Suchergebnisse

Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is posited to revolutionise the creative industries, prompting global calls for legislative intervention to ensure human creativity remains at the centre of the copyright system. As AI systems gain prowess in analysing and generating content, they promise new levels of creativity and innovation at accelerated pace and reduced costs compared to human production. Alongside these benefits come concerns of displacement, particularly in fields like music, where AI-generated music could potentially supplant human-authored creative endeavours. Suggestions ranging from taxation to levies have been proposed to address this challenge. This paper, however, advocates for a novel perspective: evolving copyright law to not only compensate creators for income lost to technological disruption but also to foster sustainability aligned with the principles of the Council of Europe's European Social Charter. Proposing an 'AI-royalty fund' represents a more optimal approach to this dilemma. Such a fund would acknowledge the intrinsic value of music and support a sustainable and inclusive creative industry ecosystem. Essential to this vision is the role of a national collective, entrusted with administering this fund to ensure equitable distribution and uphold the interests of human authors in an AI-driven landscape, contribute to regional and local plans of growth and foster cultural diversity and innovation. In essence, as AI redefines the boundaries of creativity, adapting the copyright paradigm becomes imperative to preserving the livelihoods of human creators while promoting a resilient and sustainable creative economy.

Abstract
The European Union's (EU) 2018 Audiovisual Media Services Directive attempted to level the playing field upon which video sharing platforms and audiovisual media services compete by evening out advertising and consumer protection rules. Recent competition policy literature identifies data as a source of dominance in platform markets, suggesting its relevance to such situations where platforms compete with other services. Drawing on a study of this playing field involving stakeholder interviews and a comparison of regulatory frameworks, we present a nuanced understanding of imbalances across three distinct functions of data. We consider the policy implications, arguing for more equitable access to insight from aggregate, anonymized data and financial data.

Abstract
The European Union's (EU) 2018 Audiovisual Media Services Directive attempted to level the playing field upon which video sharing platforms and audiovisual media services compete by evening out advertising and consumer protection rules. Recent competition policy literature identifies data as a source of dominance in platform markets, suggesting its relevance to such situations where platforms compete with other services. Drawing on a study of this playing field involving stakeholder interviews and a comparison of regulatory frameworks, we present a nuanced understanding of imbalances across three distinct functions of data. We consider the policy implications, arguing for more equitable access to insight from aggregate, anonymized data and financial data.

The European Union's (EU) 2018 Audiovisual Media Services Directive attempted to level the playing field upon which video sharing platforms and audiovisual media services compete by evening out advertising and consumer protection rules. Recent competition policy literature identifies data as a source of dominance in platform markets, suggesting its relevance to such situations where platforms compete with other services. Drawing on a study of this playing field involving stakeholder interviews and a comparison of regulatory frameworks, we present a nuanced understanding of imbalances across three distinct functions of data. We consider the policy implications, arguing for more equitable access to insight from aggregate, anonymized data and financial data.

This article investigates and compares the changes to both the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and the Copyright Directive, through which Europe-an Union policymakers have sought to protect European content producers, mainly in the face of competition from US-based platforms. Contributing to debates about platform and content regulation, we examine the approaches taken with these two legislative changes and assess the potential for success of the most recent efforts. Ultimately, we argue that if revised as proposed the Copyright Directive runs the risk of further adding to the imbalance of power between press publishers and online platforms, and that the level playing field approach taken in the AVSMD revision is more likely to be at least somewhat effective in addressing that imbalance.

EU policy makers are currently debating a copyright reform which aims at providing an ecosystem combating online infringements effectively through the use of algorithms while fostering, amongst others, cultural diversity. As the goals set by the EU Commission for the Digital Single Market Strategy will only be met if cultural diversity is adequately preserved and promoted, it is important to analyse how algorithms as copyright enforcement mechanisms operate. This article provides an empirical analytical framework on how cultural diversity can be measured in this context of a copyright reform suited for the digital environment.