DOCSLIB.ORG

International Survey on Private Copying

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
International Survey on Private Copying International Survey on Private Copying For more information contact WIPO at www.wipo.int World Intellectual Property Organization Law & Practice 2015 34, chemin des Colombettes P.O. Box 18 CH-1211 Geneva 20 Switzerland Telephone: +4122 338 91 11 Fax: +4122 733 54 28 WIPO Publication No. 1037E/16 ISBN 978-92-805-2707-0 Acknowledgement and thanks for front cover illustrations Acknowledgement and thanks for front right image courtesy of Carlos Porto at FreeDigitalPhotos.net Top image courtesy of Stuart Miles at FreeDigitalPhotos.net centre Top right image courtesy of tungphoto at FreeDigitalPhotos.net Top Lower left Image courtesy of stockimages at FreeDigitalPhotos.net image courtesy of xedos4 at FreeDigitalPhotos.net Lowewr centre Lower right image courtesy of watcharakun at FreeDigitalPhotos.net International Survey on Private Copying Law & Practice 2015 International Survey on Private Copying Law & Practice 2015 International Survey on Private Copying Law & Practice 2015 Table of Contents PREFACE 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 1. Introduction 3 2. Methodology and Scope 3 3. Legal background for private copying remuneration 4 4. Practical implementation of compensation systems 7 5. Liability 10 6. Collection and distribution 11 7. Revenue trends 13 8. Conclusion 22 9. Annex 24 1. AUSTRIA 30 2. BELGIUM 37 3. BURKINA FASO 44 4. CANADA 46 5. CROATIA 51 6. CZECH REPUBLIC 56 7. DENMARK 60 8. ESTONIA 64 9. FINLAND 68 10. FRANCE 74 11. GERMANY 81 12. GREECE 85 13. HUNGARY 90 14. ITALY 97 15. JAPAN 103 International Survey on Private Copying 16. LATVIA 109 17. LITHUANIA 112 18. NETHERLANDS 118 19. NORWAY 123 Law & Practice 2015 20. PARAGUAY 125 21. POLAND 128 22. PORTUGAL 133 23. ROMANIA 137 24. RUSSIA 141 1 25. SLOVAK REPUBLIC 144 26. SLOVENIA 147 27. SPAIN 150 28. SWEDEN 152 29. SWITZERLAND 156 30. TURKEY 162 31. UKRAINE 164 32. UNITED STATES 166 PREFACE The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the Dutch collecting society for private copying remunerations, Stichting de Thuiskopie, are pleased to present the third joint publication on the law and practice of private copying systems around the world. The survey provides a global view of private copying compensation (also known as private copying levies), an important element of copyright and related rights infrastructure. It aims to facilitate evidence-based decision-making and to provide an update on important developments in the private copying law and practice of countries that have such an exception in their legal arsenals. Stichting de Thuiskopie started collecting legal and practical information about private copying remuneration in neighboring countries in 1991. The survey quickly expanded to include all European countries with a levy system in place. Over the years, the scope has been expanded to embrace countries outside of Europe. This 24th edition covers countries on almost all continents, and includes information on Slovenia, the United Kingdom and Nigeria for the first time. The task of compiling this report was entrusted to Stichting de Thuiskopie (specifically, to Hester Wijminga and Wouter Klomp). Valuable project advice and analysis were provided by a steering committee consisting of Dr. Joost Poort of the Institute for Information Law (IVIR) and Marije van der Jagt, LL.M, legal advisor for Thuiskopie, as well as by representatives of WIPO. The production of this rich and varied collection of data would not have been possible without the support of private copying collecting societies.1 The authors are grateful to all these societies for their cooperation and their efforts to improve insight into global private copying compensation systems. The survey demonstrates the importance of this source of income for all rightholders. It is hoped that the survey will be as useful as it has been in previous years as a reference for negotiations on levies, in background reports of the European Commission, in studies of rightholders and users’ organizations alike and in the policy papers of governmental bodies. The publication provides transparent information on the administration of the levy system with regard to authors, performing artists, producers, publishers, users of copyright works, manufacturers, importers and other stakeholders. This 2015 edition of the survey contains information about levy systems and legal developments up until October 2015 as well as revenue data until 2014. It is hoped that this survey will be of interest to governments, rightholders and users and will provide a valuable source of information for policy and research. International Survey on Private Copying Law & Practice 2015 2 1 The survey contains the contact information of all the participating collecting societies. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. Introduction This survey is the 24th edition of a collection and analysis of key data on private copying compensation systems around the world. For the third consecutive year, it is the result of collaboration between the private copying collection body in the Netherlands, Stichting de Thuiskopie (Dutch Private Copying Collection Society), and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Previous editions were used as a reference in EU publications as well as by collecting societies and stakeholders in private copying. Physical copies have been distributed to all the participating collecting societies and to relevant research and academic institutions across the globe. The report is available on the websites of WIPO and Stichting de Thuiskopie. One hundred and fifty hard copies of the survey have been distributed, and it has been downloaded more than 39,000 times from the WIPO and Thuiskopie websites. The data compiled in the survey is exclusively provided by participating collecting societies, which are entrusted with the collection and distribution of private copying remuneration. The main objectives of the survey is to provide facts and figures regarding the function of private copying collection systems around the world and to afford insight into private copying exceptions in various legal systems, the trends in remuneration collected on behalf of rightholders and practices employed in collecting this important source of income for creators. The survey supports efforts to unify and possibly harmonize collection and distribution practices and helps to reduce the differences in the various systems that may distort regular market conditions. 2. Methodology and Scope 2.1 Research method The survey is an assembly of data delivered by collecting societies responsible for the administration of private copying compensation. The data was collected through an extensive questionnaire that covered all aspects of law and practice relevant to determining and collecting remuneration for the private use of protected works. The survey contains revenue data up to 2014 and information about levy systems and tariffs up to October 2015. Two years of revenue data have been added to the previous edition. Each year, the questionnaire is thoroughly reviewed and updated. Comments from participants and experience gained from processing the information provide insights into how the questionnaire can be improved and made more International Survey on Private Copying effective, which is reflected in subsequent studies. When necessary and appropriate, additional information and clarifications have been requested. Replies are compared with information submitted in response to earlier surveys in order to identify and address possible inconsistencies. Information regarding the population 2 and income per capita of participating countries is taken from World Bank data. Law & Practice 2015 2.2 Participating countries This edition covers information on private copying systems in 34 countries (32 chapters) across the world. For the first time, this edition contains information on the United Kingdom and Nigeria and a chapter on Slovenia. 3 Private copying compensation systems are most common in Europe. Information about levies in 22 (of 28) European Union countries is included in the survey, as is information on Norway, Switzerland, Russia and Turkey. Among EU member states, only Cyprus, Ireland, Luxembourg and Malta have no private copying exception. The United Kingdom introduced an exception in 2014 envisaging an accompanying remuneration for rightholders, however the legislation has been overturned in 2015. In a number of countries, there is no active system of collection, although a private copying exception has been provided for in law. This is true for Belarus, for example. In other countries, such as Bulgaria, the exception provided for has been amended, leaving virtually no leeway for collecting levies. Reasons for this vary: sometimes there is no collective management organization (CMO) that is authorized to fulfill these 2 http://data.worldbank.org/, data retrieved 21 September 2015. functions (as in Slovenia); at other times, debate about the system, legal proceedings or copyright reform has paralyzed collection and distribution. There have been many developments in private copying in the EU. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has demarcated boundaries and clarified many issues in the last couple of years. Copyright reform is a hot topic for the European Commission and systems are being adapted to the digital environment, leading some countries to abandon levy systems altogether and turn towards state-funded remuneration systems as a means of compensating rightholders for private copying. North America Compensation systems exist in Canada and the United
Load more

Recommended publications
  • International Survey on Private Copying
    International Survey on Private Copying For more information contact WIPO at www.wipo.int Law & Practice 2 012 World Intellectual Property Organization 34, chemin des Colombettes 2012 International Survey on Private Copying – Law & Practice P.O. Box 18 CH-1211 Geneva 20 Switzerland Telephone: +4122 338 91 11 Fax: +4122 733 54 28 WIPO Publication No. 1037E ISBN 978-92-805-2271-6 International Survey on Private Copying Law & Practice 2012 Acknowledgement and thanks for front cover illustrations (Image of headphones courtesy of: www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=2133&picture=headphones by Anna Langova and all other images courtesy of www.copyright-free-images.com) Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 1. REVENUES PER CAPITA 12 2. TARIFFS ON BLANK CARRIERS 13 3. TARIFFS ON DEVICES (ALL THE AMOUNTS IN THIS REPORT ARE IN EUROS [€].) 14 4. AUSTRIA 15 5. BELGIUM 20 6. BULGARIA 25 7. BURKINA FASO 30 8. CANADA 33 9. CROATIA 37 10. CZECH REPUBLIC 41 11. CZECH REPUBLIC 45 12. DENMARK 48 13. FINLAND 51 14. FRANCE 56 15. GERMANY 61 16. GREECE 65 17. HUNGARY 69 18. ITALY 74 19. JAPAN 80 20. LATVIA 86 21. LITHUANIA 90 22. NETHERLANDS 97 23. NORWAY 102 24. PARAGUAY 104 25. POLAND 107 26. PORTUGAL 112 International Survey on Private Copying 27. ROMANIA 114 28. RUSSIA 118 29. SLOVAKIA 121 Law & Practice 2012 30. SLOVENIA 124 31. SPAIN 127 32. SWEDEN 132 33. SWITZERLAND 136 34. TURKEY 141 1 35. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 144 Executive Summary 1. Introduction The present Survey represents a collection of key data on private copying compensation systems around the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Private Copyinc in the Digital Age: an Analysis of the Canadian Approach to Music
    RETHINKING PRIVATE COPYINC IN THE DIGITAL AGE: AN ANALYSIS OF THE CANADIAN APPROACH TO MUSIC BY John Davidson A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Laws Graduate Department of the Faculty of Law University of Toronto O By John Davidson 2001 National Library Bibliothèque nationale du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliogmphic Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395. rue Wellington mwa ON K1A ON4 OtlawaON K1AW canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allouwing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Cana&. to Biblothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute 9r seil reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of diis thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette îhèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/fïlm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fkom it Ni la thése ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. RETHINKING PRIVATE COPYING IN THE DIGITAL AGE: AN ANALYSIS OF THE CANADIAN APPROACH TO MUSIC John Davidson B.Comm. (U. Syd.), LL.B. (Hons.) (U. Syd.) Admitted to Practice Law in New South Wales, Australia Master of Laws Faculty of Law University of Toronto 200 1 ABSTRACT Digital technotogy and the Internet in particular have fundamentally altered the dynamics of private copying.
    [Show full text]
  • Private Copying and Fair Compensation: an Empirical Study of Copyright Levies in Europe
    Private Copying and Fair Compensation: An empirical study of copyright levies in Europe Martin Kretschmer Centre for Intellectual Property Policy & Management www.cippm.org.uk Bournemouth University [email protected] WIPO, 15 February 2012 EC levy definition (2006) A private copying levy is a form of indirect remuneration for right holders, based on the premise that some acts of private copying cannot be licensed for practical purposes by the relevant right holders. A copyright levy is typically attached to certain products (equipment or blank media) that can serve to reproduce audio, audio-visual and textual material such as music, films or books. Policy context ESRC Fellowship at UK IPO (2010/11) – UK: What position on EU wide regulation? – UK: Can a private copying exception be introduced without providing compensation? Limitations and exceptions – Are exceptions just a response to market failure? – What activities should be possible without permission? – If without permission, requirement to pay? Empirical approach: If we don’t know how a “regulated” market works, we can’t intervene. Levy history in the EU – 1965: Germany UrhG §53 – 2001: Info Soc Directive (“fair compensation”) – 2006: EC recommendation (almost) – October 2010: ECJ Padawan (“uniform interpretation”, “calculation based on harm”) – May 2011: EC announces “comprehensive legislative action” regarding private copying levies (+ “mediator”) – August 2011: UK commitment to introduce private copying exception without compensation (“Hargreaves”) – [Norway], Finland,
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Licensing Music Online: the Role of Collective Rights Organizations and the Effect of Territoriality, 25 J
    The John Marshall Journal of Information Technology & Privacy Law Volume 25 Issue 3 Journal of Computer & Information Law Article 1 - Summer 2008 Summer 2008 The Future of Licensing Music Online: The Role of Collective Rights Organizations and the Effect of Territoriality, 25 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 409 (2008) Neil Conley Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.uic.edu/jitpl Part of the Computer Law Commons, Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, Internet Law Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Neil Conley, The Future of Licensing Music Online: The Role of Collective Rights Organizations and the Effect of Territoriality, 25 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 409 (2008) https://repository.law.uic.edu/jitpl/vol25/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UIC Law Open Access Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in The John Marshall Journal of Information Technology & Privacy Law by an authorized administrator of UIC Law Open Access Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLES THE FUTURE OF LICENSING MUSIC ONLINE: THE ROLE OF COLLECTIVE RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS AND THE EFFECT OF TERRITORIALITY NEIL CONLEYt I. INTRODUCTION The right to control the performance of a creative work' represents for most songwriters and music publishers ("rights holders")2 their great- est source of income.3 However, the current licensing regime practiced t The author will receive his LL.M. in intellectual property law at the George Wash- ington University Law School in August of 2008. I would like to thank Ralph Oman, my professor, for his guidance, suggestions, and edits.
    [Show full text]
  • FEP Report of Activities 2011 - 2012 3 4 FEP Report of Activities 2011 - 2012 Foreword by Fergal Tobin, FEP President
    Report of Activities May 2011 – May 2012 Table of Content Table of Content Foreword by Fergal Tobin, FEP President . 5 DG Internal Market & Services . 25 25. Review of the Enforcement Directive27 FEP . 7 26. Effective Enforcement of copyright 28 28. Directive on orphan Works 30 FEP Meets 29. out-of-commerce Dialogue 31 FEP in Brussels and in Europe 30. viP stakeholders Dialogue 32 FEP Networks 31. collective Management 33 FEP statistics 32. Levies 34 DG Culture & Education . 9 DG Justice . 33 9. Multilingualism 33. Data protection 35 10. European cultural platforms Green Paper on 35. Brussels i Regulation cultural industries 11. European Union Prize for Literature 12. High level expert group on literacy DG Home Affairs . 36 36. Data retention DG Entreprise . 13 13. Toy Safety DG Research & Innovation . 38 DG Environment . 15 DG Taxation . 39 15. Eco-label 16. Obligations of operators who place timber and 39. Reduced rates of vAt timber products on the market 41. vAt on books in the member countries DG Health & Consumers . 17 DG Trade . 42 17. Review of the consumer Acquis 42. Anti-counterfeiting trade Agreement (ACTA) 43. External EU actions against piracy and counterfeiting DG Information Society & Media. 19 19. task force for the coordination of the Media The Publications Office of the European Union 20. European Digital Library - Europeana (publications office) . 45 21. ARROW – ARROW + 22. Revision of the directive 2003/98/Ec on the re- use of public sector information 24 23. Net Neutrality 25 FEP REPoRt oF ActivitiEs 2011 - 2012 3 4 FEP REPoRt oF ActivitiEs 2011 - 2012 Foreword by Fergal Tobin, FEP President Ebook, epublishing, elibraries, ebookshops… if the word of them are developing digital works, innovative tools to that defines you does not start with an e, you are pretty access them, tailor-made licences for all types of users.
    [Show full text]
  • OPPORTUNITIES of EU-LEVEL ADMINISTRATION of PRIVATE COPYING LEVIES Natasha Mangal*
    Conference Draft – Do Not Distribute OPPORTUNITIES OF EU-LEVEL ADMINISTRATION OF PRIVATE COPYING LEVIES Natasha Mangal* ABSTRACT The foundation of the private copying levy is eroding. What was once a remuneration-based “reward” has transitioned into a compensation-based payment linked to the notion of rightholder “harm,” resulting in a wide range of levy applications, calculations and distribution schemes among EU Member States. This administrative fragmentation is further compounded by new online business models, as streaming and cloud storage services forego the need to create private copies altogether. Yet in spite of this, the levy remains as relevant as ever: as an unwaivable contractual mechanism, it serves as a stable source of income for EU rightholders with limited bargaining power, and accounts for millions of Euros reinvested back into the creative economy. In the continued absence of an adequate technological means to track the private copying practices of users, it seems that the levy may provide an even longer-term solution than anticipated – what is still needed, then, is a means by which levy administration can be optimized for the digital era. This paper will examine and critique one approach to improving the function of the private copying levy in EU Member States: administrative intervention at the EU- level. Part I will first identify theoretical and technological shifts that challenge the current existence of the levy. After these issues are addressed, Part II will assess the feasibility of an EU-level institutional approach by addressing regulatory gaps in three distinct areas: tariff setting, collection and distribution and technological monitoring. This paper will ultimately propose recommendations for improving the administration of the levy among EU Member States.
    [Show full text]
  • English and Collections Stream
    ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Content President’s foreword by Jean-Michel Jarre CISAC is a unique “united nations” of creators 02 Foreword by Eric Baptiste Pushing for a creators-centric agenda 03 Introduction by Gadi Oron Building a better future for creators of all repertoires 04 CISAC Vice Presidents Champions for creators’ rights internationally 06 Key data The world of CISAC in numbers 08 Key figures 09 CISAC work programme in review 10 Special features Pingyao International Film Festival 29 UNESCO & CISAC team up on transfer of value 30 Algiers Creators Conference 31 CISAC structure and committees CISAC key services CISAC’s structure and committees Transfer of value campaign 32 at a glance 46 Bringing fairness to authors Education in the digital world Public education and raising awareness 48 Audiovisual campaign 34 Creators Councils Fair remuneration for film directors and screenwriter CIAM: Extending international influence 49 Resale right campaign 36 W&DW: New leadership, new frontiers 50 Fair royalties for visual artists CIAGP: Action and transition at the top 51 Private copying campaign 38 Regional Reports A key collections source for creators Asia Pacific 52 Technology and innovation 40 Africa 54 Developing effective data Latin America & the Caribbean 56 management tools Canada/USA 58 Governance 42 Europe 60 Strengthening collective management worldwide CISAC Members 62 Management team and Board 64 Publications 44 Authority, information, awareness Credits 65 CISAC ANNUAL REPORT # 2018 / 1 President’s foreword by Jean-Michel Jarre CISAC is a unique “united nations” of creators As the “United Nations” of creators, CISAC has a unique voice – one which speaks for the whole world, for five repertoires and for four million creators.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary Italy's Economy, the Ninth-Largest in the World, Is Fully
    Executive Summary Italy’s economy, the ninth-largest in the world, is fully diversified, but dominated by small and medium-sized firms (SMEs), which comprise 99.9 percent of Italian businesses. Italy is an original member of the 18-nation Eurozone. Germany, France, the United States, Spain, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom are Italy's most important trading partners, with China continuing to gain ground. Tourism is an important source of external revenue, as are exports of engineering products, mechanical machinery, and textiles/fashion. Italy continues to lag behind many industrialized nations as a recipient of direct foreign investment, and Italy does not have a bilateral investment treaty with the United States (see section on Bilateral Investment Agreements for the full list of countries that have such treaties with Italy). Italy’s relatively affluent domestic market, proximity to emerging economies in North Africa and the Middle East, and assorted centers of excellence in scientific and information technology research remain attractive to many investors. The government in 2013 remained open to specific foreign sovereign wealth funds to invest in shares of Italian companies and banks and continued to make information available online to prospective investors. The Italian government’s efforts to implement new investment promotion policy that would paint Italy as a desirable direct investment destination were overshadowed in large part by Italy’s ongoing economic weakness, setbacks to reform initiatives, and lack of concrete action on structural reforms that could repair the lengthy and often inconsistent legal and regulatory systems, unpredictable tax structure and layered bureaucracy. However, Italy’s economy is moving into fragile recovery after its longest recession in recent memory and this could provide political momentum for improvements to Italy’s investment climate.
    [Show full text]
  • FAQ – Extending the Private Copying Levy to MP3 Players
    FAQ – Extending the Private Copying Levy to MP3 Players Why should the private copying levy be extended to MP3 players like the iPod? The private copying levy exists to provide fair compensation to songwriters, composers, music publishers, recording artists, musicians and recording companies for private copies made of their music. Currently, the levy only applies to CD-Rs. The time has come to extend the levy to reflect how private copies of music are actually made today – not how they were made a decade ago. Of the 1.9 billion songs copied annually in Canada, 62% are copied onto MP3 players like the iPod. Modernizing the levy by extending it to MP3 players will bring the current copyright legislation in line with the way people use and copy music today. Why is this so “urgent”? MP3 players have become the method of choice for copying music. The percentage of private copies being made on to CD-Rs is decreasing significantly. Revenue from the current levy has dropped 68% since 2008 and is drying up quickly. Rights holders are no longer being compensated for the majority of private copies being made of their music. Canadians have changed the technology used to copy music – our copyright law needs to change also, so that artists, songwriters and other rights holders can continue to receive the compensation to which they are entitled. Isn’t this just another tax? No. The private copying levy is not a tax. It is a royalty paid to music rights holders. Unlike a tax, which is collected by the government, the private copying levy is collected by the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC) to provide remuneration to rights holders for private copying.
    [Show full text]
  • I Diritti SIAE I Diritti SCF La Licenza Ombrello Il Canone RAI Speciale
    I diritti SIAE i diritti SCF la licenza ombrello il canone RAI speciale a cura di Patrizia Clementi n. 68 I diritti SIAE i diritti SCF la licenza ombrello il canone RAI speciale a cura di Patrizia Clementi SUPPLEMENTO AL N° 68 DI EX LEGE - POSTE ITALIANE SPA SPED. IN ABB.TO PO- STALE DL 353/2003 (conv. in legge 27/02/2004 n. 46) art. 1 comma 1 LO/MI Fonti normative – D.P.R. 633/1941 – R.D.L. 21/02/1938, n. 246 – D.L.Lt. 21/12/1944, n. 458 – Accordo CEI-SIAE – Convenzione CEI-SCF – Licenza Ombrello Di seguito si riassumono gli adempimenti cui la par- rocchia è tenuta relativamente al possesso di appa- recchi radiotelevisivi (esclusi quelli presenti nelle a- bitazioni dei sacerdoti), alla diffusione di musica “dal vivo” o registrata e all'utilizzo di opere cinema- tografiche. Questa Guida non è esaustiva; intende offrire solo un primo quadro di riferimento per comprendere come operare correttamente in riferimento alle si- tuazioni più diffuse nelle parrocchie ambrosiane. Diritto d’autore Per poter eseguire dal vivo o mediante strumenti le per le opere opere musicali tutelate dal diritto d’autore, ai sensi della legge n. 633 del 1941 occorre essere autoriz- musicali, zati (acquisire la “licenza”) e pagare i relativi diritti la cui tutela d’autore: «Sono protette ai sensi di questa legge le opere dell’ingegno di carattere creativo che appar- compete alla SIAE tengono alla letteratura, alla musica, alle arti figura- tive, all’architettura, al teatro ed alla cinematografia, qualunque ne sia il modo o la forma di espressione» (art.
    [Show full text]
  • P2P and the Future of Private Copying Peter K
    Texas A&M University School of Law Texas A&M Law Scholarship Faculty Scholarship 2005 P2P and the Future of Private Copying Peter K. Yu [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/facscholar Part of the Intellectual Property Law Commons, and the Internet Law Commons Recommended Citation Peter K. Yu, P2P and the Future of Private Copying, 76 U. Colo. L. Rev. 653 (2005). Available at: https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/facscholar/383 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Texas A&M Law Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Texas A&M Law Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. P2P AND THE FUTURE OF PRIVATE COPYING PETER K. Yu* TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 654 I. THE 2003 COPYRIGHT WARS ......................................................... 658 I. THE FUTURE P2P FILE-SHARING WARS ......................................... 676 A . Dom estic Challenges ............................................................... 676 1. Proliferation of New P2P Technologies ............................ 676 2. Transnational Nature of the Future Copyright Wars ......... 677 3. Increased Political Alienation of the Recording Industry. 679 4. Counterattacks and Setbacks ............................................. 685 B. InternationalChallenges ......................................................... 686 1. Heightened
    [Show full text]
  • FEP REPORT of ACTIVITIES 2010-2011 3 FOREWORD by Fergal Tobin, FEP President
    Federation of European Publishers Fédération des éditeurs Européens RepoRt oF ActivitiEs MAY 2010 - APRIL 2011 31, Rue Montoyer, box 8 • BE-1000 Brussels • TEL. 32 2 770.11.10 FAX. 32 2 771.20.71 E-mail: [email protected] • Website: www.fep-fee.eu Report of activities May 2010 - April 2011 1 Table of content Foreword by Fergal Tobin, FEP President ................................................................................................................................................... 5 FEP Networks ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 FEP Meets ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 FEP in Brussels and in Europe ......................................................................................................................................................................... 7 FEP Statistics ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 DG CULTURE AND EDUCATION .................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Multilingualism
    [Show full text]