Search

This paper aims to proceed with a careful analysis of the delicate balance between rights in the field of copyright enforcement. The following considerations are justified by a strong interest in current events, namely the transposition of the new European legislation that involves copyright: Directive (EU) 2019/790 of 17 April 2019 "on copyright and related rights in the digital single market". The European regulatory framework has been nationally transposed with Legislative Decree 8 November 2021, n. 177, effective from 12 December 2021. Considering, with an initial analysis, the provisions of a specific article of the aforementioned Directive, the seventeenth, it immediately emerged that it poses specific doubts of legitimacy in light of fundamental rights, as protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of The European Union. Particularly, it seems to clash with the right of respect for private and family life, with the protection of personal data and, in a word, with the right to "privacy". A peculiar conflict has therefore been selected, a source of friction between the interests underlying copyright enforcement and those of users' privacy. Although a "right to privacy" is a recent introduction, or conquest, of contemporary legal society, since an origin of the same cannot be found before the end of the nineteenth century, this paper will try, in its first section, to identify, with an anecdotal approach, some curious historical events demonstrating how, in reality, the copyright enforcement has, since its origins, shown an aptitude to enter into conflict with other instances, which we would now include into the “right to privacy”. History can provide a solid basis for understanding modern dynamics, of instances that, from the Stationers of the sixteenth-century London, are proposed, in a digital key, in the lobbying activities that led to the approval of the new Directive 2019/790. These protection strategies, evolved with the change of technology, maintained a deep connection with their historical roots of emergence. Therefore, this paper will report stories of "pirates", of business and commerce, of self-defense and of private police bodies that will be transformed from physical into bits. From the analogical world outlined in the first chapter, this paper will proceed to the digital one represented by the "file-sharing" on "peer-to-peer" networks. Taking up the historical trends, this paper will highlight the strategies that emerge in the digital world so that copyright holders can assert their needs in the dynamics of the Web, defining all the instances in which the copyright enforcement clashes with the importance of privacy protection. In this, the comparative analysis of both US and Euro-Italian regulations and court rulings will be particularly useful. Among the strategies implemented by copyright holders for the enforcement of their rights, one is worthy of independent discussion, namely the use of Digital Rights Management systems. The third chapter will therefore be focused on them and on their relations with the protection of personal data, recalling technologies such as hashing, watermarking or fingerprinting, anticipating considerations on that particular form of enforcement through electronic systems represented by the Automatic Content Recognition, connecting to the fourth chapter. Ultimately, this paper will focus on the analysis of Directive 2019/790, and particularly on its article 17, believing that all the considerations in terms of balancing rights carried out for the entire extension of this paper will merge into this provision. An attempt will then be made to provide interpretative suggestions of the new legislation, in order to highlight the shadows and criticalities in relation to the compatibility with the fundamental rights of the European Charter. This paper will therefore try to highlight at least the complexities that legal practitioners and citizens of the world are called to face when they approach the dynamics of the digital world, without claiming to be able to trace any magical criterion that solves the complexity of reality or an effective algorithm that reduces legal thought to a sum of numbers. At most, this paper will try to emphasize the most problematic characteristics that can be found in the clash between the copyright enforcement and the protection of users' privacy, hoping to provide useful considerations to those who rule the world, legislators, courts, and economic operators, aimed at suggesting that solutions to these problems cannot be found by forgetting the achievements of modern civilization in the field of fundamental rights. The truth, according to Ann Cavoukian(1), is that privacy is the foundation of our freedom: if we value freedom, we value privacy. (1) Ann Cavoukian, interviewed by Forbes, in H. Jones, Will Privacy First Be The New Normal? An Interview With Privacy Guru, Dr. Ann Cavoukian, in Forbes.com, 13 august 2018, accessible at: «https://www.forbes.com/sites/cognitiveworld/2018/08/13/will-privacy-first-be-the-new-normal-an-interview-with-privacy-guru-ann-cavoukian/?sh=132b577925dc» (Last access: 10 may 2022).

Free access to scientific knowledge has always been one of the main goals of our contemporary society. The advent of the Internet era has ensured many steps were taken towards broadening access to scientific knowledge, trying to reach all individuals. The Open Access movement was built on these principles, seeking to grant access to academic information to everyone. Despite the initial skepticism of the scientific community, the movement has gained considerable success globally, appearing to be the solution to the crisis of scientific communication and scholarly publishing. Within the academic environment, a crucial role is played by Open Access. Several universities adopt Open Access practices to enable free access to scientific knowledge without limitations of sorts. The main purpose is to break down any economic and legal barriers to the dissemination of knowledge. Transformative agreements have been implemented on the basis of the founding principles of Open Access. These are contracts negotiated between publishers and institutions with a view to transforming the current business model, the so-called subscription-based system or pay per read system, into an Open Access business model. The entire academic community and the public around the world (at least those who have access to the Internet) would benefit from this type of agreements, since bundled access to a publisher’s entire journal list would be gained and at the same time researchers would be given the opportunity to publish articles without additional costs. The aim of this paper is to critically analyze transformative agreements, focusing on the nature of these contracts, the positive or negative effects they could bring to our system as well as the potential outcomes they could achieve. This research will examine the Open Access movement and the legal issues that may arise in relation to transformative agreements, and the landscape of scientific research and scholarly publishing. An in-depth legal analysis of transformative agreements will be pursued, together with a comparative analysis of transformative agreements negotiated across Europe. The Italian framework and the approach adopted by Italian universities and consortia will be considered. After evaluating advantages and disadvantages of transformative agreements, possible solutions will be proposed, such as legal remedies and alternative standards. L’accesso al sapere ha da sempre rappresentato uno degli obiettivi principali della nostra società contemporanea. Nell’ottica di una sempre più ampia diffusione della conoscenza, a partire dalla fine degli anni ‘90 si è cercato di ampliare la platea di coloro che potessero avere accesso al sapere scientifico, cercando di raggiungere tutti gli strati della popolazione. Tutto ciò è stato determinato dallo sviluppo di Internet, la nuova tecnologia che permette la connessione e la comunicazione a livello globale, superando qualsiasi tipo di barriera spaziale o temporale. Queste premesse hanno rappresentato il punto di partenza del movimento dell’Open Access, nato con l’obiettivo di rendere il sapere scientifico accessibile a tutti, sfruttando il potere di Internet. Agli albori della nascita del movimento, il quale ha trovato riconoscimento in numerose dichiarazioni degli inizi degli anni duemila, grande era l’entusiasmo nei confronti di quella che, agli occhi di molti, appariva come la soluzione alla crisi della comunicazione scientifica e la spinta verso un nuovo modo di fare scienza. Tuttavia, è necessario puntualizzare che è possibile ottenere i risultati che l’Open Access si ripropone di raggiungere solo se questo nuovo modo di fare scienza viene adottato dal maggior numero di scienziati possibile. Nel corso del tempo, infatti, questa ha rappresentato una problematica notevole: inizialmente l’Open Access non era visto di buon occhio da numerosi scienziati, studiosi, ricercatori. Nonostante alcune correnti contrarie e l’iniziale scetticismo dei più, il movimento ha continuato ad espandersi e ha raggiunto un notevole successo a livello globale. Nel mondo accademico, in particolar modo, l’Open Access gioca un ruolo estremamente importante. Moltissimi Atenei adottano pratiche di accesso aperto per consentire al pubblico di accedere al sapere scientifico senza alcun limite. L’obiettivo è quello di infrangere qualsiasi barriera economica e giuridica alla diffusione della conoscenza. Nel solco di questa volontà di garantire l’accesso a risorse elettroniche e scientifiche tramite pratiche di Open Access si collocano gli accordi trasformativi. Si tratta di accordi che vengono negoziati tra le istituzioni nazionali e gli editori, tramite vari modelli negoziali, che dovrebbero trasformare il nostro sistema attuale, che è un sistema pay per read, in un sistema pay per publish. Ciò farebbe sì che tutte le riviste diventino riviste in Open Access. A beneficiare di questo tipo di accordi sarebbe tutta la comunità accademica e il pubblico del mondo intero (almeno di quello che ha la possibilità di accedere a Internet), poiché, a seguito della stipula di questo tipo di contratti, si otterrebbe l’accesso a tutto il pacchetto di riviste e allo stesso tempo verrebbe data la possibilità ai ricercatori di pubblicare articoli senza ulteriori costi. È necessario, però, interrogarsi sulla natura di questi contratti, sugli effetti positivi o negativi che potrebbero apportare al nostro sistema nonché sui potenziali risultati che potrebbero raggiungere. Nel far ciò, bisognerà partire da un’analisi del problema giuridico che riposa a fondo della questione, studiando in che rapporto si pongono gli accordi trasformativi rispetto alle pratiche di accesso aperto e come questi possano essenzialmente contribuire allo sviluppo dell’Open Access. Per questa ragione, nel primo capitolo del presente lavoro, dedicato all’analisi del problema giuridico esistente tra contratti trasformativi e Open Access, ci si soffermerà sull’apporto europeo alla disciplina, tramite lo sviluppo di politiche in materia di Open Access, quali ad esempio OA2020, Horizon Europe. Particolare attenzione merita, inoltre, il consorzio di Plan S. Verrà portata avanti un’analisi approfondita del rapporto tra autore ed editore, sottolineandone la disparità contrattuale. Inoltre, ci si interrogherà sull’esistenza di un vero e proprio “diritto umano alla scienza aperta” o “diritto alla ricerca”, con una chiosa finale sul diritto di messa a disposizione del pubblico in accesso aperto. Nel secondo capitolo, si passerà ad un’analisi interdisciplinare del problema, vale a dire un’analisi storico-economica del panorama attuale della ricerca scientifica e delle principali infrastrutture. Con un breve excursus storico si partirà dagli albori dell’editoria scientifica, per giungere alla situazione odierna. Nel far ciò, si farà riferimento al ciclo editoriale e alle varie fasi che permettono di arrivare alla pubblicazione dell’articolo, il quale conduce ad un’analisi delle possibili alternative in termini di riviste scientifiche. Il cuore del capitolo sta nello studio dei maggiori editori scientifici che ad oggi detengono il monopolio, quali Elsevier e Springer Nature. A questi si affianca Wiley, del quale si fa menzione. Il tutto si conclude con un approfondimento sulla valutazione della ricerca scientifica, sui problemi innescati dalla bibliometria: dall’utilizzo di indici citazionali alle conseguenze che il sistema attualmente dominante ha sulla comunità scientifica, conducendo sempre più verso la “mercificazione” della conoscenza e la privatizzazione della ricerca. Nel terzo capitolo, si andrà ad affrontare la vera e propria analisi giuridica della disciplina dei contratti trasformativi, partendo da una disamina del diritto d’autore accademico e del rapporto tra diritto d’autore ed evoluzione tecnologica. Dal punto di vista contrattuale, sarà utile analizzare il sistema delle licenze (EULA, Creative Commons), ponendo attenzione ai meccanismi commerciali quali il bundling e il price discrimination, il double-dipping. A ciò seguirà un’analisi approfondita della struttura dei contratti stessi con uno studio comparato del problema a livello dei vari ordinamenti europei, per poi soffermarsi sul caso italiano e sulle diverse posizioni adottate dalle università italiane relativamente ai contratti trasformativi. Infine, nel quarto capitolo, verranno analizzati vantaggi e svantaggi dei contratti trasformativi, proponendo possibili soluzioni alternative. In particolare, verranno analizzati eventuali rimedi giuridici e modelli contrattuali alternativi., https://lawtech.jus.unitn.it/main-menu/paper-series/student-paper-series-of-the-trento-lawtech-research-group/2/

While much of the debate on the relationship between a human right to science and copyright focuses on the exceptions and limitations to exclusive rights and on users’ rights, this paper, on the wake of previous studies, argues that it is also necessary to look at other legal mechanisms. In this perspective, it is necessary to reflect on the so called “secondary publication right”. This right is an essential tool to defend academic autonomy and freedom, which are increasingly at risk. It is not an exception or a user’s right but rather a moral and economic author’s right to open scientific texts, which is philosophically rooted on the Kantian vision of copyright (protecting the integrity of the discourse between author and public), the public use of reason and the Mertonian norms of science. The right to open scientific texts is a fundamental aspect of the human right to (open) science. Mentre gran parte del dibattito sul rapporto tra diritto umano alla scienza e alla ricerca, proprietà intellettuale e diritto d’autore si focalizza sulle eccezioni e limitazioni ai diritti di esclusiva (libere utilizzazioni) e sui diritti degli utenti, questo scritto sostiene, sulla scorta di precedenti ricerche, che occorre guardare anche ad altri dispositivi giuridici. Tra questi dispositivi spicca l’attribuzione in capo all’autore di un diritto di apertura dei testi scientifici (c.d. “secondary publication right”) a difesa dell’autonomia e della libertà accademiche, sempre più a rischio. Tale diritto non è un’eccezione o una limitazione del diritto di esclusiva né un diritto dell’utente ma un vero e proprio diritto morale (ed economico) dell’autore di aprire i testi scientifici. Esso è filosoficamente fondato sulla visione kantiana del diritto d’autore (il diritto d’autore non è una proprietà ma un diritto morale a protezione del discorso tra autore e pubblico), sull’uso pubblico della ragione e sulla norma mertoniana che prescrive la messa in comune della conoscenza scientifica. Il diritto di aprire i testi scientifici è una proiezione del diritto umano alla scienza (aperta)., In corso di pubblicazione in "Rivista di informatica e diritto", 2023. Questo scritto costituisce la rielaborazione con integrazioni, modifiche e note della relazione dal titolo "Il diritto umano alla scienza aperta e l'etica dell'insegnamento" presentata al Convegno "Ricerca, educazione e accesso al patrimonio culturale. Un confronto tra diritti fondamentali ed eccezioni al diritto d'autore", tenutosi a Roma presso il Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR), nell'Aula Marconi, il 6 maggio 2022.

In these last ten years, Maltese translation has experienced an exponential development. This was mainly due to Malta’s membership in the European Union in 2004. The inclusion of Maltese among the EU’s official languages highlighted three main problems that required urgent attention, namely terminological inadequacy, the lack of generally-accepted orthographical rules and the acute shortage of professional translators. After giving a brief historical background of the Maltese linguistic situation, this paper discusses the challenges faced by Maltese language planners and translators in the decade spanning from the eve of EU accession to the present day, focusing mainly on the measures taken to bring the Maltese language at par with the other official languages of the EU. The paper also discusses briefly the state of literary translation and its problems., peer-reviewed

Questo paper illustra la predisposizione di una ricerca empirica condotta in occasione di una tesi di dottorato e fornisce un resoconto sommario dei risultati ottenuti. La ricerca è dedicata al tema “Il diritto d'autore nell'era digitale: comportamenti, percezione sociale e livello di consapevolezza” ed è stata condotta attraverso una web-survey disponibile online per la compilazione tra il febbraio e il giugno 2011. Nel paper si procederà dapprima a spiegare gli obbiettivi della ricerca e a presentare il questionario su cui è basata la survey. Si citeranno i principali nodi metodologici incontrati nella predisposizione della ricerca e i metodi utilizzati per la raccolta e l'analisi dei dati. Poi si renderà conto del numero totale delle risposte utili raccolte e della loro distribuzione per variabili demografiche (area geografica, età, titolo di studio, occupazione, tipologia di utenti). Si entrerà quindi nel cuore dei risultati raccolti, concentrandoci unicamente sui dati relativi allo Studio 1 – Italia, che denota la maggior rappresentatività delle risposte. Il commento dei dati raccolti (espressi in alcuni casi con l'ausilio di grafici a barre) verrà condotto sulla base dei tre macro-temi della ricerca: comportamenti (ovvero come gli utenti della rete sono soliti acquisire contenuti creativi e software); opinioni e percezione (ovvero come gli utenti della rete si rapportano al problema del copyright, quali sono le loro opinioni e percezioni rispetto ai temi più caldi in materia); livello di consapevolezza (ovvero qual è l'effettivo livello di informazione e consapevolezza dei meccanismi di funzionamento del copyright da parte dei comuni utenti della rete e non degli “addetti ai lavori”). This article shows an empiric research within the context of a graduate studies thesis and provides a summary report of obtained results. The research has been carried on through a web-survey which was available online between February and June 2011. The article first explains the research goals and introduces the web-survey. Then main methodological nodes met in this research and methods used to collect and analyze data will be discussed. Then is given the results of the total number of useful responses and their distribution based on demographic variables (geographic area, age, degree, occupation and user typology). Therefore it brings into focus on the results about the Studio 1 -- Italia, which are the most representative answers. The results (in few cases showed with bar charts) will be discussed concerning the three macro-themes of the research: behaviours (that is how net users usually acquire creative contents and software); opinions and perceptions (that is how net users relate themselves to the copyright problem, which are their opinions and perceptions about the hottest themes on the subject); consciousness level (in other words what is the real information level and the copyright working principles consciousness of net users and not of experts).

Internet, mp3 files, peer-to-peer software and digital technologies for copying have radically modified the music sector. In this paper I present a theoretical model, that investigates the consequences of the appearance of a pirate low quality good (typically a mp3 file) in the music market. In this paper I propose a model of sampling, consider the possibility that the firm modifies its business entering into the low quality segment and investigate the supposed conflict between the recording company, whose profit depends on the CD sold, and the artist, whose profits depend in part on the live performance, the demand of which can increase for the positive externality due to the illegal download of music

The growing interest in intellectual property is closely linked to the role it plays in modern society, characterized by continuous technological and cultural progress and a knowledge-based economy. Therefore, intangible assets have become increasingly important and indispensable for the success of individuals and businesses on the market. In order for this value to be preserved and made profitable, it is necessary that IP rights are effectively protected against counterfeiting and plagiarism. Indeed, thanks to technological innovations and easier access to information, these phenomena have reached worrying proportions, so much so as to test the adequacy of the responses of our legal system. In particular, in the general strategy of IP enforcement, a prominent role is played by infringement damages, intended as a tool by which to allow the owner of the infringed right to obtain fair compensation. However, traditionally, the institution of compensation has not always been up to this task, especially in view of the characteristics of intangible assets and counterfeiting phenomena, as well as due to a compensatory function focused too much on the damage suffered, so as to miss the other direct consequence of the harmful conduct: the profits gained by the infringer. With the intention of making up for this shortcoming, the legislator has been inspired by common law systems, in particular the US system and the remedy of disgorgement of profits, for the introduction of the retroversion of profits, an instrument foreign to our civil tradition that allows the return of profits unlawfully obtained from the violation of IP rights. Consequently, the remedy not only plays a compensatory function, but also a preventive-deterrent and punitive-sanctioning one. This thesis aims to critically analyze how the introduction of the retroversion of profits has led to redefine the concept of damages and, more generally, of civil liability in the field of intellectual property. Moreover, through a comparative analysis of the US and Italian legal systems, this work will try to evaluate how the retroversion of profits is applied in practice and how it has affected the determination of infringement damage awards, how these remedies interact and what results it has produced in terms of quality of protection. First of all, the first chapter will focus on the relationship between the nature of IP rights and the adequacy of the responses provided by the civil liability regime. By retracing the doctrinal and jurisprudential paths that have prepared the ground for the advent of the retroversion of profits, the perplexities and risks that have always characterized the compensatory damages and that also involve the new remedy will be identified. Finally, through a broader understanding of the institution of the disgorgement of profits in the United States, it will be possible to identify how the Italian system has made this instrument its own by means of the provisions of art. 125 c.p.i. and 158 l.a., as amended by legislative decree no. 140 of 16 March 2006, in implementation of Directive 2004/48/CE, and how this has contributed to rediscovering the multifunctional nature of civil liability. In the second chapter, the subject of the analysis will be the patent for invention and how its protection is achieved by means of compensatory damages and the retroversion of profits as governed by art. 125 c.p.i. After identifying the essential features of the discipline of this IP right, it will be illustrated, through comparison with the US system, how the quantification of damage awards is carried out in practice by the Italian courts and overseas, trying to outline problems and solutions, common and different. In light of this, an evaluation will be carried out regarding the innovative scope of the retroversion of profits, both in its declination of renewed attention to the profit of the counterfeiter (paragraphs 1 and 2 of art. 125 c.p.i.) and as an autonomous remedy which is independent of infringer culpability (paragraph 3 of art. 125 c.p.i.). In conclusion, the third chapter will focus on the copyright protection and how compensatory damages and retroversion of profits are brought together under art. 158 l.a. The complexity of copyright, resulting from the peculiarities of intellectual works and rights recognized on them, is reflected in the difficulty of determining damage awards in case of infringement or plagiarism. In relation to this, the continuous references to US copyright regime will allow to observe the evolution of Italian jurisprudence, which shares with the overseas one the same problems. Finally, the intertwining of damages and retroversion of profits will allow to make an in-depth reflection on the relevance of infringer culpability and on the possible implications arising from its enhancement, in a perspective of increasing quality of the response of our legal system to infringements., Trento Law and Technology Research Group, Student Paper Series; 73

In the European Union, also by virtue of its status of fundamental right, copyright is given a protection which tends to be hypertrophic, without this being justified by the necessity to provide incentives to creation. Indeed, on the one hand copyright owners��� exclusive rights are interpreted extensively, on the other a restrictive approach is applied with regard to copyright limitations and exceptions, which are in charge of enabling unauthorised uses of protected works. In particular, copyright limitations and exceptions tend to be considered as derogations to the principle according to which copyright must be given a high level of protection. The assumption that limitations and exceptions have a derogatory nature implies that they cannot be interpreted in an extensive or analogical manner. This approach is problematic as it fails to acknowledge that copyright limitations and exceptions protect users��� fundamental freedoms, inter alia the human right to science, freedom of expression and the right to participate in cultural life. Once confronted with these rights, copyright cannot be said anymore to deserve an aprioristically high protection. In the light of the foregoing, the need emerges to foster a more integrated system, where copyright owners��� exclusive rights can interact more physiologically with users��� fundamental freedoms. This is a crucial issue in the light of the digital revolution, which makes it possible for knowledge to circulate in a fast and cheap way. To tell the truth, the exigence to elaborate concrete solutions has become even more urgent due to the Covid-19 pandemic, which has made it clear that it is vitally important to promote content sharing, above all to foster scientific research. This study aims at analysing the present copyright system in the European Union in order to scrutinise its most problematic aspects and to formulate proposals with a view to fostering a better balance between the various interests at stake. This analysis will adopt a comparative approach. More specifically, it will take into account the US and the Canadian legal systems with a view to borrowing some solutions which may be applicable to the copyright system as conceived in the European Union. Indeed, the US and the Canadian legal systems stand out as they endorse a model of exceptions which is more flexible than the paradigm the European Union adopts. The findings of the present comparative analysis will be tested in the so-called GLAM sector. In particular, GLAM is an acronym which stands for ���galleries, libraries, archives and museums���. The choice to focus on the activities of cultural institutions is justified by the fact that, as the depositaries of scientific knowledge and cultural heritage, they are constantly expected to make cultural rights effective while dealing with copyright owners��� exclusive rights on the works included in their collections. It is not the case that the European legislator has long been concerned to enlarge the number of unauthorised uses permitted to cultural heritage institutions, most recently with the Directive 2019/790. This study is articulated in three chapters. The first one aims at giving an overview of the most problematic aspects this work tries to deal with. With this objective in mind, first of all it will be necessary to give an account of the nature and the functions of copyright thanks to a brief excursus about the theories which have been justifying its recognition and development in the various legal systems. This will allow to point out the main convergences and divergences between the so-called author���s rights, as elaborated in the civil law tradition, and their homologous in common law countries, id est copyright. It will be underlined that, while continental legal systems protect author���s rights by giving relevance not only to the rightsholders��� economic interests, but also to their moral interests, copyright is intended as a monopoly created by law and meant to act as an economic incentive to creation. In this regard, a terminological specification is needed: the term ���copyright��� will be used with specific regard to the common law systems, while the expression ���author���s rights��� will be referred exclusively to the civil law paradigm. However, it is noteworthy that such a distinction will not be applied with regard to the European Union system, with regard to which the terms ���copyright��� and ���author���s rights��� will be used in an interchangeable manner. Indeed, the European Union system does not fully adhere neither to the former nor to the latter model. Among the justificative theories of copyright, the Kantian and the social planning ones will enable the proper understanding of copyright limitations and exceptions as mechanisms, inherent to the copyright system itself, underpinning users��� fundamental rights. This recognition will imply that copyright, recognised as a fundamental right in the European Union, will be expected to interact with users��� freedoms. In particular, this study will suggest that the balance between the various interests at stake may be fostered by using the so-called Drittwirkung, which consists in the horizontal application of fundamental rights. Drittwirkung is not unknown to the European Union jurisprudence. However, it will be underlined that, in order to further foster its role, it is desirable to proceed to the prodromic search of the minimum and irreducible content of copyright. This is a process the European Union jurisprudence has not completed yet. In particular, it will be noted that copyright can be observed from two main perspectives. On the one hand, it can be assimilated to a property right. On the other, following the approach which is more spread in common law countries, copyright can be considered as a legal monopoly pre-ordered to the promotion of knowledge dissemination. Both these conceptions will be analysed with the view to identifying which vision is the most inclined to foster a better balance between copyright and users��� interests. It will be concluded that conceiving copyright as a legal monopoly has the advantage to promote the balance between the various interests at stake under the aegis of the proportionality principle and to galvanise the extensive and analogical application of the exceptions. It will be noted that, in the copyright sector, the Court of Justice already makes a desirable and appropriate use of the proportionality principle. However, there is a step forward to make, as the Court has not yet endorsed the possibility to interpret the exceptions in an extensive and analogical manner. The second chapter has the ambition to conduct a comparative analysis. Indeed, it will be underlined that the restrictive approach to exceptions and limitations in the European Union can be explained in the light of the fact that the European Union adopts the mechanism of the so-called ���closed exceptions���. This model will be contrasted first with the US paradigm, which stands out for the open clause known as ���fair use���. Then, this study will deal with the potentialities of the Canadian clause of ���fair dealing���, which, despite not being an open exception, is featured by a high level of flexibility. What fair use and fair dealing have in common is that they are both underpinned by the common law conception of copyright as a limited legal monopoly pre-ordered to knowledge dissemination. With specific regard to fair use, the four factors, on which its jurisprudential application is based, will be briefly examined. This analysis will have the merit to confirm the impression of a part of the US doctrine claiming that, if it is true that fair use is a flexible clause, this does not mean that fair use is so unpredictable to undermine the solidity of the copyright system. This because the conflict between fair use and copyright is only apparent, as both of them share the same constitutional foundation, that is the so- called Copyright Clause. This is witnessed by the fact that fair use has the inherent vocation to cover transformative uses of protected works. More evidently than fair use, the Canadian clause of fair dealing has the merit to safeguard users��� access to copyright works, by breaking the equation between creative uses and public interest: indeed, copyright pursues its objective to disseminate knowledge when users are able to have access to works, without being relevant whether access is prodromic to further creative inputs by users. Thanks to the analysis of various relevant cases decided by the Canadian Supreme Court, it will be demonstrated that the fair dealing clause can be a precious source of inspiration as a forge of new possible unauthorised uses of copyright works. In the light of the analysis conducted with regard to fair use and fair dealing, some suggestions will be formulated with a view to making the European Union copyright system more flexible. With this objective in mind, this study will proceed to an analysis of the role of the three-step test which may stand out as a European version of the fair use clause. In particular, following some doctrinal inputs and the approach adopted by the Spanish jurisprudence, it will be demonstrated that the Court of Justice has erroneously intended the three-step test as a filter further limiting the application of copyright limitations and exceptions established by the law. It will be suggested that the three-step test should be conceived as a proactive clause enabling the extensive and analogical application of closed exceptions. The third chapter aims at proposing some concrete applications of the reasoning conducted in the first two parts of this study. As stated above, the GLAM sector will be taken into consideration. An aspect which will be given great relevance is the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the intersections between copyright and the activities of cultural heritage institutions which, indeed, could have played a more decisive role as enablers of scientific research if only digital content sharing had not been so hampered by copyright. Moreover, it will be underlined that, during the period commonly known as lockdown, digitisation of contents became essential to ensure the effectiveness of the right to participate in cultural life. After a brief excursus about the copyright limitations and exceptions dedicated to the GLAM sector, the single provisions regarding the GLAM sector in Directive 2019/790 will be analysed. In particular, the fallowing ones will be examined: articles 3 and 4 about text and data mining; article 6 enabling the preservation of cultural heritage; article 8 about the uses of out-of-commerce works; article 14, which states that reproductions of works of visual art in the public domain are not subject to copyright and related rights. These norms will be examined in the light of the vision which conceives copyright as a legal monopoly pre-ordered to the pursuance of public interest. Some proposals will be made with regard to the implementation and the interpretation of the Directive 2019/790, also on the basis of the precious hints which can be taken from the US fair use and the Canadian fair dealing., Trento Law and Technology Research Group, Student Paper Series; 72

The legal case between the soprano Rosetta Pampanini and the Italian radio (Eiar) in the years 1938-1940 presents singular features. The controversy led to the first decision of the Supreme Court of Cassation on the rights of performers, in a decisive phase of their discipline. In fact, the judges dealt with the problems raised by the 1928 broadcasting law, on the eve of the new copyright law (1941), which defined the issue at the end of a debate initiated by Italian doctrine also on international tables. This paper considers the Italian experience in both its scientific and jurisprudential perspective. The aim of the research is to draw attention to a significant fragment of this little-explored history and to ascertain the contribution that the defensive strategy elaborated by Filippo Vassalli and Giuseppe Ferri, as lawyers of Eiar, gave to the determination of the nature of the artists’ rights with respect to copyright.

The intersection of copyright and design is problematic. Despite the attempt of harmonization at EU level, national applications of EU principles appear confused and contradictory. This paper will focus on the Italian legal system, although there will be short references to the United Kingdom, where the harmonizing grip of the European Court of Justice unfolds - or at least has unfolded prior to Brexit - emblematically. After a first illustration of the Italian legislation on the protection of industrial design, which will examine in detail the difficulties related to the intersection of copyright and other forms of protection, we will focus on the conflictual meaning and scope of the criterion of artistic value against the interpretation of the originality threshold for copyright protection suggested by the European Court of Justice. The second part of the essay is dedicated to the analysis of related case law, which offers further and specific food for thought that flows into the final paragraph., in corso di pubblicazione in pubblicazione in B. Pasa (ed.), Design, innovazione tecnologica e digitale. Proposta interdi-sciplinare per ripensare le tutele / Design, technological and digital innovation. Interdisci-plinary proposals for reshaping legal protections, ESI Napoli, 2021.

There is a large stream of literature related to academic copyright. Nonetheless a comprehensive interdisciplinary analysis of the interplay between economic rights and the moral right of paternity appears to be missing. Furthermore, the impact of the commodification of research on academic copyright has not been sufficiently investigated. This essay aims precisely to fill these gaps. The main idea is the following: in the current age of metrics and numbers, academic copyright on scientific texts undergoes a distortion that is altering its nature and scope, which is indeed one of the consequences of the worrying process of research commodification., Trento LawTech Research Paper nr. 37

Discussione della proposta di legge (camera.395.18) sull'accesso aperto, presentata al parlamento italiano nel marzo 2018, che spiega perché sarebbe preferibile renderlo possibile con modifiche al diritto d'autore piuttosto che in seno a una disciplina per la tutela dei beni culturali. The paper deals with a bill presented to the Italian parliament by Luigi Gallo, whose goal is enhancing the current institutional Open Access mandate. However, strengthening institutional mandates without coping with copyright might just increase the bureaucratic burden on the shoulders of universities and individual researchers without managing to open a proportionate amount of scientific literature. Italy, therefore, should consider the idea of following the German, Dutch and French path: empowering authors by granting them a right to make their works available to the public for free, after a rather short period of time.

The starting point of this research are a number of selected lawsuits in which copyright holders have tried to enforce their rights against Internet users suspected of illegal file-sharing. In so doing, copyright enforcement collided with users’ information privacy. Employing a comparative and multidisciplinary approach, my aim is to understand the way judges solve the mentioned conflict between information privacy and copyright enforcement. The comparison involves the European system (with particular regard to Italy) and the North American ones (US and Canada). The idea behind my analysis is that technology affects society, which in turn affects lawmakers, and even judges. Indeed, judges do not live a secluded life, but operate within a society. Therefore, it is at least plausible, if not necessary, that their decisions reflect the values of that society. Many studies illustrate the way courts decide and if and how they can be influenced by the society and culture in which they operate. To assess if my statement is sound, I shall consider the perception of copyright in the three normative systems. The same analysis is undertaken with regard to information privacy. Importance is given also to the policies adopted for the two rights. Unsurprisingly, technology has affected in many ways the substance of both privacy and copyright norms, as well as people’s lives and people’s way of behaving. This has led to a different perception of the need to protect the aforementioned rights. The question I mean to answer is the following: could this be a reason why, despite similar legal frameworks, the outcomes of lawsuits are quite different among the considered legal systems? This is the goal of my research, conscious of the fact that anyway my answer can be just one of the many possible explanations., Trento LawTech Research Paper nr. 20

L’articolo intende presentare l’esperienza fatta all’Università della Tuscia, dove, grazie alla collaborazione tra docenti e bibliotecari, si è realizzato un archivio aperto istituzionale fin dal 2005, Unitus DSpace. Particolare attenzione viene data alla comunità Tesi di dottorato, cui hanno lavorato i bibliotecari, che ha visto instaurarsi un clima di costante e fattiva collaborazione anche con gli uffici amministrativi competenti. Promozione della filosofia open access, metadati, copyright, soluzioni tecniche sono state alcune delle problematiche affrontate. Ora ci attende una verifica dei risultati per continuare a crescere. This paper illustrates the experience made at Tuscia University about both the creation and the administration of an institutional repository. Unitus DSpace, this is the name of the open archive, has been created by means of collaboration between academic staff and librarians, and has been in function since 2005. A particular attention has been given to doctoral thesis, upon which the work of librarians has been focused on, having a constant and active cooperation with the competent administrative staff. Other issues which have been handled are promotion of open access movement in the university, metadata standards, copyright, and more technical aspects. Next step is an analysis and review of the results so to constantly improve Unitus Dspace.