<ul><ul><li>Evi Werkers (ICRI) and Sari Depreeuw (LSTS)‏ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Innovation Journalism: Copyright and...
Agenda <ul><li>Introduction to FLEET </li></ul><ul><li>Publishers in dubio </li></ul><ul><li>The Belgian “Google”-case </l...
Introduction <ul><li>New ways to access and influence creative content available on the worldwide network </li></ul><ul><l...
Multidisciplinary Research Consortium <ul><li>LSTS - VUB: Drs. S. Depreeuw, Prof. Dr. F. Brison, Prof. Dr. S. Guthwirth ; ...
FLEET Research <ul><li>FLEmish E-publishing Trends </li></ul><ul><li>IWT (Institute for Science and technology)‏ </li></ul...
FLEET Research <ul><li>Legal Research: </li></ul><ul><li>Copyright implications </li></ul><ul><li>Media law and liability ...
Agenda <ul><li>Introduction to FLEET </li></ul><ul><li>Publishers in dubio </li></ul><ul><li>The Belgian “Google”-case </l...
Publishers in dubio <ul><li>Newspapers:  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Full, free access </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>E.g.  New ...
Some want to share
Some want to  share
Some want to share some
Some want to share some ??? 
Some don’t
Agenda <ul><li>Introduction to FLEET </li></ul><ul><li>Publishers in dubio </li></ul><ul><li>The Belgian “Google”-case </l...
The Belgian Google-case <ul><li>Parties </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Copiepresse, SAJ/JAM, Assucopie </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>G...
Google News: the look Photo Title Snippet Deeplinks Other sources
A mere application of the existing legal framework <ul><li>European Copyright? </li></ul><ul><li>Copyright protected works...
“ European” copyright? <ul><li>International treaties </li></ul><ul><li>European instruments </li></ul><ul><li>Member Stat...
International treaties <ul><li>Main instruments: </li></ul><ul><li>Berne Convention (BC) 1886 (1971)‏ </li></ul><ul><li>[a...
European Framework <ul><li>Computer Program Directive 91/250 </li></ul><ul><li>Rental and Lending and Related Rights Direc...
A mere application of the existing legal framework <ul><li>European Copyright? </li></ul><ul><li>Copyright protected works...
Protected “Works” <ul><li>Scope of application </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Work of “literature or art”,  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul>...
 
A mere application of the existing legal framework <ul><li>Copyright protected works </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed economic ...
Economic rights <ul><li>Exclusive rights </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Art. 2-4 Dir. 2001/29 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reproducti...
Infringed economic rights <ul><li>Reproduction </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Art. 2 Dir. 2001/29: “to authorise or prohibit direct...
Infringed economic rights <ul><li>Communication to the public </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Art. 3 Dir. 2001/29: “authorise or pro...
A mere application of the existing legal framework <ul><li>Copyright protected works </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed economic ...
Exceptions <ul><li>Statutory exceptions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Closed list > InfoSoc Dir </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Restric...
Temporary acts of reproduction <ul><li>Conditions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Transient or incidental </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li...
Quotation <ul><li>Conditions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Work lawfully made available </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Excerpt </li></...
Reporting on current events <ul><li>Conditions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Work lawfully made available </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><...
“ External” limitations <ul><li>Freedom of expression </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Already built-in in exceptions </li></ul></ul>...
A mere application of the existing legal framework <ul><li>Copyright protected works </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed economic ...
Moral rights <ul><li>Moral rights </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No European harmonisation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Art. 6bis BC ...
Moral rights in Google News -  (Other/without) editorial / philosophical line Author Snippet
Divulgation right <ul><li>Right to make available to the public </li></ul><ul><ul><li>First publication, then exhaustion <...
Paternity right <ul><li>Author can </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Claim authorship </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Anonymity, pseudonym ...
Integrity right <ul><li>Right of respect for the protected work  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Oppose  any  modification </li></ul...
A mere application of the existing legal framework <ul><li>Copyright protected works </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed economic ...
No authorisation from copyright holders <ul><li>Copyright = exclusive right </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not merely right to oppo...
Agenda <ul><li>Introduction to FLEET </li></ul><ul><li>Publishers in dubio </li></ul><ul><li>The Belgian “Google”-case </l...
Interests at stake <ul><li>Authors and derived © holders (publishers)  </li></ul><ul><li>=> control over works (and revenu...
Works at stake <ul><li>Bern Convention: no protection for “ news  of the day or to miscellaneous  facts  having the charac...
Exploitation rights at stake <ul><li>Broad - too broad? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Also partial reproduction; </li></ul></ul><u...
Exceptions at stake <ul><li>Limitative list in Act - no “fair use” - too restrictive? </li></ul><ul><li>Art. 14 Belgian Ac...
On line use at stake <ul><li>Automated processing: identification of protected content? </li></ul><ul><li>Cascade of autho...
Agenda <ul><li>Introduction to FLEET </li></ul><ul><li>Publishers in dubio </li></ul><ul><li>The Belgian “Google”-case </l...
Current developments <ul><li>Drop opt-out </li></ul><ul><li>ACAP </li></ul><ul><li>Nieuws .be </li></ul><ul><li>24.be </li...
European Policy <ul><li>Study on “Interactive Content and Convergence: Implications for the information Society” </li></ul...
Communication CCO <ul><li>Four horizontal challenges </li></ul><ul><li>Increase availability of creative content  </li></u...
The Internet of Things”: web 3.0. <ul><li>Web 3.0.= seamless, anytime, anywhere business, entertainment and social network...
Conclusion <ul><li>Traditional versus innovative offer </li></ul><ul><li>Solution:  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Digital business...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Publish Or Perish

990 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, News & Politics
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
990
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
175
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Publish Or Perish

    1. 1. <ul><ul><li>Evi Werkers (ICRI) and Sari Depreeuw (LSTS)‏ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Innovation Journalism: Copyright and the Use of Creative Commons”-Conference </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>European Journalism Centre & Stanford Center for Innovations in Learning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Maastricht (NL) - 13 November 2008 </li></ul></ul>Publish or perish. Is the publishers' indignation selective?
    2. 2. Agenda <ul><li>Introduction to FLEET </li></ul><ul><li>Publishers in dubio </li></ul><ul><li>The Belgian “Google”-case </li></ul><ul><li>What’s at stake? </li></ul><ul><li>Current developments </li></ul>
    3. 3. Introduction <ul><li>New ways to access and influence creative content available on the worldwide network </li></ul><ul><li>Digital convergence urges publishers to seek new business models </li></ul><ul><li>Several legal issues arise: </li></ul><ul><li>- copyright protection v. rights of users </li></ul><ul><li>- media law implications </li></ul><ul><li>- liability issues </li></ul><ul><li>etc. </li></ul>
    4. 4. Multidisciplinary Research Consortium <ul><li>LSTS - VUB: Drs. S. Depreeuw, Prof. Dr. F. Brison, Prof. Dr. S. Guthwirth ; </li></ul><ul><li>ICRI - KULeuven: Drs. E. Werkers, Prof. Dr. P. Valcke ; </li></ul><ul><li>IBBT/SMIT-VUB: Drs. I. Picone, Prof. Dr. C. Pauwels ; </li></ul><ul><li>CEMESO - VUB: Drs. D. Geens, Prof. Dr. K. Vanden Brande, </li></ul><ul><li>Econ/MOFI - VUB: Drs. V.A. Bleyen, Prof. Dr. L. Van Hove, </li></ul><ul><li>CUO - KULeuven: Drs. J. De Boever, Prof. Dr. D. De Grooff, </li></ul><ul><li>MICT - Ugent: Dr. S. Paulussen, Prof. Dr. K. Raeymaekers </li></ul><ul><li>Infonomics ECDC: Drs. J. Bierhoff, drs. S. Spek </li></ul><ul><li>TNO ICT, subcontractor to IBBT SMIT, L. Pennings & M. Leendertse </li></ul>
    5. 5. FLEET Research <ul><li>FLEmish E-publishing Trends </li></ul><ul><li>IWT (Institute for Science and technology)‏ </li></ul><ul><li>Project with social relevance (SB0), 4 years </li></ul><ul><li>Legal, economic, sociological aspects </li></ul><ul><li>Research objectives </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Production / publishing perspective </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Content generating perspective </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>User perspective </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Transversal issues </li></ul></ul>
    6. 6. FLEET Research <ul><li>Legal Research: </li></ul><ul><li>Copyright implications </li></ul><ul><li>Media law and liability implications </li></ul><ul><li>Valorisation: </li></ul><ul><li>Trendflagging document </li></ul><ul><li>SOTA e-publisher, e-journalist and e-user (soon publicly available)‏ </li></ul><ul><li>Legal vademecums for three target groups (following in-depth interviews)‏ </li></ul><ul><li>Publications & Papers </li></ul><ul><li>More information: http://www. fleetproject .be </li></ul>
    7. 7. Agenda <ul><li>Introduction to FLEET </li></ul><ul><li>Publishers in dubio </li></ul><ul><li>The Belgian “Google”-case </li></ul><ul><li>What’s at stake? </li></ul><ul><li>Current developments </li></ul>
    8. 8. Publishers in dubio <ul><li>Newspapers: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Full, free access </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>E.g. New York Times </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>E.g. Guardian Online - full articles via RSS </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>E.g. De Redactie (VRT)‏ </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Restricted access, with controlled sharing features </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>E.g. The Economist </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>E.g. De Standaard </li></ul></ul></ul>
    9. 9. Some want to share
    10. 10. Some want to share
    11. 11. Some want to share some
    12. 12. Some want to share some ??? 
    13. 13. Some don’t
    14. 14. Agenda <ul><li>Introduction to FLEET </li></ul><ul><li>Publishers in dubio </li></ul><ul><li>The Belgian “Google”-case </li></ul><ul><li>What’s at stake? </li></ul><ul><li>Current developments </li></ul>
    15. 15. The Belgian Google-case <ul><li>Parties </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Copiepresse, SAJ/JAM, Assucopie </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Google Inc. (USA)‏ </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Claims/problems? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Google News: title, snippet, link, photo, classification in themes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Google Search: cache </li></ul></ul>
    16. 16. Google News: the look Photo Title Snippet Deeplinks Other sources
    17. 17. A mere application of the existing legal framework <ul><li>European Copyright? </li></ul><ul><li>Copyright protected works </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed economic rights </li></ul><ul><li>No exceptions applicable </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed moral rights </li></ul><ul><li>No authorisation from copyrightholders </li></ul>
    18. 18. “ European” copyright? <ul><li>International treaties </li></ul><ul><li>European instruments </li></ul><ul><li>Member States’ copyright legislation </li></ul>
    19. 19. International treaties <ul><li>Main instruments: </li></ul><ul><li>Berne Convention (BC) 1886 (1971)‏ </li></ul><ul><li>[and Rome Convention 1961] </li></ul><ul><li>WIPO Copyright Treaty, WCT 1996 </li></ul><ul><li>[and WIPO Performers and Phonograms Treaty, WPPT 1996] </li></ul><ul><li>GATT TRIPS 1994 (WTO)‏ </li></ul>
    20. 20. European Framework <ul><li>Computer Program Directive 91/250 </li></ul><ul><li>Rental and Lending and Related Rights Directive 92/100 repealed by Directive 2006/115 </li></ul><ul><li>Satellite and Cable Directive 93/83 </li></ul><ul><li>Term Directive 93/98 – repealed by Directive 2006/116 </li></ul><ul><li>Database Directive 96/9 </li></ul><ul><li>Information Society Directive 2001/29 </li></ul><ul><li>Resale Directive 2001/84 </li></ul><ul><li>Enforcement Directive 2004/48 </li></ul><ul><li>Customs Regulation 1383/2003 </li></ul>
    21. 21. A mere application of the existing legal framework <ul><li>European Copyright? </li></ul><ul><li>Copyright protected works </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed economic rights </li></ul><ul><li>No exceptions applicable </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed moral rights </li></ul><ul><li>No authorisation from copyrightholders </li></ul>
    22. 22. Protected “Works” <ul><li>Scope of application </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Work of “literature or art”, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>including scientific works </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Conditions for protection: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Formal expression </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Originality </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(size doesn’t matter, as a rule…)‏ </li></ul></ul><ul><li>E.g.: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Scientific and press articles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Titles (some descriptive, some original, cfr. slogans)‏ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Photos, graphics, logo,... </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lay-out,… </li></ul></ul>
    23. 24. A mere application of the existing legal framework <ul><li>Copyright protected works </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed economic rights </li></ul><ul><li>No exceptions applicable </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed moral rights </li></ul><ul><li>No authorisation from copyrightholders </li></ul>
    24. 25. Economic rights <ul><li>Exclusive rights </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Art. 2-4 Dir. 2001/29 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reproduction </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Communication to the public, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>incl. making available to the public </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Distribution </li></ul></ul>
    25. 26. Infringed economic rights <ul><li>Reproduction </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Art. 2 Dir. 2001/29: “to authorise or prohibit direct or indirect, temporary or permanent reproduction by any means and in any form, in whole or in part” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Applied to Google News </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Titles, snippets </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Hyperlinking? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>(was not challenged before Brussels court)‏ </li></ul></ul></ul>
    26. 27. Infringed economic rights <ul><li>Communication to the public </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Art. 3 Dir. 2001/29: “authorise or prohibit any communication to the public of their works, by wire or wireless means, including the making available to the public of their works in such a way that members of the public may access them from a place and at a time individually chosen by them </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Applied to Google News: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Titles, snippets, pictures readily accessible </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No access to articles in cache </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>[only hyperlink to original webpage] </li></ul></ul>
    27. 28. A mere application of the existing legal framework <ul><li>Copyright protected works </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed economic rights </li></ul><ul><li>No exceptions applicable </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed moral rights </li></ul><ul><li>No authorisation from copyright holders </li></ul>
    28. 29. Exceptions <ul><li>Statutory exceptions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Closed list > InfoSoc Dir </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Restrictive interpretation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Subject to “3 steps”-test </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Not applicable in case at hand </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Temporary acts of reproduction </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Quotations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reporting on current events </li></ul></ul>
    29. 30. Temporary acts of reproduction <ul><li>Conditions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Transient or incidental </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Integral and essential part of a technological process </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>With the sole purpose to enable: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Transmission in a network between 3rd parties by an intermediary or </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Lawful use </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No independent economic significance </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Applied to Google News </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Integral part of technological process (yes)‏ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>But other purpose : search service + news aggregation service (no)‏ </li></ul></ul>
    30. 31. Quotation <ul><li>Conditions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Work lawfully made available </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Excerpt </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Well-defined purposes: criticism, debate, review, education, science </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>In line with fair business practices </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mention of source and author </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Applied to Google News </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No analysis, no opinion, no reasoning, no comment, no comparison, no review,... (no)‏ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Automated processing - no human intervention </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Only classification in themes </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Reproduction > accessory </li></ul></ul></ul>
    31. 32. Reporting on current events <ul><li>Conditions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Work lawfully made available </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Excerpt </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Information of the public </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>In a report on current events </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mention of source and author </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Applied to Google News </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Information of the public (yes)‏ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>But no reporting on current events </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>No comment, no analysis </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Reproduction > accessory </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>And <=> ratio legis </li></ul></ul>
    32. 33. “ External” limitations <ul><li>Freedom of expression </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Already built-in in exceptions </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Abuse of rights </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Legitimate exercise of copyright </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not compared to acquisition of consent </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>But compared to cease infringement </li></ul></ul>
    33. 34. A mere application of the existing legal framework <ul><li>Copyright protected works </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed economic rights </li></ul><ul><li>No exceptions applicable </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed moral rights </li></ul><ul><li>No authorisation from copyright holders </li></ul>
    34. 35. Moral rights <ul><li>Moral rights </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No European harmonisation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Art. 6bis BC </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Right to claim authorship </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Right to integrity </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Distortion, mutilation or modification </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Prejudice to honour or reputation </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Belgian copyright law </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Divulgation </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Paternity </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Integrity </li></ul></ul></ul>
    35. 36. Moral rights in Google News - (Other/without) editorial / philosophical line Author Snippet
    36. 37. Divulgation right <ul><li>Right to make available to the public </li></ul><ul><ul><li>First publication, then exhaustion </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Applied to Google News </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Prior publication </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>=> no infringement </li></ul></ul>
    37. 38. Paternity right <ul><li>Author can </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Claim authorship </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Anonymity, pseudonym </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Applied to Google News </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mention of source </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>But no mention of author’s name </li></ul></ul>
    38. 39. Integrity right <ul><li>Right of respect for the protected work </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Oppose any modification </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Work </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Context </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Even if no prejudice to honour or reputation </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Applied to Google News </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Snippets </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Selection and classification by theme </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Irrespective of source of articles </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Possible change of editorial or philosophical context </li></ul></ul></ul>
    39. 40. A mere application of the existing legal framework <ul><li>Copyright protected works </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed economic rights </li></ul><ul><li>No exceptions applicable </li></ul><ul><li>Infringed moral rights </li></ul><ul><li>No authorisation from copyright holders </li></ul>
    40. 41. No authorisation from copyright holders <ul><li>Copyright = exclusive right </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not merely right to oppose </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Right to refuse </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Prior authorisation required </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No opt-out, no reservation of rights </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Notwithstanding existence of technical parameters </li></ul><ul><ul><li>robots.txt, meta tags </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No obligation for copyright holder </li></ul></ul>
    41. 42. Agenda <ul><li>Introduction to FLEET </li></ul><ul><li>Publishers in dubio </li></ul><ul><li>The Belgian “Google”-case </li></ul><ul><li>What’s at stake? </li></ul><ul><li>Current developments </li></ul>
    42. 43. Interests at stake <ul><li>Authors and derived © holders (publishers) </li></ul><ul><li>=> control over works (and revenues)‏ </li></ul><ul><li>Public </li></ul><ul><li>=> access to information </li></ul><ul><li>Intermediaries </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Search engines </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Content aggregators </li></ul></ul><ul><li> => new business models </li></ul>
    43. 44. Works at stake <ul><li>Bern Convention: no protection for “ news of the day or to miscellaneous facts having the character of mere items of press information” (art. 2.8)‏ </li></ul><ul><li>Particular character of subject matter </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Information? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>News? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Article? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Title? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Keywords? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Synopsis? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li><=> Ideas? Originality? </li></ul></ul>
    44. 45. Exploitation rights at stake <ul><li>Broad - too broad? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Also partial reproduction; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>no quantitative criterion </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Regardless of commercial purpose </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>E.g. non-commercial blog </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Regardless of nature of activity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Competing activity? </li></ul></ul></ul>
    45. 46. Exceptions at stake <ul><li>Limitative list in Act - no “fair use” - too restrictive? </li></ul><ul><li>Art. 14 Belgian Act 1886: a newspaper article may be used by another newspaper if the source is indicated and if such use is not expressly forbidden. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not maintained in Copyright Act 1994! </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Art. 5.3 (c) Dir. 2001/29: reproduction by the press , communication to the public or making available of published articles on current economic, political or religious topics or of broadcast works or other subject-matter of the same character, in cases where such use is not expressly reserved, and as long as the source, including the author's name, is indicated. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not implemented in Belgian law in 2005! </li></ul></ul>
    46. 47. On line use at stake <ul><li>Automated processing: identification of protected content? </li></ul><ul><li>Cascade of authorisations: overlap reproduction/communication to the public? </li></ul><ul><li>Distinction portal/search engine? </li></ul><ul><li>Hyperlinking subject to copyright? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Deeplink? Inline link? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Other protection? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Expression of consent </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Opt-out rule? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Robots.txt, meta tags, ACAP </li></ul></ul>
    47. 48. Agenda <ul><li>Introduction to FLEET </li></ul><ul><li>Publishers in dubio </li></ul><ul><li>The Belgian “Google”-case </li></ul><ul><li>What’s at stake? </li></ul><ul><li>Current developments </li></ul>
    48. 49. Current developments <ul><li>Drop opt-out </li></ul><ul><li>ACAP </li></ul><ul><li>Nieuws .be </li></ul><ul><li>24.be </li></ul>
    49. 50. European Policy <ul><li>Study on “Interactive Content and Convergence: Implications for the information Society” </li></ul><ul><li>-> Although the market is growing steadily, legal, economic and technological challenges need to be addressed for Europe to have faster market uptake </li></ul><ul><li>Communication European Commission on Creative Content Online in the Single Market (03/01/2008)‏ </li></ul><ul><li>Communication on future networks and the Internet. Early challenges regarding the “Internet of things” (29/09/2008)(+ public consultation)‏ </li></ul>
    50. 51. Communication CCO <ul><li>Four horizontal challenges </li></ul><ul><li>Increase availability of creative content </li></ul><ul><li>Multi-territory licensing for creative content </li></ul><ul><li>Interoperability and transparency of Digital Rights Management systems (DRMs) </li></ul><ul><li>Legal offers and piracy </li></ul><ul><li>+ content online platform </li></ul>
    51. 52. The Internet of Things”: web 3.0. <ul><li>Web 3.0.= seamless, anytime, anywhere business, entertainment and social networking over fast, reliable and secure networks </li></ul><ul><li>Remedies: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Self-/co-regulatory agreements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>promote digital business models </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>enforce legal certainty rights and obligations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>promotion legal offers online </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>reinforcement consumers’ rights </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>fight against online piracy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(Speech V. Reding, “Seizing the opportunities of the global Internet economy, OECD Ministerial Meeting “Future of the Internet economy”, Seoul, Korea, 17-18 June 2008 </li></ul></ul>
    52. 53. Conclusion <ul><li>Traditional versus innovative offer </li></ul><ul><li>Solution: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Digital business models </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Legal offers online (licence + technology)‏ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Restore balance publishers – users </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>= the way forward </li></ul></ul>

    ×