Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe role of online intermediaries in allowing third parties to perform legal as well as illegal activities and the growing economic power of such intermediaries are profoundly challenging the legal framework established 20 years ago with the European Union e-Commerce Directive. European courts first, and legislatures more recently, have taken a position regarding the need for further regulation of online intermediaries. The new liability rules for copyright infringement are just an example of a more general tendency to charge intermediaries with responsibility. This tendency goes beyond the realm of intellectual property and includes consumer law, antitrust and competition law. The forthcoming EU Digital Services Act aims to revise the regulation of online intermediaries by means of new rules framing the responsibilities of digital services and online platforms' market behaviour.In this context there is no doubt that the current scenario requires modern rules. However, it is licit to ask whether and how European institutions are considering the collateral effects of the above-mentioned tendency. It is also not clear how the basic principles underpinning the e-Commerce Directive – and, in particular, freedom of expression – will be assured in a new legal framework where online intermediaries may not enjoy the safe harbours originally laid down in the e-Commerce Directive.

The role of online intermediaries in allowing third parties to perform legal as well as illegal activities and the growing economic power of such intermediaries are profoundly challenging the legal framework established 20 years ago with the European Union e-Commerce Directive. European courts first, and legislatures more recently, have taken a position regarding the need for further regulation of online intermediaries. The new liability rules for copyright infringement are just an example of a more general tendency to charge intermediaries with responsibility. This tendency goes beyond the realm of intellectual property and includes consumer law, antitrust and competition law. The forthcoming EU Digital Services Act aims to revise the regulation of online intermediaries by means of new rules framing the responsibilities of digital services and online platforms' market behaviour. In this context there is no doubt that the current scenario requires modern rules. However, it is licit to ask whether and how European institutions are considering the collateral effects of the above-mentioned tendency. It is also not clear how the basic principles underpinning the e-Commerce Directive – and, in particular, freedom of expression – will be assured in a new legal framework where online intermediaries may not enjoy the safe harbours originally laid down in the e-Commerce Directive.

Open Access' main goal is not the subversion of publishers' role as driving actors in an oligopolistic market characterised by reduced competition and higher prices. OA's main function is to be found somewhere else, namely in the ability to subvert the power to control science's governance and its future directions (Open Science), a power that is more often found within the academic institutions rather than outside. By decentralising and opening-up not just the way in which scholarship is published but also the way in which it is assessed, OA removes the barriers that helped turn science into an intellectual oligopoly even before an economic one. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate that Open Access is a key enabler of Open Science, which in turn will lead to a more Open Society. Furthermore, the paper argues that while legislative interventions play an important role in the top-down regulation of Open Access, legislators currently lack an informed and systematic vision on the role of Open Access in science and society. In this historical phase, other complementary forms of intervention (bottom-up) appear much more "informed" and effective. This paper, which intends to set the stage for future research, identifies a few pieces of the puzzle: the relationship between formal and informal norms in the field of Open Science and how these impact on intellectual property rights, the protection of personal data, the assessment of science and the technology employed for the communication of science. ; Trento LawTech Research Paper nr. 27

Open Access' main goal is not the subversion of publishers' role as driving actors in an oligopolistic market characterized by reduced competition and higher prices. OA's main function is to be found somewhere else, namely in the ability to subvert the power to control science's governance and its future directions (Open Science), a power that is more often found within the academic institutions rather than outside. By decentralizing and opening-up not just the way in which scholarship is published but also the way in which it is assessed, OA removes the barriers that helped turn science into an intellectual oligopoly even before an economic one. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate that Open Access is a key enabler of Open Science, which in turn will lead to a more Open Society. Furthermore, the paper argues that while legislative interventions play an important role in the top-down regulation of Open Access, legislators currently lack an informed and systematic vision on the role of Open Access in science and society. In this historical phase, other complementary forms of intervention (bottom-up) appear much more "informed" and effective. This paper, which intends to set the stage for future research, identifies a few pieces of the puzzle: the relationship between formal and informal norms in the field of Open Science and how this impact on intellectual property rights, the protection of personal data, the assessment of science and the technology employed for the communication of science.

Open Access' main goal is not the subversion of publishers' role as driving actors in an oligopolistic market characterised by reduced competition and higher prices. OA's main function is to be found somewhere else, namely in the ability to subvert the power to control science's governance and its future directions (Open Science), a power that is more often found within the academic institutions rather than outside. By decentralising and opening-up not just the way in which scholarship is published but also the way in which it is assessed, OA removes the barriers that helped turn science into an intellectual oligopoly even before an economic one. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate that Open Access is a key enabler of Open Science, which in turn will lead to a more Open Society. Furthermore, the paper argues that while legislative interventions play an important role in the top-down regulation of Open Access, legislators currently lack an informed and systematic vision on the role of Open Access in science and society. In this historical phase, other complementary forms of intervention (bottom-up) appear much more "informed" and effective. This paper, which intends to set the stage for future research, identifies a few pieces of the puzzle: the relationship between formal and informal norms in the field of Open Science and how these impact on intellectual property rights, the protection of personal data, the assessment of science and the technology employed for the communication of science.

Article 13 of the Proposed EU Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market and the accompanying Recital 38 are amongst the most controversial parts of the European Commission's copyright reform package. Several Members States (Belgium, the Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary, Ireland, the Netherlands and Germany) have submitted questions seeking clarification on aspects that are essential to the guarantee of fundamental rights in the EU and to the future of the Internet as an open communication medium. The following analysis discusses these questions in the light of the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union. It offers guidelines and background information for the improvement of the proposed new legislation.