publish or perish
TRANSCRIPT
Evi Werkers (ICRI) and Sari Depreeuw (LSTS)
“Innovation Journalism: Copyright and the Use of Creative Commons”-Conference
European Journalism Centre & Stanford Center for Innovations in Learning
Maastricht (NL) - 13 November 2008
Publish or perish. Is the publishers' indignation
selective?
Agenda
• Introduction to FLEET
• Publishers in dubio
• The Belgian “Google”-case
• What’s at stake?
• Current developments
Introduction
• New ways to access and influence creative content available on the worldwide network
• Digital convergence urges publishers to seek new business models
• Several legal issues arise:- copyright protection v. rights of users- media law implications- liability issuesetc.
Multidisciplinary Research Consortium
• LSTS - VUB: Drs. S. Depreeuw, Prof. Dr. F. Brison, Prof. Dr. S. Guthwirth ;
• ICRI - KULeuven: Drs. E. Werkers, Prof. Dr. P. Valcke ; • IBBT/SMIT-VUB: Drs. I. Picone, Prof. Dr. C. Pauwels ;• CEMESO - VUB: Drs. D. Geens, Prof. Dr. K. Vanden Brande,• Econ/MOFI - VUB: Drs. V.A. Bleyen, Prof. Dr. L. Van Hove,• CUO - KULeuven: Drs. J. De Boever, Prof. Dr. D. De Grooff,• MICT - Ugent: Dr. S. Paulussen, Prof. Dr. K. Raeymaekers• Infonomics ECDC: Drs. J. Bierhoff, drs. S. Spek• TNO ICT, subcontractor to IBBT SMIT, L. Pennings & M.
Leendertse
FLEET Research
• FLEmish E-publishing Trends• IWT (Institute for Science and technology)• Project with social relevance (SB0), 4 years• Legal, economic, sociological aspects• Research objectives
1. Production / publishing perspective2. Content generating perspective3. User perspective4. Transversal issues
FLEET Research
Legal Research:• Copyright implications• Media law and liability implicationsValorisation:• Trendflagging document• SOTA e-publisher, e-journalist and e-user (soon
publicly available)• Legal vademecums for three target groups (following
in-depth interviews)• Publications & PapersMore information: http://www.fleetproject.be
Agenda
• Introduction to FLEET
• Publishers in dubio
• The Belgian “Google”-case
• What’s at stake?
• Current developments
Publishers in dubio
• Newspapers: – Full, free access
• E.g. New York Times • E.g. Guardian Online - full articles via RSS• E.g. De Redactie (VRT)
– Restricted access, with controlled sharing features
• E.g. The Economist• E.g. De Standaard
Some want to share
Some want to share
Some want to share some
Some want to share some
QuickTimeª and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
QuickTimeª and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressorare needed to see this picture.???
Some don’t
Agenda
• Introduction to FLEET
• Publishers in dubio
• The Belgian “Google”-case
• What’s at stake?
• Current developments
The Belgian Google-case
• Parties– Copiepresse, SAJ/JAM, Assucopie– Google Inc. (USA)
• Claims/problems?– Google News: title, snippet, link,
photo, classification in themes– Google Search: cache
Google News: the look
PhotoTitle
Snippet
Deeplinks
Other sources
A mere application of the existing legal framework
• European Copyright?• Copyright protected works• Infringed economic rights• No exceptions applicable• Infringed moral rights• No authorisation from
copyrightholders
“European” copyright?
• International treaties• European instruments• Member States’ copyright
legislation
International treaties
Main instruments:• Berne Convention (BC) 1886 (1971)
[and Rome Convention 1961]• WIPO Copyright Treaty, WCT 1996
[and WIPO Performers and Phonograms Treaty, WPPT 1996]
• GATT TRIPS 1994 (WTO)
European Framework• Computer Program Directive 91/250• Rental and Lending and Related
Rights Directive 92/100 repealed by Directive 2006/115
• Satellite and Cable Directive 93/83• Term Directive 93/98 – repealed by
Directive 2006/116• Database Directive 96/9• Information Society Directive 2001/29• Resale Directive 2001/84• Enforcement Directive 2004/48• Customs Regulation 1383/2003
A mere application of the existing legal framework
• European Copyright?• Copyright protected works• Infringed economic rights• No exceptions applicable• Infringed moral rights• No authorisation from
copyrightholders
Protected “Works”• Scope of application
– Work of “literature or art”, including scientific works
• Conditions for protection:– Formal expression– Originality
(size doesn’t matter, as a rule…)• E.g.:
– Scientific and press articles– Titles (some descriptive, some original, cfr. slogans)– Photos, graphics, logo,...– Lay-out,…
A mere application of the existing legal framework
• Copyright protected works• Infringed economic rights• No exceptions applicable• Infringed moral rights• No authorisation from
copyrightholders
Economic rights
• Exclusive rights– Art. 2-4 Dir. 2001/29– Reproduction– Communication to the public,
incl. making available to the public– Distribution
Infringed economic rights• Reproduction
– 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”
– Applied to Google News• Titles, snippets• Hyperlinking?
(was not challenged before Brussels court)
Infringed economic rights• Communication to the public
– 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
• Applied to Google News: – Titles, snippets, pictures readily accessible– No access to articles in cache
[only hyperlink to original webpage]
A mere application of the existing legal framework
• Copyright protected works• Infringed economic rights• No exceptions applicable• Infringed moral rights• No authorisation from copyright
holders
Exceptions
• Statutory exceptions– Closed list > InfoSoc Dir– Restrictive interpretation– Subject to “3 steps”-test
• Not applicable in case at hand– Temporary acts of reproduction– Quotations– Reporting on current events
Temporary acts of reproduction
• Conditions– Transient or incidental– Integral and essential part of a technological
process– With the sole purpose to enable:
• Transmission in a network between 3rd parties by an intermediary or
• Lawful use
– No independent economic significance• Applied to Google News
– Integral part of technological process (yes)– But other purpose: search service + news
aggregation service (no)
Quotation
• Conditions– Work lawfully made available– Excerpt– Well-defined purposes: criticism, debate, review,
education, science– In line with fair business practices– Mention of source and author
• Applied to Google News– No analysis, no opinion, no reasoning, no
comment, no comparison, no review,... (no)• Automated processing - no human intervention • Only classification in themes• Reproduction > accessory
Reporting on current events
• Conditions– Work lawfully made available– Excerpt– Information of the public– In a report on current events– Mention of source and author
• Applied to Google News – Information of the public (yes)– But no reporting on current events
• No comment, no analysis• Reproduction > accessory
– And <=> ratio legis
“External” limitations
• Freedom of expression– Already built-in in exceptions
• Abuse of rights– Legitimate exercise of copyright– Not compared to acquisition of
consent– But compared to cease infringement
A mere application of the existing legal framework
• Copyright protected works• Infringed economic rights• No exceptions applicable• Infringed moral rights• No authorisation from copyright
holders
Moral rights
• Moral rights– No European harmonisation– Art. 6bis BC
• Right to claim authorship• Right to integrity
– Distortion, mutilation or modification– Prejudice to honour or reputation
– Belgian copyright law• Divulgation• Paternity• Integrity
Moral rights in Google News
-
(Other/without) editorial / philosophical line
Author
Snippet
Divulgation right
• Right to make available to the public– First publication, then exhaustion
• Applied to Google News– Prior publication – => no infringement
Paternity right
• Author can– Claim authorship– Anonymity, pseudonym
• Applied to Google News – Mention of source– But no mention of author’s name
Integrity right• Right of respect for the protected work
– Oppose any modification• Work• Context
– Even if no prejudice to honour or reputation
• Applied to Google News– Snippets– Selection and classification by theme
• Irrespective of source of articles• Possible change of editorial or philosophical
context
A mere application of the existing legal framework
• Copyright protected works• Infringed economic rights• No exceptions applicable• Infringed moral rights• No authorisation from
copyright holders
No authorisation from copyright holders
• Copyright = exclusive right– Not merely right to oppose– Right to refuse– Prior authorisation required– No opt-out, no reservation of rights
• Notwithstanding existence of technical parameters – robots.txt, meta tags– No obligation for copyright holder
Agenda
• Introduction to FLEET
• Publishers in dubio
• The Belgian “Google”-case
• What’s at stake?
• Current developments
Interests at stake
• Authors and derived © holders (publishers) => control over works (and revenues)
• Public => access to information
• Intermediaries– Search engines– Content aggregators => new business models
Works at stake• 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)
• Particular character of subject matter– Information? – News?– Article?– Title?– Keywords?– Synopsis?– <=> Ideas? Originality?
Exploitation rights at stake
• Broad - too broad?– Also partial reproduction;
no quantitative criterion– Regardless of commercial purpose
• E.g. non-commercial blog
– Regardless of nature of activity• Competing activity?
Exceptions at stake• Limitative list in Act - no “fair use” - too
restrictive?• 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.– Not maintained in Copyright Act 1994!
• 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.– Not implemented in Belgian law in 2005!
On line use at stake• Automated processing: identification of
protected content?• Cascade of authorisations: overlap
reproduction/communication to the public?• Distinction portal/search engine?• Hyperlinking subject to copyright?
– Deeplink? Inline link?– Other protection?
• Expression of consent– Opt-out rule?– Robots.txt, meta tags, ACAP
Agenda
• Introduction to FLEET
• Publishers in dubio
• The Belgian “Google”-case
• What’s at stake?
• Current developments
Current developments
• Drop opt-out
• ACAP
• Nieuws.be
• 24.be
European Policy
• Study on “Interactive Content and Convergence: Implications for the information Society”→ Although the market is growing steadily, legal, economic and technological challenges need to be addressed for Europe to have faster market uptake
• Communication European Commission on Creative Content Online in the Single Market (03/01/2008)
• Communication on future networks and the Internet. Early challenges regarding the “Internet of things” (29/09/2008)(+ public consultation)
Communication CCO
Four horizontal challenges• Increase availability of creative content • Multi-territory licensing for creative content • Interoperability and transparency of Digital
Rights Management systems (DRMs) • Legal offers and piracy + content online platform
The Internet of Things”: web 3.0.
• Web 3.0.= seamless, anytime, anywhere business, entertainment and social networking over fast, reliable and secure networks
• Remedies:1) Self-/co-regulatory agreements2) promote digital business models3) enforce legal certainty rights and obligations4) promotion legal offers online5) reinforcement consumers’ rights6) fight against online piracy
(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
Conclusion
• Traditional versus innovative offer• Solution:
- Digital business models- Legal offers online (licence +
technology)- Restore balance publishers – users= the way forward