EFF’s Teaching Copyright curriculum was created to help teachers present the laws surrounding digital rights in a balanced way.
Teaching Copyright provides lessons and ideas for opening your classroom up to discussion, letting your students express their ideas and concerns, and then guiding your students toward an understanding of the boundaries of copyright law.
Copyright law is based on the theory that ideas come in a flash of genius only one single person can produce. That person must be highly creative, if not a genius. Those ideas come to him/her complete, built on nothing but pure air and are so unique and so indistinguishable from anything others did that we call that person original.
The theory is wrong. 4 different people discovered sunspots independently in 1611; 5 people invented the steamboat between 1802 and 1807; 6 people conceived of the electric railroad between 1835 and 1850. Edison did not invent the light bulb, William Morse didn’t invent the telegraph, the brothers Wright didn’t invent the airplane.
Most inventions happened in more places at once because they are a product of their time and place. Inventors don’t create in a void, but built on the work that was made before them. Here are two of the most important researches on the topic:
The European Comission awarded the Dutch company Ecorys a contract worth €360.000 to conduct a study on how negatively is piracy affecting sales. It was a 300-page study that was delivered in 2015 but never published because it didn’t align with the commission’s preferred narrative.
It concluded, like a trove of other studies, that there was no evidence that piracy displaces sales. In videos games, piracy actually was found to boost sales.
EU paid for a report that concluded piracy isn’t harmful — and tried to hide the findings – MÁR MÁSSON MAACK, 2017
A random sample of new books for sale on Amazon.com shows more books for sale from the 1880’s than the 1980’s. Why? This paper presents new data on how copyright seems to make works disappear.
Author: Paul J. Heald. Professor of Law at University of Illinois
The study is available for download here.
“The legal monopoly created by copyright is justified by its encouragement of the creation of new works, but there is little evidence on this relationship. The file-sharing era can be viewed as a large-scale experiment allowing us to check whether events since Napster have stemmed the flow of new works.”
Joel Waldfogel found no evidence that changes since Napster have affected the quantity of new recorded music or artists coming to market.
Author: Joel Waldfogel, proffesor of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota
The study is available for download here.
Author: Rufus Pollock
The study is available for download here.
The paper attempts to show how far out of whack copyright laws are, with the simple tale of a hypothetical law professor going about a normal day, tallying up every big of copyright infringement he engages in. Law professor John Tehranian did some research a few years ago, into how much of his normal daily activity could be considered copyright infringement, and realized that under today’s insane statutory damages rules, he had a daily liability of $12.45 million — and that wasn’t because he was downloading music. It was just everyday activities that people do all the time.
Author: John Tehranian
The paper is available for download here.
Copy Culture in the US and Germany is a comparative study of digital culture, focusing on media consumption, media acquisition, and attitudes toward copyright enforcement. The study is based on a random phone survey of 2303 Americans and 1000 Germans in August-September 2011.
Authors: Joe Karaganis and Lennart Renkema (The American Assembly, Columbia University)
The study is available for download here.
Digital Opportunity follows a six-month independent review of IP and Growth, led by Professor Ian Hargreaves. He was asked to consider how the national and international IP system can best work to promote innovation and growth.
Author: Ian Hargreaves. Professor Ian Hargreaves holds the chair of Digital Economy at the Cardiff School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies and Cardiff Business School.
The study is available for download here.
This guide describes the debate that has occurred within each of the EU states during this process of implementation. It also describes the options that are available in implementation, and how these options have been exercised across the EU.
Author: FIPR. The Foundation for Information Policy Research (FIPR) is the leading think tank for Internet policy in Britain. It studies the interaction between IT, Government, business and civil society. It researches policy implications and alternatives, and promotes better understanding and dialogue between business, Government and NGOs across Europe.
The study is available for download here.
The document captures a familiar dilemma. On the one hand, Sharkey-the-romantic holds dear to the belief that there is something magical or mystical about the act of creativity, a moment in which an individual, or small group of individuals, are inspired to create. On the other hand, there is Sharkey-the-lobbyist arguing for the need for government intervention and investment for the purpose of ‘liberating creativity’. Sharkey is by no means alone in wanting to combine these two thoughts. But can they be? What contribution does public policy intervention make to creativity? Does it liberate it, or stifle it?
Authors: John Street, Dave Laing and Simone Schroff
The paper is available for download here.
Economists have almost no empirical evidence about copyright as an incentive to creativity generated by individual creators. The emphasis on creative industries as a source of economic growth has highlighted the role of creativity and of copyright as an incentive for it. Little is known, however, about the economics of creativity or what economic incentives it responds to and this is a gap in our understanding of cultural supply that requires detailed research.
Research is, however, held back by data problems concerning the measurement of creative industry output and employment and especially of the supply of core creative content, making claims of the impact of copyright difficult to assess. The impetus for the article is to express these concerns and to emphasis the need for empirical research in this area.
Author: Ruth Towse
The paper is available for download here.
This study was set up to assist the European Commission in the development of a methodology that would quantify the scope, scale and impact of IPR infringements on the European economy. In this report we offer the ‘building blocks’ for such a methodology that strives to be consistent, robust, feasible and reliable in measuring the scale of this phenomenon.
Author: RAND Europe. A not-for-profit research institute whose mission is to help improve policy and decision-making through research and analysis
The study is available for download here.
Media Piracy in Emerging Economies is the first independent, large-scale study of music, film and software piracy in emerging economies, with a focus on Brazil, India, Russia, South Africa, Mexico and Bolivia.Based on three years of work by some thirty-five researchers, Media Piracy in Emerging Economies tells two overarching stories: one tracing the explosive growth of piracy as digital technologies became cheap and ubiquitous around the world, and another following the growth of industry lobbies that have reshaped laws and law enforcement around copyright protection. The report argues that these efforts have largely failed, and that the problem of piracy is better conceived as a failure of affordable access to media in legal markets.
Edited by Joe Karaganis (Social Science Research Council). SSRC is a U.S.-based independent nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing research in the social sciences and related disciplines.
The study is available for download here.
In 2011 the Cybernorms Research Group decided to try an interesting way to deeper understand the file-sharing community. In cooperation with The Pirate Bay the group did a study called “The Research Bay” targeting their user-base. The response was huge; 75.000 respondents and over 25000 open answers. It is possible to search for certain topics, make comparisons and get output as basic graphs. There is also an option to comment or share the findings.
The Survey Bay is a collaboration between the Cybernorms Research Group of Lund University and The Pirate Bay.
The results of this collaboration are available here.
This document collects reported cases where the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA have been invoked not against pirates, but against consumers, scientists, and legitimate competitors. It will be updated from time to time as additional cases come to light.
Released by the Electronic Frontier Foundation. International non-profit digital rights group based in the United States
The study is available for download here.
“The European Union has been repeatedly having discussions for the past twelve years on how to cherish, develop and protect creation in the digital environment. So far, discussions have focused on enforcement of pre-existing legal norms and the extent to which internet providers should police and even punish their customers. Despite all of these efforts, it appears that copyright is still not respected in the European Union. As Commissioner Kroes said, “Citizens increasingly hear the word copyright and hate what is behind it.” This is a situation where everyone loses and which demands a strong policy response. This booklet looks at the foundations of the profound disconnect that has developed between citizens and the law.”
Authors: Joe McNamee, Advocacy Coordinator, Marie Humeau Kirsten Fiedler, Advocacy Managers. European Digital Rights.
The study is available for download here.
You can also check “DRM: The strange, broken world of Digital Rights Management“.
The Copyright & Creation: A Case for Promoting Inclusive Online Sharing policy brief presents new research relevant to current policy debates about copyright in the digital economy. It is part of the Media Policy Project, initiated by the London School of Economics. The project “aims to establish a deliberative relationship between policy makers, civil society actors, media professionals and relevant media research. “
You can also read:
Read the whole study here.
Author: Stephen E. Siwek of Economists Incorporated for the IIPA (International Intellectual Property Alliance)
This paper introduces the net neutrality debate. It discusses the key network design principles involved; the current move toward discrimination or “access-tiering”; the arguments involved in the debate; the approaches suggested to secure network neutrality; and the current state of play in the U.S. and Europe. Finally, it focuses on one sector likely to be particularly affected by the outcome of this debate: the media. The paper ends with a call for innovative solutions and increased engagement by public interest advocates to develop solutions that promote open, fair and sustainable societies.
Author: Stefaan G. Verhulst (London School of Economics) for Open Society Foundations Media Programme.
The study is available for download here.
You can also check the following papers:
“This memorandum lays out the public interest issues at stake legal battle over Net neutrality. It explains what Network Neutrality is and why openness is important to telecommunications infrastructure. It outlines the social and economic benefits of a regulatory regime that preserves network neutrality. It identifies the specific language
in the key provisions that risk fundamental rights and freedoms. It concludes with a guide to making Network Neutrality a fundamental regulatory principle in the European telecommunications market.”
Author: La Quadrature du Net.
The study is available for download here.
“Free Press report Finding the Bottom Line: The Truth about Network Neutrality and Investment provides overwhelming evidence, despite the claims of companies like AT&T, that Network Neutrality will not harm network investment. The report shows that open Internet rules will likely have a positive impact on investment in both the network and applications markets.”
Author: S. Derek Turner – Research Director at Free Press
The report is available for download here.
Net Neutrality: Ending Network Discrimination in Europe clarifies certain aspects of net neutrality, including the definition of network discrimination, what constitutes “reasonable” traffic management, and the impacts of network discrimination on the fundamental rights to privacy, data protection, and freedom of expression. The paper includes a set of principles that Access recommend policymakers enshrine into law, in order to ensure that the internet remains an open and non-discriminatory platform for all types of communications and content distribution.
Read the whole study here.
Authors: Giusy Cannella, Raegan MacDonald & Jochai Ben-Avie
Released by Access, an international human rights organization premised on the belief that political participation and the realization of human rights in the 21st century is increasingly dependent on access to the internet and other forms of technology. Mission: Access defends and extends the digital rights of users at risk around the world. By combining innovative policy, user engagement, and direct technical support, we fight for open and secure communications for all.
“The purpose of this booklet is to briefly outline current EU surveillance and security measures in order to give an insight into their scale and cumulative effect. In order to be legal under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, each security measure that limits fundamental rights is understood to be effective and a ‘necessary’ and ‘proportionate’ breach of the rights which our society considers to be fundamental.”
Author: Joe McNamee, Advocacy Coordinator, Kirsten Fiedler & Marie Humeau, Advocacy Managers & Daniel Dimov, intern. European Digital Rights.
The study is available for download here.
You can also check “An introduction to DATA PROTECTION“. Or the comic book “Under Surveillance“.
“86% of adult internet users have taken steps from time to time to avoid surveillance by other people or organizations when they were using the internet. Despite their precautions, 21% of online adults have had an email or social media account hijacked and 11% have had vital information like Social Security numbers, bank account data, or credit cards stolen—and growing numbers worry about the amount of personal information about them that is available online.”
Released by Pew Internet & American Life Project. It is one of seven projects that make up the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan, nonprofit “fact tank” that provides information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. The Project produces reports exploring the impact of the internet on families, communities, work and home, daily life, education, health care, and civic and political life.
The report is available for download here.
You can also take a look at: Privacy and Data Management on Mobile Devices, Privacy management on social media sites and many more other research reports about the digital habits of the US population.
“The European Data Retention Directive was written to ensure that telecom providers would retain certain data, to be made available to the police for the purpose of crime detection, investigation and prosecution. However, the Directive did not take into account the heterogeneous nature of the networks and systems of most telecom providers. This complication has made it difficult for companies to meet the Directive obligations and it is anticipated that formidable challenges will grow over time.”
Frost & Sullivan, a global growth consulting firm, has published in 2010 a whitepaper that identifies and analyses these challenges, which extend well beyond Europe.
Every year, Reporters without Borders release a study on “Enemies of the internet“, in which they cover all forms of cyber-censorship in all countries. In 2013, their report is a little different: it focuses “on the subject of online surveillance. It takes a close look at the activities of five countries and five companies that are ‘leaders’ in this domain, but the list is far from exhaustive”
You can also read their noteworthy developments in the field of cyber-censorship in the past year.
Free Haven is a project which began in December 1999 as a research project initially comprised of several MIT students. It aims to deploy a system for distributed, anonymous, persistent data storage which is robust against attempts by powerful adversaries to find and destroy any stored data. This model of decentralized system has been classified as peer-to-peer by recent popular media. Besides this, the members of the project have put together and exhaustive list of studies on surveillance and anonymity, starting all the way from the 70’s.
For those of you with technical skills, this is a good reading list that will keep you busy for quite a long time!
“On June 5, 2013, the Guardian broke the first story in what would become a flood of revelations regarding the extent and nature of the NSA’s surveillance programs. Facing an uproar over the threat such programs posed to privacy, the Obama administration scrambled to defend them as legal and essential to U.S. national security and counterterrorism. Two weeks after the first leaks by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden were published, President Obama defended the NSA surveillance programs during a visit to Berlin, saying: ‘We know of at least 50 threats that have been averted because of this information not just in the United States, but, in some cases, threats here in Germany. So lives have been saved.‘
However, our review of the government’s claims about the role that NSA “bulk” surveillance of phone and email communications records has had in keeping the United States safe from terrorism shows that these claims are overblown and even misleading.”
Read the whole study here.
Authors: Peter Bergen, David Sterman, Emily Schneider, and Bailey Cahall
Released by the New America Foundation, a nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy institute that invests in new thinkers and new ideas to address the next generation of challenges facing the United States.
If you know of a recent study or report which is not featured in the archive, don’t hesitate to tell us by leaving a comment below or sending en e-mail at editor [@] copy-me.org. We would love to hear from you! And thank you!
