economics
ESRC Workshop Series
‚Digital Policy: Connectivity, Creativity and Rights’
November 22, 2012, Vienna
2. Using content online: legal or illegal?
Fair Use on YouTube and in Wikipedia
Private resolution of public problems?
5. “ Forty-four per cent of all internet
users aged 12+ claimed to be either
‘not particularly confident’ or ‘not at all’
confident in terms of what is legal and
what isn’t online.
”
Online copyright infringement tracker
benchmark study, commissioned by the
Office of Communications (Ofcom) UK, 2012
7. Regulatory Uncertainty: Questions
Online usage End-user Intermediary
watching/ Is the source legal? Is Is providing tools for
listening/ watching/listening/reading watching/listening/reading
reading from an illegal source legal?
legal?
linking Is linking to (illegal) Is providing the tools for
content legal? linking to content legal?
storing/offering Is storing/offering the Is providing tools for
content legal? storing/offering (illegal)
content legal?
interacting/ Is interacting/creating with Is providing tools for
creating online the content online legal? interacting/creating with
online content legal?
Source: Dobusch, L./Quack, S. (2012): Transnational Copyright: Misalignments between Regulation, Business Models and User Practice.
Osgoode CLPE Research Paper Series, 8 (4), Research Paper No. 13, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2116334
8. Regime Complexity in Copyright
Regime Forums Regulatory Outcome
International WTO, UN/WIPO TRIPS treaty, WCT,
treaties WPPT, ACTA, TPP
(Supra-)nation EU, national legislative EU copyright directives,
al law bodies national laws
Private Industry networks, Digital Rights
regulation via standard setters Management, Open
standards Content Licensing
Source: Dobusch, L./Quack, S. (2012): Transnational Copyright: Misalignments between Regulation, Business Models and User Practice.
Osgoode CLPE Research Paper Series, 8 (4), Research Paper No. 13, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2116334
9. Regulatory Uncertainty: Case Law
Online usage End-user Intermediary
watching/ - RIAA v. Diamond (“Rio
listening/ case”, 1998)
reading
linking Intellectual Reserve v. A&M Records v. Napster
Utah Lighthouse Ministry (2001)
(1999) Arista v. Lime Wire (2010)
Universal City Studios v.
Corley (2001)
storing/offering e.g. Warner v. DeWitt Viacom v. YouTube (2007)
(2007) or Interscope v. GEMA v. RapidShare
Rodriguez (2007) (2010)
interacting/ Lenz v. Universal Music Warner Bros.
creating online Corp. (2008) Entertainment et al. v.
Sapient v. Geller (2008) RDR Books et al. (2008)
Source: Dobusch, L./Quack, S. (2012): Transnational Copyright: Misalignments between Regulation, Business Models and User Practice.
Osgoode CLPE Research Paper Series, 8 (4), Research Paper No. 13, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2116334
10. Illegal in spite of substantial proportion
of non-infringing practices?
A&M Records v. Napster (2001) Arista v. Limewire (2010)
11. Legal in spite of substantial proportion
of infringing practices?
Viacom v. YouTube (2007)
13. “ Members shall confine limitations and
exceptions to exclusive rights to certain
special cases which do not conflict with a
normal exploitation of the work and do not
unreasonably prejudice the legitimate
”
interests of the rights holder.
Article 13, TRIPS Agreement
29. Growing importance of private
regulatory layer
Regime Forums Regulatory Outcome
International WTO, UN/WIPO TRIPS treaty, WCT,
treaties WPPT
(Supra-)nation EU, national legislative EU copyright directives,
al law bodies national laws
Private Industry networks, Digital Rights
regulation via standard setters Management, Open
standards Content Licensing
30. Conclusions
Uncertainty in copyright is going to last
Enabling uncertainty of fair use
preferrable to prohibiting certainty
Scope of fair use is re-negotiated by
regulatory practices of non-state actors