Copyright Term Research Articles

Social media-based copyright awareness and knowledge-sharing practices among university students in Bangladesh

The main aim of the present study is to investigate public university students’ social media-based copyright awareness as well as their knowledge-sharing practices. Students from a public university in Bangladesh were the target population of the study. A well-structured questionnaire was designed using Google Forms and distributed to the students via different social media platforms. A total of 267 students responded to the survey. The findings of the study showed that most of the students use Facebook and YouTube to connect with their friends and family. The majority of the students were aware of SM-based copyright practices and reported giving credit to the original writer while sharing their writings on SM. The test results found significant differences in students’ SM-based knowledge-sharing practices based on their awareness regarding SM terms and services and self-reported frequency of violating copyright in SM. However, students’ SM-based knowledge-sharing practices were significantly associated with their years of experience with SM, awareness regarding SM copyright terms and services, and their self-reported frequency of copyright violation. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first attempt in Bangladesh to examine public University students’ social media-based copyright awareness and knowledge-sharing practices.

TDM copyright for AI in Europe: a view from Portugal

Abstract The development of artificial intelligence (AI) justified the introduction at the level of the European Union (EU) of a new copyright exception regarding text and data mining (TDM) for purposes of scientific research conducted by research organizations and entities responsible for cultural heritage. This exception is binding and mandatory, as Member States have to provide it in their domestic laws and it cannot be excluded by contract nor by technical measures. In addition to this exception for scientific purposes, a general TDM exception is provided, which is also binding but only applies by default, meaning that it can be excluded by contract and/or by technical measures. The default TDM exception also applies to computer programs, raising the question whether acts allowed under the Software Directive can now be excluded by contract and/or technical measures. It is far from clear whether the new regime extends or, on the contrary, restricts freedom of innovation in AI and whether and how the TDM copyright will contribute to the development of AI and encourage ‘machine learning’ in Europe. The Portuguese implementation of the new ‘TDM copyright’ has been faithful to EU law, and therefore, AI development in Portugal will be carried out under the copyright terms of the Digital Single Market Directive, which seeks a fair balance between the principle of high-level protection of rightholders, the rights and freedoms of users and the good functioning of the digital market in the EU.

The Copyright Status of Wittgenstein’s Works

Abstract Determining the copyright status of a literary work is not always straightforward, because copyrights are territorial and the relevant laws differ significantly country by country. In some legislations, for example, a work’s copyright status may depend on the publication date, on whether the publication was posthumous, on the quantity and quality of editorial interventions the manuscript underwent before publication, etc. 2021 marked the 70th anniversary of Wittgenstein’s death. In many countries, the duration of the copyright term is the author’s life plus 70 years. Thus, as of the moment of this writing, it is important to attempt a comprehensive analysis and to try to determine whether, where and why his manuscripts and his published works are in the public domain. This paper clarifies the general principles of copyright and describes the rules and best practices that must be followed in the context of internet publications. Additionally, it examines the factors that make it particularly challenging to ascertain the copyright status both of Wittgenstein’s published works and of the transcriptions of his manuscripts. Lastly, it provides a detailed account of the copyright status of some of Wittgenstein’s works that were published in the second half of the 20th century, proving that they are in the public domain in most countries.

Copyright Term Extension Act and its Impact on Competition Law

Copyright Term Extension Act and its Impact on Competition Law

Ross, Trevor. Writing in Public: Literature and the Liberty of the Press in Eighteenth-Century Britain

Ross, Trevor. <i>Writing in Public: Literature and the Liberty of the Press in Eighteenth-Century Britain</i>

Digital use of standardised assessment tools for children and adolescents: can available paper-based questionnaires be used free of charge in electronic format?

QuestionMost adolescents live in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), and about 10% of them face mental problems. The mental health provision gap in low- and middle-income countries could be addressed by evidence-based practices, however costs are implementational barriers. Digitalization can improve the accessibility of these tools and constitutes a chance for LMIC to use them more easily at a low cost. We reviewed free and brief evidence-based mental health assessment tools available for digital use to assess psychopathology across different domains in youth.MethodsFor the current study, instruments from a recent review on paper-based instruments were re-used. Additionally, a systematic search was conducted to add instruments for the personality disorder domain. We searched and classified the copyright and license terms available from the internet in terms of free usage and deliverability in a digital format. In the case that this information was insufficient, we contacted the authors.ResultsIn total, we evaluated 109 instruments. Of these instruments, 53 were free and digitally usable covering 11 mental health domains. However, retrieving information on copyright and license terms was very difficult.ConclusionsFree and digitally adaptable instruments are available, supporting the strategy of using instruments digitally to increase access. The instrument’s authors support this initiative, however, the lack of copyright information and the difficulties in contacting the authors and licence holders are barriers to using this strategy in LMIC. A comprehensive, online instrument repository for clinical practice would be an appropriate next step to make the instruments more accessible and reduce implementation barriers.

Grand rights and opera reuse today

Abstract This article studies the economic role of grand rights in the incentives to stage and reuse works from the opera canon. It complements previous research on the incentives to create new opera in the way it looks at copyright taxing availability and follow-on creativity around works. Based on a unique dataset of global opera performances, we find that changes in copyright status increase the number of total performances individual works receive on stage once copyright expires. Moreover, we provide preliminary evidence on chilling, long-term effects of status around premiering operas, and revivals at the beginning of the copyright term. Based on these findings, we discuss limitations of the study and novel options for copyright policy frameworks.

Ideological Vandalism of Public Statues: Copyright, The Moral Right of Integrity and Racial Justice

This paper considers the regulation of ideological vandalism by the Australian copyright and moral rights regimes in the context of the defacement of public art statues that occurred in Australia and overseas during the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020. Statue vandalism is approached as a form of anti-racist or anti-colonial iconoclasm that contributes to discourse around previous and continuing racial inequities. Law is approached as a form of symbolic action that can consolidate the alienation and othering of vulnerable groups in public spaces. The authors investigate whether, when public statues are within the copyright term, intellectual property rights symbolically devalue anti-racist discourse by de-prioritising agonistic art encounters. It is identified that copyright’s exclusive rights do not render direct physical interventions with the statue unlawful, but that the moral right of integrity held by the statue’s creator is problematic. The moral right of integrity privileges the connection between the artist and their work as a matter of reputation, and any public interest in the graffitied counter-monument is irrelevant to a finding of infringement, which in our view justifies reform. The paper concludes that public spaces should be democratic spaces, and that intellectual property law in post-colonial states and states with a history of racial injustice should do more in support of this goal.

It Was 50 Years Ago Today: Recording Copyright Term and the Supply of Music

This paper examines the effect of the expiry of recording copyright on the supply of music—in the form of rereleases, availability on streaming platforms, and concert performances—by artists popular in the United Kingdom in the 1960s. We find that recording copyright expiry has different effects on a song’s availability in different distribution channels. The lapsing of copyright leads to a large increase in the number of rereleases in physical formats, holding constant artist, age, and year fixed effects. However, when a song’s original recording copyright expires, it becomes less likely to be performed in concert. Moreover, copyright status is not associated with differences in availability on the digital streaming platform Spotify. These results show that copyright expiry has nuanced effects on availability and can lead to different and even opposite effects on availability of a product across different distribution channels. They also show that within the context of digital distribution, the impact of copyright on availability differs based on the business model of a platform. This paper was accepted by Chris Forman, information systems. Funding: J. McKeon thanks Boston University’s Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program for funding. M. MacGarvie and J. Watson thank the National Bureau of Economic Research (Digitization Small Grant) for funding. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4343 .

Correlation of terms «orphan work» and «public domain work» in the modern copyright law

Keywords: orphan work, copyright, work digitization, public domain, propertyrights of the author, term of copyright&#x0D; The authors insist on the need todifferentiate the terms «orphan work» and «public domain work». It is connected withthe necessity to follow reasonable balance between the property interest of the authoror his successors and the public interest in reasonable use of the work in order to improvethe current legal field.It is substantiated that the existing copyright system, which provides to pay royaltyfor every use of the work for its author for 70 years or more, conflicts with theneeds of society in modern digital age. It is necessary to get permission from the copyrightholder to digitize a work to make it available. For orphan works it is difficult.The traditional copyright system should provide an exception for orphan works. It isformulated that permission to use such works must be granted by a specially authorizedstate body if there is any evidence that the user has taken all possible measuresto find the copyright holder, but has not been successful.Analysis of the content of theoretical and legal definitions of the terms «orphanwork» and «public domain work» shows that the presence or absence of ongoing protectionof property rights of the author is a key factor in the difference. Such rightsare still valid for orphan works, and therefore the permission of the right holder touse such a work is required. Meanwhile, the «public domain work» includes workswhich the term of copyright has expired. Therefore, the work can be used without permission.So, the approach that an orphan work becomes public domain is incorrect.On a basis of analysis of legislation conclusions is drawn that it is inexpedient touse too voluminous definition of the term «orphan work». It is argued that the systemof issuing permits for use of orphan works by the state bodies at request of a potentialuser must be defined in legislation.

Copyright Term Extension: Good Morning to You Productions v Warner/Chappell Music

This chapter focuses on a widely reported case related to the famous folk song ‘Happy Birthday to You’. Written in the late 19th century, the tune was held in copyright by a series of amendments and statutory actions which rendered the world’s most popular song unable to fall into the public domain. This Southern District of New York case allows the chapter to ponder the ever-lengthening copyright term (most commonly life + 70) and point out the absurdity of protecting a work for over a century. Term extension and copyright complexities upset the fair balancing of interests that is taken into consideration by traditional welfare incentive theory when regulating intellectual property rights. Copyright extension and expansion lead to commodification of intellectual assets, which, at least in case of retroactive copyright extension, find no justification in welfare incentive theory and economic analysis of law. Derangement from this theoretical approach, and from proportional balancing of competing interests at stake, then, increasingly exacerbates the ‘intellectual property paradox’ by eroding access and emphasizing protection, while creating a vast array of negative externalities, including depriving the public of the ‘public domain effect’, orphan works, and chilling effects on free speech. In sum, overextended—and overexpanded—copyright protection fundamentally detaches modern copyright policy from its pristine civic purposes and anti-monopolistic sentiments.

Copyright and Economic Viability: Evidence from the Music Industry

Copyright provides a long term of legal excludability, ostensibly to encourage the production of new creative works. How long this term should last, and the extent to which current law aligns with the economic incentives of copyright owners, has been the subject of vigorous theoretical debate. We investigate the economic viability of content in a major content industry—commercial music—using a novel longitudinal dataset of weekly sales and streaming counts. We find that the typical sound recording has an extremely short commercial half‐life—on the order of months, rather than years or decades—but also see evidence that subscription streaming services are extending this period of economic viability. Strikingly, though, we find that decay rates are sharp even for blockbuster songs, and that the patterns persist when we approximate weekly revenue. Although our results do not provide an estimate of the causal effect of copyright on incentives, they do put bounds on the problem, suggesting a misalignment between the economic realities of the music industry and the current life‐plus‐70 copyright term.

Creating a Last Twenty (L20) Collection: Implementing Section 108(H) in Libraries, Archives and Museums

Section 108(h) has not been utilized by libraries and archives, in part because of the uncertainty over definitions (e.g. “normal commercial exploitation”), determination of the eligibility window (last twenty years of the copyright term of published works), and how to communicate the information in the record to the general public. This paper seeks to explore the elements necessary to implement the Last Twenty exception, otherwise known as Section 108(h) and create a Last Twenty (L20) collection. In short, published works in the last twenty years of the copyright may be digitized and distributed by libraries, archives, and museums, as long as there is no commercial sale of the works and no reasonably priced copy is available. This means that Section 108(h) is available for the forgotten and neglected works, 1923-1941, including millions of foreign works restored by GATT. Section 108(h) is less effective for big, commercially available works. In many ways, that is the dividing line created by Section 108(h): allow for commercial exploitation of works throughout their term, but allow libraries to rescue works that had no commercial exploitation or copies available for sale and make them available through copying and distribution for research, scholarship, and preservation. In fact, Section 108(h) when it was being debated in Congress was called labeled “orphan works.” This paper suggests ways to think about the requirements of Section 108(h) and to make it more usable for libraries. Essentially, by confidently using Section 108(h) we can continue to make the past usable one query at a time. The paper ends with an evaluation of the recent Discussion Paper by the U.S. Copyright Office on Section 108 and suggests changes/recommendations related to the proposed changes to Section 108(h).

The Digitisation of Cultural Heritage: Originality, Derivative Works and (Non) Original Photographs

The purpose of this paper is to explore the legal consequences of the digitisation of cultural heritage institutions' archives and in particular to establish whether digitisation processes involve the originality required to trigger new copyright or copyright-related protection. As the European Commission and many MS reported, copyright and in particular photographers rights are cause of legal uncertainty during digitisation processes. A major role in this legally uncertain field is played by the standard of originality which is one of the main requirements for copyright protection. Only when a subject matter achieves the requested level of originality, it can be considered a work of authorship. Therefore, a first key issue analysed in this study is whether - and under which conditions - digitisation activities can be considered to be original enough as to constitute works (usually a photographic work) in their own right. A second element of uncertainty is connected with the type of work eventually created by acts of digitisation. If the process of digitisation of a (protected) work can be considered authorial, then the resulting work will be a derivative composed by two works: the original work digitally reproduced and the - probably - photographic work reproducing it. Finally, a third element of uncertainty is found in the protection afforded to by the last sentence of Art. 6 Term Directive and implemented in a handful of European countries. Accordingly, the paper is structured as follows: Part I is dedicated to the analysis of copyright law key concepts such as the originality standard, the definition of derivative works and the forms of protection available in cases of digital (or film-based) representations of objects (photographs). The second part of the study is devoted to a survey of a selection of EU Member States in an attempt to verify how the general concepts identified in Part I are applied by national legislatures and courts. The selected countries are Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Poland, the Netherlands and the UK. The country analysis fulfils a double function: on the one hand it provides a specific overview of the national implementation of the solutions found at international and EU level. On the other hand, it constitutes the only possible approach in order to analyse the protection afforded by some MS to those (also called non original photographs or mere/simple photographs) provided for by the last sentence of Art. 6 Copyright Term Directive. Part III presents some conclusions and recommendations for cultural heritage institutions and for legislatures.

Copyright Reform: Imagining More Balanced Copyright Laws

Earlier chapters of this book provide a history of copyright and libraries in the United States, a review of outdated language in the existing copyright code, and a discussion of actions by both copyright owners and the public to rebalance copyright outside of legislation. This chapter simply imagines what copyright could be if we disregard the known political and legal obstacles. It starts with no constraints, which one might argue is both impractical and foolish. Why spend time discussing what could be when treaties, self-interest, and powerful industry lobbies stand in the way? The answer is simply that environments can be changed. They have been changed throughout history, whether through legislation (e.g., copyright terms), case law (e.g., fair use in relation to technology), or ground roots movements (e.g., the initial movement to recognize authors’ rights). And if one hopes to change history, why not start first by exploring possibilities that we might not consider otherwise? Refusing to consider change out of fear of opposition translates to a voluntary surrender of power. Beginning with restraints also blinds one to possibilities of a much better construct than could be achieved with them. If everything has to fit in a box, people will often discard anything they think won’t fit at the outset. Only by removing the box can we imagine the full range of benefits of a given course of action. If the outcome is desired, then efforts can turn to whether or not there is a way to fit the outcome into the box. Or to decide if the benefits are so great that destruction of the box is in society’s best interest. A vision should start with where one thinks the world should be, and then reality can help to shape the path. Because this is the last chapter in the book, to fully understand how the guiding interests were chosen, one would need to read the preceding chapters.

Copyright and Economic Viability: Evidence from the Music Industry

Copyright provides a long term of legal excludability, ostensibly to encourage the production of new creative works. How long this term should last, and the extent to which current law aligns with the economic incentives of copyright owners, has been the subject of vigorous theoretical debate. We investigate the economic viability of content in a major creative industry—commercial music—using a novel longitudinal dataset of weekly sales and streaming counts. We find that the typical sound recording has an extremely short commercial half-life—on the order of months, rather than years or decades—but also see evidence that subscription streaming services extend the period of economic viability. Strikingly, though, we find that decay rates are sharp even for blockbuster songs, and that the patterns persist when we approximate weekly revenue. Although our results do not provide an estimate of the causal effect of copyright on incentives, they do put bounds on the problem, and suggest a misalignment between the economic realities of the music industry and the current life-plus-seventy copyright term in the United States.

The Revision of the Canadian Copyright Act: An Economic Analysis

A clause of the 2012 Canadian Copyright Modernization Act requires Parliament to review the Copyright Act every five years. The House of Commons instructed two of its committees, the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology (INDU) and the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage (SCCH), to review the Copyright Act. The committees filed their reports in 2019. Four of their recommendations are particularly relevant and discussed here: the extension of the term of copyright, the introduction of a so-called “termination right”, an amendment of the copyright reversion regime, and the introduction of a mandatory registration. My study is intended to inform policy analysis of these recommendations, including, among other things, the upfront impact on creator bargaining power and remuneration; the long-term impact on a work’s availability and potential revenues; the creative marketplace in general; and the interactions between the proposed legislative amendments and other areas of the Copyright Act.

Information for Contributors

Information for Contributors

The Copyright Term for Corporate-Authored Works: Averting the Menace of the Dog in the Manger

The Copyright Act, 2001 adopts, on one hand, a utilitarian approach and stipulates definite copyright terms for copyrightable works. On the other hand, the Act enshrines the concept of corporate authorship which confers authorship upon corporations possessed of perpetual existence. These two parallels pose a legal conundrum in which corporations, as authors, may claim perpetual copyright thus defeating the copyright term contemplated under the Copyright Act. This paper therefore contends that when copyrights are conferred upon corporate authors possessed of perpetual existence, there is an imminent risk of such corporations turning into the proverbial ‘dogs in the manger’ who may endeavour to perversely interfere with the affordable use and dissemination of previously published works.

What Happens When Books Enter the Public Domain? Testing Copyright’s Underuse Hypothesis across Australia, New Zealand, The United States and Canada

A key justification for copyright term extension has been that exclusive rights encourage publishers to make older works available (and that, without them, works will be ‘underused’). We empirically test this hypothesis by investigating the availability of ebooks to public libraries across Australia, New Zealand, the United States and Canada. We find that titles are actually less available where they are under copyright, that competition apparently does not deter commercial publishers from investing in older works, and that the existence of exclusive rights is not enough to trigger investment in works with low commercial demand. Further, works are priced much higher when under copyright than when in the public domain. In sum, simply extending copyrights results in higher prices and worse access. We argue that nations should explore alternative ways of allocating copyrights to better achieve copyright’s fundamental aims of rewarding authors and promoting widespread access to knowledge and culture.