Intellectual Property: Copyright Law eJournal最新文献

{"title":"Do Pirated Video Streams Crowd Out Non-Pirated Video Streams? Evidence from Online Activity","authors":"Sarah Oh, S. Wallsten, Nathaniel Lovin","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3525027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3525027","url":null,"abstract":"Does watching more pirated streaming video mean spending less time watching non-pirated streaming video? This study measures whether, and how much, time spent watching pirated video crowds out time spent on streaming video apps. While prior studies have estimated the impact of piracy on sales revenues, our study measures the impact of piracy on time spent on free and paid streaming apps. We combine big data tools with standard econometric techniques, including a two-stage least squares model, to analyze 5.25 terabytes of online activity data from 19,764 American households and their 468,612 devices from 2016 to 2017. The analysis suggests that every minute spent engaged with pirated video sites crowded out about 3.5 minutes of time spent streaming video. Because pirated video files are generally more compressed than non-pirated video files and because they are frequently downloaded as entire files rather than streamed, as with non-pirate sites like Netflix and Amazon, we conclude that our results exhibit closer to a 1-to-1 crowding out effect of piracy on over-the-top streaming video services.","PeriodicalId":223636,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual Property: Copyright Law eJournal","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134179854","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Big data: un análisis documental de su uso y aplicación en el contexto de la era digital (Big Data a Documentary Analysis of Its Use and Application in the Context of the Digital Age)","authors":"Mariana Escobar Borja, Margareth Mercado Pérez","doi":"10.18601/16571959.n28.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18601/16571959.n28.10","url":null,"abstract":"<b>Spanish Abstract:</b> El Big Data es un sistema de procesamiento de datos a través de las TIC, caracterizado por variabilidad, velocidad y volumen. Esta investigación analiza su uso y aplicación en el contexto de la era digital, utilizando una revisión teórica. Como resultados, el Big Data aporta: celeridad en la gestión de información, apoyo para sistemas económicos, financieros y productivos y, fundamento a decisiones sobre aspectos sociales. Como reflexión, los sectores sociales deben invertir en tic que les permitan sacar provecho de los datos; en el ámbito investigativo, el Big Data debe conceptualizarse claramente, ya que este es difuso en el entorno teórico analizado.<br><br><b>English Abstract:</b> Big Data is a data processing system through ICT, characterized by: variability, speed and volume. This research analyzes its use and application in the context of the digital era, using a theoretical review. As a result, Big Data provides speed in information management, support for economic, financial and productive systems, and, basis for decisions on social aspects. As a reflection, the social sectors must invest in ICT that allow them to take advantage of the data; In the research field, Big Data must be clearly conceptualized, since this is diffuse in the theoretical environment analyzed.","PeriodicalId":223636,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual Property: Copyright Law eJournal","volume":"187 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121518678","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Levola Hengelo Bv V Smilde Foods Bv: The Hard Work of Defining a Copyright Work","authors":"Jani McCutcheon","doi":"10.1111/1468-2230.12463","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12463","url":null,"abstract":"The Court of Justice of the European Union's judgement in Levola Hengelo BV v Smilde Foods BV ruled that the taste of food cannot be protected as a copyright work under EU copyright law. This note describes the issues in the primary dispute concerning the claim of copyright in the taste of cheese, the reasoning of Advocate General M. Wathelet who advised the CJEU, and the reasoning of the CJEU in its broad concurrence with the AG. It then critiques the CJEU's judgement, which is surprisingly brief, considering the gravity of the question, which probes the boundaries of the copyright work under EU law. The note explains the many opportunities that were overlooked by the court in its brief judgement, attempts to unravel some of the more ambiguous aspects of the judgement, and assesses the merit and utility of the court's primary pronouncement that a copyright work must be objectively identifiable.","PeriodicalId":223636,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual Property: Copyright Law eJournal","volume":"106 22","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120820792","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Digital Platforms and Antitrust Law","authors":"Keith N. Hylton","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3381803","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3381803","url":null,"abstract":"This is a paper about “big data” and antitrust law. For my purposes, big data refers to digital platforms that enable the discovery and sharing of information by consumers, and the harvesting and analysis of data on those consumers by the platform. The obvious example of such a platform is Google. The big platforms owe their market dominance not to anticompetitive conduct but to economies of scale. I discuss three types of anticompetitive conduct associated with digital platforms: kill zone expropriation, acquisition of nascent rivals, and denial of access to data. There is nothing so unusual about digital platforms that would require a reform of the antitrust laws. Some are described as two-sided markets, but this designation, even after Ohio v. Amex, should not present an obstacle to the application of antitrust law.","PeriodicalId":223636,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual Property: Copyright Law eJournal","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133406620","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"How Europe Wants to Redefine Global Online Copyright Enforcement","authors":"Martin Husovec","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3372230","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3372230","url":null,"abstract":"This book chapter discusses how since the early 2010s the Europen Union continuously deviated from the original notice and takedown safe harbour model championed by the United States thereby incrementally creating its own regulatory response to online copyright infringement. The article puts the Digital Single Market Directive, and its highly contentious Article 17 (formerly 13), in a broader context of new regulatory models that have been developed in the last decade. These models not only inspired the reform but will also continue to co-shape it and complement it in the years to come. The ultimate goal is to provide a reader with a high-level analysis of the current regulatory models, including of Article 17 DSMD, and to provide a concise overview of the developments which are likely to set the tone of the discussions also abroad. When this happens, it is always useful to understand the regulatory context in which the European reform took place.","PeriodicalId":223636,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual Property: Copyright Law eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114140598","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Enjoining the Cloud: Equity, Irreparability, and Remedies","authors":"Hannibal Travis","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3411780","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3411780","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the tailoring of remedies in cases involving potential monetary compensation and both lawful and unlawful conduct, especially in online infringement disputes. When websites communicate copyrighted works to members of the public or use trademarks unlawfully, domestic requirements of equitable relief come into tension with global enforcement cultures. Courts are sometimes persuaded to enjoin entire websites or to order the defendant and its cloud service providers to end any use of the copyrights or trademarks at issue, while other courts limit their injunctions to the adjudicated conduct and the parties before them. The question sometimes arises whether a site-killing or device-killing order should issue in light of the defendant's infringement and third parties' facilitation of it, or whether the defendant should simply be ordered to desist from the infringing acts (and related parties from facilitating those specific acts). An increasingly prominent alternative is to withhold an injunctive remedy in view of the potential recovery of monetary relief. This article explores why, despite statutory language, case law precedent, and political consensus that website blocking should not occur, the sweeping remedy of site blocking (enjoining any facilitation of site access) continues to be available. It argues that site-blocking and orders to third parties not to index or provide services to a website are in tension with the Supreme Court's decision in eBay, the First Amendment case for narrowly targeted remedies when publishing and digital communication are at stake, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's limiting language, remedial proportionality doctrine, and the failure of the Stop Online Piracy Act of 2011 in Congress. Remedial inequities are also emerging as between patent and copyright or trademark holders, because the bare loss of control of intellectual property is justifying copyright and trademark injunctions despite patent law cases suggesting that impaired exclusivity and negotiating leverage are not necessarily \"irreparable\" injury.","PeriodicalId":223636,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual Property: Copyright Law eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131363621","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"From the Myth of Babel to Google Translate: Confronting Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence – Copyright and Algorithmic Biases in Online Translation Systems","authors":"S. Yanisky-Ravid, C. Martens","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3345716","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3345716","url":null,"abstract":"Many of us rely on “Google Translate” and other Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning (“AI”) online translation on a daily basis for personal or commercial use. These AI systems have become ubiquitous and are poised to revolutionize human communication across the globe. Promising increased fluency across cultures by breaking down linguistic barriers and promoting cross-cultural relationships in a way that many civilizations have historically sought and struggled to achieve, AI translation affords users the means to turn any text — from phrases to books — into cognizable expression. \u0000 \u0000This Article discusses the burgeoning possibilities in the 3A Era (Advanced, Autonomous, AI systems), of AI online translation as accessible tools, whose users are data suppliers and feedback providers, and hence, contributors to the programing and improvement processes of these AI translation tools. On the other hand, this Article also acknowledges the real concerns this new realm raises, stemming from malicious uses of AI, which are most often concealed from the public. Such hidden aspects include built-in algorithmic biases, such as race, sex and gender, color, religion, or national origin biases, which this article addresses in a discussion of AI systems’ systemic shortcomings. Because AI translation systems learn and function through the data they receive from data providers, they are vulnerable to societal biases; when users offer feedback, these systems may perpetuate sexist, racist, or otherwise objectionable expressions, of which other users, when consulting the systems, are unaware. \u0000 \u0000Furthermore, examining the current copyright regime, the Article claims, for the first time, that we (as users), have become inadvertent infringers of legal rights, since a translation, according to copyright law, is a derivative work owned and controlled by the author. As such, an author’s permission is necessary prior to the creation of a translation, with the author in a position to collect payment when due. Moreover, under current law, the Fair Use doctrine is frequently inapplicable. This Article claims that the legal and academic communities, and policy makers, have failed to address AI translation systems within the copyright regime and further argues that this failure renders the current copyright regime outdated and ill-equipped to handle the advent of sophisticated AI tools. Additionally, this Article states that the present inability of AI technology to routinely capture the nuance of human prose gives rise to another concern. The ubiquitous role such (as-yet) flawed AI online translation systems play in translation services, for personal or commercial purposes, should be better balanced with the concerns of authors — who may worry about the linguistic integrity of an AI translation of their work — and their rights, in certain circumstances, to control translations of their work and object to unauthorized AI translations. \u0000 \u0000Understanding the concerns atten","PeriodicalId":223636,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual Property: Copyright Law eJournal","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123364163","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Fortnite Is ‘Dropping’ Into Legal Land: A Proposal to Amend the Copyright Act to Address Artists’ and Game Developers’ Concerns Over Dance Moves As Purchasable Emotes in Video Games","authors":"Zachary Crane","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3314693","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3314693","url":null,"abstract":"Copyright affords subject matter like choreography exclusive rights. If you own a copyright to a work, you may exclude others from making, selling, distributing, performing, etc., the work. The lawsuits against Epic Games alleging copyright infringement for use of the plaintiffs’ dance moves in “Fortnite” reveal the doctrine’s inadequacy to balance the interests between parties today. Exclusive rights in dance moves is flawed. But there is a sense of unfairness in the Fortnite Lawsuits. A narrowed amendment is necessary to grant non-exclusive rights in an artist’s commercially exploited work not currently subject to copyright protection.","PeriodicalId":223636,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual Property: Copyright Law eJournal","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127041167","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Economic Models of Innovation: Stand-Alone and Cumulative Creativity","authors":"Peter S. Menell, Suzanne Scotchmer","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3246159","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3246159","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines economic models of innovation and the ramifications for intellectual property policy. It begins with stand-alone innovation and then introduces cumulative innovation. The analysis explores eligibility requirements, duration and breadth of protection, rights and defenses, remedies, and channeling doctrines. The chapter emphasizes the role of licensing and cumulative innovation.","PeriodicalId":223636,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual Property: Copyright Law eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131574345","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Imagining Things: Copyright for Useful Articles after Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands","authors":"Robert C. Denicola","doi":"10.5195/LAWREVIEW.2018.574","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/LAWREVIEW.2018.574","url":null,"abstract":"Imagining Things: Copyright for Useful Articles After Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands","PeriodicalId":223636,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual Property: Copyright Law eJournal","volume":"76 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127204256","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}