DOCSLIB.ORG

The Implementation, Application and Effects of the EU Directive On

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Implementation, Application and Effects of the EU Directive On The Implementation, Application and Effects of the EU Directive on Copyright in the Information Society Andrea Renda, Felice Simonelli, Giuseppe Mazziotti, Alberto Bolognini and Giacomo Luchetta No. 120 / November 2015 Abstract This study provides an ex-post evaluation of the EU copyright framework as provided by EU Directive 29/2001 on Copyright in the Information Society (InfoSoc Directive) and related legislation, focusing on four key criteria: effectiveness, efficiency, coherence and relevance. The evaluation finds that the EU copyright framework scores poorly on all four accounts. Of the four main goals pursued by the InfoSoc, only the alignment with international legislation can be said to have been fully achieved. The wider framework on copyright still generates costs by inhibiting content production, distribution and creation and generating productive, allocative and dynamic inefficiencies. Several problems also remain in terms of both internal and external coherence. Finally, despite its overall importance and relevance as a domain of legislation in the fields of content and media, the EU copyright framework is outdated in light of technological developments. Policy options to reform the current framework are provided in the CEPS companion study on the functioning and efficiency of the Digital Single Market in the field of copyright (CEPS Special Report No. 121/November 2015). ISBN 978-94-6138-487-4 This study was carried out at the request of the Impact Assessment Unit of the Directorate for Impact Assessment and European Added Value, within the Directorate General for Parliamentary Research Services (DG EPRS) of the General Secretariat of the European Parliament. Originally entitled “Study on the implementation, application and effects of Directive 2001/29/EC on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (InfoSoc) Directive and of its related instruments”, it is part of a larger, 3-part study entitled “Review of the EU copyright Framework: European Implementation Assessment”, published on the Parliament’s website (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=EPRS_STU%282015%2 9558762). It is republished here by CEPS with the kind permission of the European Parliament. The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not represent the official position of the European Parliament or CEPS. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. Available for free downloading from the CEPS website (www.ceps.eu) © European Union, 2015 All rights reserved. Centre for European Policy Studies ▪ Place du Congrès 1 ▪ B-1000 Brussels ▪ Tel: (32.2) 229.39.11 ▪ www.ceps.eu TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................... I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................ II INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 1. Copyright in the digital era .................................................................................................... 1 2. Structure of the work .............................................................................................................. 4 PART I. THE INTERVENTION LOGIC OF THE INFOSOC DIRECTIVE AND RELATED LEGISLATION ........................................................................................ 5 1. The rationale for the intervention: Why did the EU intervene in the field of copyright?6 1.1 Needs and problems at the time of the InfoSoc Directive .............................................. 6 1.1.1 Copyright and the principle of free movement: a basic tension ............................... 6 1.1.2 The principle of exhaustion and its scope of application ......................................... 7 1.1.3 The progressive development of an EU copyright policy and regulation ............... 8 1.1.4 EU copyright Directives and industrial policy objectives ........................................ 9 1.1.5 From sector-specific interventions to horizontal legislation in the field of EU copyright ................................................................................................................. 10 1.1.6 The 1995 Green Paper on Copyright in the Information Society ............................ 11 1.2 Objectives of the InfoSoc Directive ................................................................................ 11 1.2.1 General and specific objectives ............................................................................... 12 1.2.2 Operational objectives ............................................................................................ 12 PART II. EVALUATION OF SELECTED ISSUES ..................................................... 15 1. The legal aspects of copyright: harmonisation and efficiency of the EU copyright regime, and its impact on other policy areas ...................................................................... 16 1.1 Legal basis of EU copyright legislation ......................................................................... 16 1.2 Form and extent of harmonisation of the EU copyright system.................................. 18 1.2.1 Standard of originality ............................................................................................ 19 1.2.2 The scope of the exclusive rights of reproduction .................................................. 21 1.2.3 The exclusive rights of communication to the public ............................................. 23 1.2.4 The exclusive right of distribution and the exhaustion principle........................... 25 1.2.5 The ‘Europeanisation’ of copyright exceptions and limitations ............................. 27 1.3 Legal protection of technological protection measures ................................................ 31 1.4 Sanctions and remedies .................................................................................................. 35 1.5 On the current efficiency of the EU copyright system ................................................. 36 1.5.1 Principle of territoriality and collective rights management .................................. 37 1.5.2 Procedures, regulatory and administrative burdens related to private copying levies ....................................................................................................................... 39 1.5.3 Is lack of clarity on copyright’s scope a barrier to innovation? The examples of online news aggregation and text and data mining ............................................... 43 1.6 Interplay between the EU copyright system and other EU policy streams ................ 46 1.6.1 Copyright and liability exemptions under the e-Commerce Directive .................. 46 1.6.2 Copyright and data protection ............................................................................... 47 1.6.3 Copyright and fundamental rights ......................................................................... 49 1.6.4 Copyright and support to cultural diversity .......................................................... 50 2. The Internal Market aspects of copyright: EU copyright and the functioning of the Single Market ......................................................................................................................... 52 2.1 The market fragmentation effects of legislation on copyright and related rights in the European Union ........................................................................................................ 52 2.1.1 The territorial application of copyright rules ......................................................... 52 2.1.2 Definitions that fall outside the scope of the EU copyright acquis......................... 53 2.1.3 Territorial exercise of the right ............................................................................... 56 2.2 Territorial licensing and geo-blocking in specific sectors ............................................ 58 2.2.1 The audiovisual sector ............................................................................................ 60 2.2.2 The music sector ..................................................................................................... 65 2.2.3 The book publishing sector ..................................................................................... 71 2.3 The market fragmentation effects of copyright exceptions and limitations ............... 76 2.3.1 Exception and limitations at EU and Member State level ...................................... 76 2.3.2 Transient and incidental copies .............................................................................. 77 2.3.3 Exceptions for the benefit of libraries, educational establishments, archives and museums ................................................................................................................. 78 2.3.4 Teaching or scientific research ................................................................................ 80 2.3.5 Reporting of current events .................................................................................... 82 2.3.6 Quotations .............................................................................................................. 83 2.3.7 Parody, caricature and pastiche .............................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 8. Putting Artists and Guardians of Indigenous Works First
    8 Putting Artists and Guardians of Indigenous Works First: Towards a Restricted Scope of Freedom of Panorama in the Asian Pacific Region Jonathan Barrett1 1 Introduction ‘Freedom of panorama’2 permits use of certain copyright-protected works on public display; for example, anyone may publish and sell postcards of a public sculpture.3 The British heritage version of freedom of panorama, which is followed by many jurisdictions in the Asian Pacific region,4 applies 1 Copyright © 2018 Jonathan Barrett. Senior Lecturer, School of Accounting and Commercial Law, Victoria University of Wellington. 2 The term ‘freedom of panorama’ recently came into common usage in English. It appears to be derived from the Swiss German ‘Panoramafreiheit’, which itself has only been used since the 1990s, despite the exemption existing in German law for 170 years. See Mélanie Dulong de Rosnay and Pierre-Carl Langlais ‘Public artworks and the freedom of panorama controversy: a case of Wikimedia influence’ (2017) 6(1) Internet Policy Review. 3 Incidental copying of copyright works is not considered to be a feature of freedom of panorama. See Copyright Act 1994 (NZ), s 41. 4 Asian Pacific countries are those west of the International Date Line (IDL), as defined for the purposes of the Asian Pacific Copyright Association (APCA) in Brian Fitzgerald and Benedict Atkinson (eds) Copyright Future Copyright Freedom: Marking the 40 Year Anniversary of the Commencement of Australia’s Copyright Act 1968 (Sydney University Press, Sydney, 2011) at 236. 229 MAkING COPyRIGHT WORk FOR THE ASIAN PACIFIC? to buildings, sculptures and works of artistic craftsmanship on permanent display in a public place or premises open to the public.5 These objects may be copied in two dimensions, such as photographs.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Threat Hunting?
    $whoami ◎ Apurv Singh Gautam (@ASG_Sc0rpi0n) ◎ Security Researcher, Threat Intel/Hunting ◎ Cybersecurity @ Georgia Tech ◎ Prior: Research Intern at ICSI, UC Berkeley ◎ Hobbies ◎ Contributing to the security community ◎ Gaming/Streaming (Rainbow 6 Siege) ◎ Hiking, Lockpicking ◎ Social ◎ Twitter - @ASG_Sc0rpi0n ◎ Website – https://apurvsinghgautam.me 2 Agenda ◎ Introduction to the Dark Web ◎ Why hunting on the Dark Web? ◎ Methods to hunt on the Dark Web ◎ Can the Dark Web hunting be automated? ◎ Overall Picture ◎ OpSec? What’s that? ◎ Conclusion 3 Clear Web? Deep Web? Dark Web? 5 Image Source: UC San Diego Library Accessing the Dark Web ◎ Tor /I2P/ZeroNet ◎ .onion domains/.i2p domains ◎ Traffic through relays Image Sources: Hotspot Shield, Tor Project, I2P Project, ZeroNet 6 What’s all the Hype? ◎ Hype ○ Vast and mysterious part of the Internet ○ Place for cybercriminals only ○ Illegal to access the Dark Web ◎ Reality ○ Few reachable onion domains ○ Uptime isn’t ideal ○ Useful for free expression in few countries ○ Popular sites like Facebook, NYTimes, etc. ○ Legal to access the Dark Web 7 Relevant site types? ◎ General Markets ◎ PII & PHI ◎ Credit Cards ◎ Digital identities ◎ Information Trading ◎ Remote Access ◎ Personal Documents ◎ Electronic Wallets ◎ Insider Threats Image Source: Intsights 8 Sites Examples 9 Cost of products? ◎ SSN - $1 ◎ Fake FB with 15 friends - $1 ◎ DDoS Service - $7/hr ◎ Rent a Hacker - $12/hr ◎ Credit Card - $20+ ◎ Mobile Malware - $150 ◎ Bank Details - $1000+ ◎ Exploits or 0-days - $150,000+ ◎ Critical databases - $300,000+ 10 Product Examples 11 Image Source: Digital Shadows 12 Image Source: Digital Shadows 13 What is Threat Hunting? ◎ Practice of proactively searching for cyber threats ◎ Hypothesis-based approach ◎ Uses advanced analytics and machine learning investigations ◎ Proactive and iterative search 15 Why So Serious (Eh! Important)? ◎ Hacker forums, darknet markets, dump shops, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Saisie-Contrefaçon
    Sabine Agé ÖV-Expertengespräch IP-Rechtsdurchsetzung in Europa Vienna ● 16 January 2017 Bringing evidence of infringement in France after the Enforcement directive: the saisie- contrefaçon and other available tools ÖV-Expertengespräch “IP-Rechtsdurchsetzung in Europa: Gut, besser … und morgen?” Vienna ● 16 January 2017 Sabine AGÉ Avocat Paris Lyon Evidence gathering in France after the IP Enforcement Dir. Overview Provisions of the IP Enforcement Directive (IPED) and of the French Intellectual Property Code (IPC) Overview of the means of evidence used in France Saisie-contrefaçon Protection of confidential information Use of the information gathered during the saisie- contrefaçon Right of information and rendering of accounts 2 Bringing evidence of infringement in France after the Enforcement directive: the saisie-contrefaçon and other available tools 1 Sabine Agé ÖV-Expertengespräch IP-Rechtsdurchsetzung in Europa Vienna ● 16 January 2017 Evidence gathering in France after the IP Enforcement Dir. IPED: a minimum Art. 2 : Scope “Without prejudice to the means which are or may be provided for in Community or national legislation, in so far as those means may be more favourable for rightholders, the measures, procedures and remedies provided for by this Directive shall apply, in accordance with Article 3, to any infringement of intellectual property rights as provided for by Community law and/or by the national law of the Member State concerned.” 3 Evidence gathering in France after the IP Enforcement Dir. IPED: fairness and proportionality Art. 3 : General obligation “1. Member States shall provide for the measures, procedures and remedies necessary to ensure the enforcement of the intellectual property rights covered by this Directive.
    [Show full text]
  • Read the Chapter
    ICLG The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Corporate Recovery & Insolvency 2016 10th Edition A practical cross-border insight into corporate recovery and insolvency work Published by Global Legal Group, in association with CDR, with contributions from: Ali Budiardjo, Nugroho, Reksodiputro Lenz & Staehelin Bojović&Partners Macfarlanes LLP BonelliErede Nishimura & Asahi Bredin Prat Olswang LLP Brian Kahn Inc. Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP Campbells Pinheiro Neto Advogados Dhir & Dhir Associates Roschier, Attorneys Ltd. Ferraiuoli LLC Schindler Rechtsanwälte GmbH Gall Sedgwick Chudleigh Ltd. Gilbert + Tobin Slaughter and May Gorrissen Federspiel Soteris Flourentzos & Associates LLC GRATA Law Firm LLP Strelia Hengeler Mueller Partnerschaft Sullivan & Cromwell LLP von Rechtsanwälten mbB Thornton Grout Finnigan LLP INFRALEX Uría Menéndez Kim & Chang White & Case LLP Kubas Kos Gałkowski Yonev Valkov Nenov Kvale Advokatfirma DA The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Corporate Recovery & Insolvency 2016 General Chapters: 1 An Effective Insolvency Framework Within the EU? – Tom Vickers & Megan Sparber, Slaughter and May 1 2 Developments in Directors’ Duties under English Law – Alicia Videon & Louise Bell, Olswang LLP 4 3 Liability Management as a Restructuring Tool – Chris Beatty, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP 10 4 Fund Lenders: Potential New Challenges for the Next Wave of Loan Restructuring Transactions – Contributing Editor Jat Bains & Paul Keddie, Macfarlanes LLP 16 Tom Vickers, Partner, Slaughter and May Sales Director
    [Show full text]
  • The Dynamics of Legal and Illegal Digital Music Distribution Christian Syvertsen
    Master thesis The dynamics of legal and illegal digital music distribution Christian Syvertsen 1 Preface This paper was written as a Master thesis in Informatics for Christian Syvertsen at the University of Oslo. The Master studies were started spring 2005, and the thesis is to be delivered November 2007. This Master thesis has been realized at the department of Information Systems at the Institute of Informatics at the University of Oslo, with great assistance and advice by supervisors Jennifer Blechar and Ole Hanseth. November 2007 University of Oslo, Department of Informatics Page 2 of 86 Master thesis The dynamics of legal and illegal digital music distribution Christian Syvertsen 2 Abstract In this thesis I give an overview and background of the current digital music landscape, analyse it through Actor Network Theory and see the complexity of the network as making it difficult to break down into less holistic parts. Every part of the network influences the other. As illegal downloads of illegally copyrighted music only increases, it seems apparent that the record industry have taken a wrong strategy. Copyright laws have been tightened, DRM systems have been applied and lawsuits have been made, but it seems that it has no decreasing effect on the illegal downloads. I believe what the record companies must to is to put more efforts into making a better legal music download service, that actually can offer a better product than the P2P networks, because then increasing numbers of users will prefer that legal alternative. But for something like this to be achieved, there is a long way to go.
    [Show full text]
  • An Investigation Into the Security and Privacy of Ios VPN Applications
    An Investigation Into the Security and Privacy of iOS VPN Applications Jack Wilson Division of Cybersecurity School of Design and Informatics Abertay University, Dundee A thesis submitted for the degree of Bachelor of Science with Honours in Ethical Hacking 1st May 2018 Word Count: 11,448 Abstract Due to the increasing number of recommendations for people to use VPN’s for privacy reasons, more app developers are creating VPN apps and publishing them on the Apple App Store and Google Play Store. In this ‘gold rush’, apps are being developed quickly and, in turn, not being developed with security fully in mind. This paper investigated a selection of free VPN applications available on the Apple App Store (for iOS devices) and test the apps for security and privacy. This includes testing for any traffic being transmitted over plain HTTP, DNS leakage and transmission of personally-identifiable information (such as phone number, IMEI 1, email address, MAC address) and evaluating the security of the tunnelling protocol used by the VPN. The testing methodology involved installing free VPN apps on a test device (an iPhone 6 running iOS 11), simulating network traffic for a pre-defined period of time and capturing the traffic (either through ARP spoofing, or through a proxy program such as Burpsuite). This allows for all traffic to be analysed to check for anything being sent without encryption. Other issues that often cause de-anonymisation with VPN applications such as DNS leakage can be tested using websites such as dnsleaktest.com. The research found several common security issues with the VPN applications that were tested, with a large majority of the applications tested failing to implement HTTPS.
    [Show full text]
  • 4 | 2017 Volume 8 (2017) Issue 4 ISSN 2190-3387
    4 | 2017 Volume 8 (2017) Issue 4 ISSN 2190-3387 Editorial: A Christmas Gift by Séverine Dusollier Designing Competitive Markets for Industrial Data – Between Propertisation and Access Law and Electronic Commerce Information Technology, Intellectual Property, Journal of by Josef Drexl From Cyberpunk to Regulation – Digitised Memories as Personal and Sensitive Data within the EU Data Protection Law by Krzysztof Garstka Copyright, Doctrine and Evidence-Based Reform by Stef van Gompel Non-Commercial Quotation and Freedom of Panorama: Useful and Lawful? by Eleonora Rosati Where is the Harm in a Privacy Violation? Calculating the Damages Afforded in Privacy Cases by the European Court of Human Rights by Bart van der Sloot Editors: Thomas Dreier Axel Metzger Gerald Spindler Lucie Guibault Miquel Peguera www.jipitec.eu Séverine Dusollier Chris Reed Karin Sein Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and Electronic Commerce Law Table Of Contents Volume 8 Issue 4 December 2017 www.jipitec.eu [email protected] A joint publication of: Articles Prof. Dr. Thomas Dreier, M. C. J., KIT - Karlsruher Institut für Technologie, Zentrum für Angewandte Rechtswissenschaft (ZAR), Vincenz-Prießnitz-Str. 3, Editorial: A Christmas Gift 76131 Karlsruhe Germany by Séverine Dusollier 255 Prof. Dr. Axel Metzger, LL. M., Humboldt-Universität zu Designing Competitive Markets for Industrial Data – Between Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, Propertisation and Access 10099 Berlin by Josef Drexl 257 Prof. Dr. Gerald Spindler, Dipl.-Ökonom, Georg-August- From Cyberpunk to Regulation – Digitised Memories as Personal Universität Göttingen, and Sensitive Data within the EU Data Protection Law Platz der Göttinger Sieben 6, by Krzysztof Garstka 293 37073 Göttingen Copyright, Doctrine and Evidence-Based Reform Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, by Stef van Gompel 304 Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Georg-August-Universität Non-Commercial Quotation and Freedom of Panorama: Göttingen are corporations under Useful and Lawful? public law, and represented by their respective presidents.
    [Show full text]
  • Winners List 2
    M&A AWARDS 2012 Winners List Afghanistan China Rosenstock Legal Afghan M&A Law Firm of the Year PricewaterhouseCoopers Overall Financial Advisory Firm of the Year: China Albania DLA Piper Chinese Employment Law Firm of the Year E. I. HAJDINI Albanian Commercial Law Firm of the Year NYGT (Hong Kong) Limited Mid-Sized Asset Management Firm of the Year: China Argentina Rouse Chinese Intellectual Property Law Firm of Estudio Beccar Varela Argentinian M&A Law Firm of the Year the Year Salaberren & López Sansón Argentinian Cross Border Law Firm of the Year Brons & Salas Argentinian Corporate Tax Law Firm of the Year Colombia Barrios, Vélez, Gutiérrez Abogados IT Due Diligence Provider of the Year: Colombia Australia Clayton Utz Australian Full Service Law Firm of the Year Congo (Democratic Rep) Queensland Bar Chambers Australian Mining & Energy Barrister of the Year YAV & ASSOCIATES DRC M&A Law Firm of the Year Truman Hoyle Australian IT Due Diligence Law Firm of the Year Minter Ellison Overall Law Firm of the Year: Australia Costa Rica Corrs Chambers Westgarth Australian Corporate Tax Law Firm of the Year Quirós Abogados Central Law M&A Law Firm of the Year: Costa Rica Henry Davis York Australian Public M&A Law Firm of the Year Katherine Pavlidis Johnson, Mediator Australian Corporate Mediator of the Year Croatia Middletons Australian Vendor Due Diligence Law Firm Wolf Theiss Overall Law Firm of the Year: Croatia of the Year Piper Alderman Australian Legal Adviser of the year: Cyprus Beach Energy/Adelaide Energy InterQuality Cypriot Auditors of the Year Maddocks Australian Employment Law Firm of the Year Awford Legal Australian Aviation Law Firm of the Year Denmark Pacific Equity Partners Pty.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of the EU Copyright Framework
    Review of the EU copyright framework European Implementation Assessment Review of the EU copyright framework: The implementation, application and effects of the "InfoSoc" Directive (2001/29/EC) and of its related instruments European Implementation Assessment Study In October 2014, the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) requested from the European Parliament Research Service (EPRS) an Ex Post Impact Assessment on Directive 2001/29/EC on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (InfoSoc). This EPRS publication was originally commissioned in the context of JURI's own- initiative implementation report, which was adopted in Plenary in July 2015, Rapporteur Julia Reda MEP. However, it is also relevant to the work of JURI Committees' Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights and Copyright (CWG), chaired by Jean Marie Cavada MEP. Furthermore, this request was made in the wider context of the Commission's review of the EU legislative framework on copyright, and the ensuing legislative proposals, which have been a long time in the planning and which are now expected for the 4th quarter of 2015. The objective of these proposals is to modernise the EU copyright framework, and in particular the InfoSoc Directive, in light of the digital transformation. Accordingly, in response to the JURI request, the Ex-Post Impact Assessment Unit of the European Parliament Research Service decided to produce a "European Implementation Assessment on the review of the EU copyright framework". Implementation reports of EP committees are now routinely accompanied by European Implementation Assessments, drawn up by the Ex-Post Impact Assessment Unit of the Directorate for Impact Assessment and European Added Value, within the European Parliament's Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services.
    [Show full text]
  • User Guide Contents
    USER GUIDE CONTENTS What's new 4 About Magnet OUTRIDER 5 Getting started with Magnet OUTRIDER 6 System requirements 6 Use Magnet OUTRIDER on a dongle 6 Use a trial license of Magnet OUTRIDER 6 Understanding changes made to the system 7 Detecting Bitlocker encrypted drives 8 Scanning a target 9 Scan a computer 9 Encryption screening 9 Scan an external drive 10 Scan a folder 10 Configuring scan options 11 Locate files and apps settings 11 Collect artifacts and scan browser history settings 13 CSAM Detection Technology settings 14 Scan options 15 Reporting options 16 Miscellaneous options 16 Adding keywords and NCMEC report data to a search 17 Import a keyword list or NCMEC report data 17 View a keyword list or NCMEC report data 17 Export a keyword list or NCMEC report data 18 Reviewing scan results 19 Mark a CRC CSAM hit as a false positive 19 Starting a new scan 20 Supported application categories 20 Viewing and exporting scan reports 22 View scan reports 22 Navigating your scan report folder 22 Contents of scan reports 23 View and export an error list 23 Exporting filename keyword hits and CRC CSAM hits 25 Export filename keyword hits or CRC CSAM hits 25 Export a list of saved hits 25 Updating Magnet OUTRIDER 27 Update Magnet OUTRIDER manually 27 Automatically check for updates 27 User Guide WHAT'S NEW VERSION DESCRIPTION 2.1.0 l Updated Configuring scan options with information about scanning connected networks, new supported operating system artifacts, and customizing case and report locations. 2.0.0 l Updated Reviewing scan results with information about new supported apps.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyright in Central and Eastern Europe: an Intellectual Property Metamorphosis
    Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal Volume 8 Volume VIII Number 1 Volume VIII Book 1 Article 4 1997 Copyright in Central and Eastern Europe: An Intellectual Property Metamorphosis Silke von Lewinski Head of Department, International Law, Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Patent, Copyright and Competition Law, Munich, Germany; Adjunct Professor, Franklin Pierce Law Center; Chief Legal Expert in Copyright, European Union Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/iplj Part of the Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, and the Intellectual Property Law Commons Recommended Citation Silke von Lewinski, Copyright in Central and Eastern Europe: An Intellectual Property Metamorphosis , 8 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 39 (1997). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/iplj/vol8/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LEWINSKI.TYP 9/29/2006 4:47 PM Copyright in Central and Eastern Europe: An Intellectual Property Metamorphosis Dr. Silke von Lewinski* INTRODUCTION The intellectual property systems of Central and Eastern Europe are changing rapidly as those nations join the ranks of capitalist countries. As the former Communist bloc countries con- tinue their transition from Socialist to free market systems, they are feeling growing pressure to implement new standards of protection for intellectual property rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Best VPN Services in 2017 (Speed, Cost & Usability Reviews)
    10/8/2017 Best VPN Services in 2017 (Speed, Cost & Usability Reviews) Best VPN Services VPN Reviews & In-Depth Comparisons Brad Smith Sep 18, 2017 With the help of John & Andrey (https://thebestvpn.com/contact-us/), we’ve put together a list of best VPNs. We compared their download/upload speed, support, usability, cost, servers, countries and features. We also analyzed their TOS to see if they keep logs or not and whether they allow P2P and work with Netflix. here’s a link to the spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11IZdVCBjVvbdaKx2HKz2hKB4F Z_l8nRJXXubX4FaQj4/) You want to start using a VPN, but don’t know which software/service to use? In this page, we’ve reviewed 30+ most popular VPN services (on going process). In order to find out which are best VPNs, we spent some time on research and speed testing: 1. Installed 30+ VPN software on our personal devices, such as Windows, Mac, Android and iOS and compared their usability. 2. Performed Download/Upload speed tests on speedtest.net to see which had best performing servers. 3. Double checked if they work with Netflix and allow P2P. 4. Read their TOS to verify if they keep logs or not. 5. Compared security (encryption and protocols). That means we’ve dug through a large number of privacy policies (on logging), checked their features, speed, customer support and usability. If you know a good VPN provider that is not listed here, please contact us and we’ll test it out as soon as possible. 5 Best VPNs for Online Privacy and Security Here are the top 5 VPN services of 2017 after our research, analysis, monitoring, testing, and verifying.
    [Show full text]