Suchergebnisse

AbstractOver the years, there has been an increasing interest in cultural heritage, particularly within the digital context. This has brought to light numerous opportunities and challenges that however require a careful consideration of fundamental rights, such as the public's entitlement to participation in cultural life, i.e. the right to culture. Preserving the communal aspect of cultural heritage is pivotal in unlocking the full potential of the right to engage in cultural activities. Within the intricate landscape of norms and policies encompassing diverse and often competing interests, the primary focus of this analysis is on the copyright acquis, which may be optimised for the public's enjoyment of digital culture. This article aims to establish connections between two EU copyright provisions: the Freedom of Panorama (FoP), a discretionary exception under Art. 5(3)(h) of the Directive on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (InfoSoc), allowing the reproduction of cultural goods visible from public places, and the reproduction of visual artworks in the public domain under Art. 14 of the Directive on copyright in the digital single market (CDSMD). Through a comparative analysis of how certain Member States have implemented these provisions, this article proposes potential paths for a balanced and thoughtful assessment of the interests related to digital cultural heritage that should lead to advancing the right to culture. While it would be wise to consider a supra-national legislative intervention that mandates the FoP exception, Member States should at the same time uphold the scope of Art. 14 of CDSMD, especially when it might be pre-empted by other regulations, such as those governing cultural heritage. By examining the foundations of these two provisions and seeking their nuanced interpretation, the authors anticipate the coexistence of a vital component of the EU right to culture, while acknowledging that the journey toward its comprehensive realization is far from over.

The Green route to Open Access (OA), meaning the re-publication in OA venues of previously published works, can essentially be executed by contract and by copyright law. In theory, rights retention and contracts may allow authors to re-publish and communicate their works to the public, by means of license to publish agreements or specific addenda to copyright transfer agreements. But as a matter of fact, because authors lack bargaining power, they usually transfer all economic copyrights to publishers. Legislation, which overcomes the constraints of a contractual scheme where authors usually have less bargaining power, may deliver a (digital) second publication or communication right, which this paper discusses in the context of research publications. Outlining the historical and philosophical roots of the secondary publication right, the paper provocatively suggests that it has a "moral" nature that even makes it a shield for academic freedom as well as a major step forward in the overall development of OA. ; EU project ReCreating Europe—Rethinking digital copyright law for a culturally diverse, accessible, creative Europe (Grant Agreement No. 870626). Europen Intellectual Propery Review. Forthcoming

The intersection of copyright and design is problematic. Despite the attempt of harmonization at EU level, national applications of EU principles appear confused and contradictory. This paper will focus on the Italian legal system, although there will be short references to the United Kingdom, where the harmonizing grip of the European Court of Justice unfolds - or at least has unfolded prior to Brexit - emblematically. After a first illustration of the Italian legislation on the protection of industrial design, which will examine in detail the difficulties related to the intersection of copyright and other forms of protection, we will focus on the conflictual meaning and scope of the criterion of artistic value against the interpretation of the originality threshold for copyright protection suggested by the European Court of Justice. The second part of the essay is dedicated to the analysis of related case law, which offers further and specific food for thought that flows into the final paragraph. ; in corso di pubblicazione in pubblicazione in B. Pasa (ed.), Design, innovazione tecnologica e digitale. Proposta interdi-sciplinare per ripensare le tutele / Design, technological and digital innovation. Interdisci-plinary proposals for reshaping legal protections, ESI Napoli, 2020.

The intersection of copyright and design is problematic. Despite the attempt of harmonization at EU level, national applications of EU principles appear confused and contradictory. This paper will focus on the Italian legal system, although there will be short references to the United Kingdom, where the harmonizing grip of the European Court of Justice unfolds - or at least has unfolded prior to Brexit - emblematically. After a first illustration of the Italian legislation on the protection of industrial design, which will examine in detail the difficulties related to the intersection of copyright and other forms of protection, we will focus on the conflictual meaning and scope of the criterion of artistic value against the interpretation of the originality threshold for copyright protection suggested by the European Court of Justice. The second part of the essay is dedicated to the analysis of related case law, which offers further and specific food for thought that flows into the final paragraph. ; in corso di pubblicazione in pubblicazione in B. Pasa (ed.), Design, innovazione tecnologica e digitale. Proposta interdi-sciplinare per ripensare le tutele / Design, technological and digital innovation. Interdisci-plinary proposals for reshaping legal protections, ESI Napoli, 2021.

The intersection of copyright and design is problematic. Despite the attempt of harmonization at EU level, national applications of EU principles appear confused and contradictory. This paper will focus on the Italian legal system, although there will be short references to the United Kingdom, where the harmonizing grip of the European Court of Justice unfolds - or at least has unfolded prior to Brexit - emblematically. After a first illustration of the Italian legislation on the protection of industrial design, which will examine in detail the difficulties related to the intersection of copyright and other forms of protection, we will focus on the conflictual meaning and scope of the criterion of artistic value against the interpretation of the originality threshold for copyright protection suggested by the European Court of Justice. The second part of the essay is dedicated to the analysis of related case law, which offers further and specific food for thought that flows into the final paragraph. ; in corso di pubblicazione in pubblicazione in B. Pasa (ed.), Design, innovazione tecnologica e digitale. Proposta interdi-sciplinare per ripensare le tutele / Design, technological and digital innovation. Interdisci-plinary proposals for reshaping legal protections, ESI Napoli, 2020.

The intersection of copyright and design is problematic. Despite the attempt of harmonization at EU level, national applications of EU principles appear confused and contradictory. This paper will focus on the Italian legal system, although there will be short references to the United Kingdom, where the harmonizing grip of the European Court of Justice unfolds - or at least has unfolded prior to Brexit - emblematically. After a first illustration of the Italian legislation on the protection of industrial design, which will examine in detail the difficulties related to the intersection of copyright and other forms of protection, we will focus on the conflictual meaning and scope of the criterion of artistic value against the interpretation of the originality threshold for copyright protection suggested by the European Court of Justice. The second part of the essay is dedicated to the analysis of related case law, which offers further and specific food for thought that flows into the final paragraph. ; in corso di pubblicazione in pubblicazione in B. Pasa (ed.), Design, innovazione tecnologica e digitale. Proposta interdi-sciplinare per ripensare le tutele / Design, technological and digital innovation. Interdisci-plinary proposals for reshaping legal protections, ESI Napoli, 2020.

ReCreating Europe (Rethinking digital copyright law for a culturally diverse, accessible, creative Europe) is an EU-funded H2020 RIA project (Grant Agreement No. 870626) that aims at bringing researchers, experts, policymakers and stakeholders together to clarify what is needed for a copyright regulatory framework that supports sustainable digitisation, culturally diverse production, inclusive access and consumption of digital resources. By conducting research and empirical research, reCreating Europe provides a comparative cross-national mapping of (i) the governance and implementation of processes for IPR within Galleries, Libraries, Museums and Archives (GLAM); (ii) the effective implementation of copyright law by GLAM, considering sector-specific practices, with regard to digitisation-related issues and Open Access to Knowledge. The project also aims to understand the effect and uses of the digitization of art, architecture and cultural heritage in place-making, and the effect of this on the functioning of the DSM. Work is undertaken with stakeholders to improve their copyright awareness and help them to deal with issues arising from digitisation, by drafting specific guidelines. By doing so, it enables a higher degree of harmonization of current EU copyright law and policies by means of a bottom-up approach, where stakeholders play a leading role. In support of realising these aims, reCreating Europe launched a survey from September 2020 until January 2021, focused on mapping and determining whether Galleries Libraries Archives Museums (GLAMs) are aware of the implications that copyright law and open policies have on the digitisation practices undertaken by GLAM stakeholders, also determining to what extent the law functions as a barrier to access, use and reuse of digital content and suggesting the possible countermeasures. The survey was open to public and it was widely circulated in Europe. The results of the survey will be analysed and used to help recommending best practices and policies that enable ...

ReCreating Europe (Rethinking digital copyright law for a culturally diverse, accessible, creative Europe) is an EU-funded H2020 RIA project (Grant Agreement No. 870626) that aims at bringing researchers, experts, policymakers and stakeholders together to clarify what is needed for a copyright regulatory framework that supports sustainable digitisation, culturally diverse production, inclusive access and consumption of digital resources. By conducting research and empirical research, reCreating Europe provides a comparative cross-national mapping of (i) the governance and implementation of processes for IPR within Galleries, Libraries, Museums and Archives (GLAM); (ii) the effective implementation of copyright law by GLAM, considering sector-specific practices, with regard to digitisation-related issues and Open Access to Knowledge. The project also aims to understand the effect and uses of the digitization of art, architecture and cultural heritage in place-making, and the effect of this on the functioning of the DSM. Work is undertaken with stakeholders to improve their copyright awareness and help them to deal with issues arising from digitisation, by drafting specific guidelines. By doing so, it enables a higher degree of harmonization of current EU copyright law and policies by means of a bottom-up approach, where stakeholders play a leading role. In support of realising these aims, reCreating Europe launched a survey from September 2020 until January 2021, focused on mapping and determining whether Galleries Libraries Archives Museums (GLAMs) are aware of the implications that copyright law and open policies have on the digitisation practices undertaken by GLAM stakeholders, also determining to what extent the law functions as a barrier to access, use and reuse of digital content and suggesting the possible countermeasures. The survey was open to public and it was widely circulated in Europe. The results of the survey will be analysed and used to help recommending best practices and policies that enable ...

With a specific focus on cultural heritage institutions like galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (GLAMs), the activities of WP5 address precisely the needs of such organisations through a mixed methodology that combines theoretical research with empirical analysis, e.g., online questionnaires and semi-structured interviews, which most WP5 deliverables have or will be based on. The present output, which comprises a descriptive analysis of the legal framework (part 2), a set of Frequently Asked Questions (part 3) and Guidelines (part 4), all focusing on digital preservation, use of orphan works and use of out-of-commerce works, precisely follows this approach. The work builds upon preceding deliverables D5.1 Report on the existing legal framework for Galleries and Museums (GM) in EU1 and D5.2 Report on the existing legal framework for Libraries and Archives (LA) in the EU. 2 Both these reports were produced based on the research carried out under T5.1 European Legal Framework for GLAM industries: from closure to Openness. The goal of this deliverable is to produce a first draft of Guidelines and FAQs to help GLAMs deal with some selected issues arising from digitisation. The draft which will be circulated during the upcoming workshops organised under WP5, in which participants will be invited to discuss the FAQs and apply the guidelines to suggest (a) whether different and/or clearer rules (i.e. considering laws and policies) may facilitate the process of dealing with the identified controversial issues, and (b) whether the current legal framework is too strict to comply with, and thus possibly hindering GLAM's mission of democratising culture. The present deliverable also mirrors - to the extent possible - its twin deliverable D5.4 Guidelines & FAQs (LA) industries - Interim version, 3 which was dedicated to Libraries and Archives, under T5.2 Implementation of legal requirements and criteria for openness. Both D5.3 and D5.4 are designed to serve as instruments (thus their temporary nature) for further ...

Focusing on the Green Road, this workshop took place (online) on 9th December 2021. The speakers presented and discussed the second (or secondary) publication right within the context of scientific publications as a key instrument to implementing Open Access (OA). Legislative models were presented from across Europe; including Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, France and Belgium. In addition, the following questions were covered during the discussion: - How should the notion of "publicly funded research" be interpreted and how the extent of public funding should be calculated when complying with relevant indications (usually percentage of public funding is indicated as 50% or more)? This seems important to understand how to deal with the circumstance that research is financed with contributions from the private sector or charities. - How laws granting secondary publishing rights should be applicable across different Member States in EU when not all of them do not have specific provisions on secondary publishing rights? What are the relevant elements (e.g. establishment of the author or of the publisher, etc.) to determine which law on secondary publishing should be applicable? - What is the approach of Universities concerning secondary publishing right on works produced by members of their staff, for instance in their regulations, contracts, etc.? - How CC licenses can be applied in the context of secondary publishing? - How the LIBER model law for secondary publishing could find practical application? - What is the status of art in other countries which the present workshop did not cover, as for instance UK and Ireland? This workshop is co-organised with members of the reCreating Europe project and LIBER. This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 870626.