Group Details Private

Global Moderators

Forum wide moderators

  • The compatibility or validity of national transpositions of Article 17 CDSM Directive

    Article 17 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive (CDSM) Directive (2019/790) introduces a new authorization and liability regime for online content-sharing service providers (OCSSPs). Member States were required to implement the new regime by June 7, 2021, although many have failed to do so. In addition, existing national transposition laws and proposals of Article 17 show significant divergences. Indeed, those Member States that have already introduced the national rules on OCSSPs might need to reconsider their national laws to comply with the recent CJEU judgment in Case C-401/19.

    How do you evaluate the compatibility of the national transpositions (and available proposals for transposition) of Article 17 in your Member State with EU law, and how do you think your national transposition can reach the necessary balance between copyright holders’, end-users’ and businesses’ fundamental rights? More precisely, do you think a literal (minimalist) or a more detailed implementation of Article 17(4) can reach this goal more efficiently?

    Want to know more?

    posted in Intermediaries
  • The interplay of Article 17 CDSM Directive with the Digital Services Act

    Following a proposal on 15 December 2020, the EU is set to adopt in 2022 the Digital Services Act (DSA). The DSA carries out a regulatory overhaul of the horizontal rules on intermediary liability in the e-Commerce Directive (2000/31/EC) and introduces new due diligence obligations for intermediary services. At this point, it is still unclear how the DSA’s
    rules interact with existing sector-specific lex specialis rules, particularly the regime for online content-sharing service providers (OCSSPs) set forth in Article 17 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market (CDSM) Directive (2019/790). Our analysis suggests that the DSA will apply to OCSSPs insofar as it contains rules that regulate matters not covered by Article 17 CDSM Directive, as well as specific rules on matters where Article 17 leaves a margin of discretion to Member States. This includes, to varying degrees, DSA rules relating to the liability of intermediary providers and to due diligence obligations for online platforms of different sizes. Importantly, we consider that such rules apply even where Article 17 CDSM Directive contains specific (but less precise) regulation on the matter.

    For national law makers and policy makers, a key question is: how do you plan to adjust national laws and rules for platforms that are subject not only to Article 17 CDSM Directive but also to the DSA? For platforms, a key question is: how do you plan to adapt your content moderation systems to deal with the different and overlapping rules applying to copyright infringement and to other types of illegal content?

    Want to know more?

    posted in Intermediaries
  • The changing face of copyright content moderation in Europe: how will platforms adjust to Article 17?

    The regulatory landscape for copyright content moderation has changed with the adoption at EU level and ongoing implementations of Article 17 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive (CDSM) Directive (2019/790), the European Commission's Guidance (COM), and the more recent CJEU case law, especially the judgment in Case C-401/19. Article 17 CDSM Directive regulates, inter alia, that users may rely on certain limitations and exceptions (quotation, criticism, review and caricature, parody or pastiche, cf. Article 17(7)), which are central for the access to culture and underlying fundamental rights. The Court’s judgement in C-401/19 further clarifies that Article 17(7) incorporates user rights, which application must be ensured by Member States and platforms.

    How do you already adapt or plan to adapt your content moderation rules, technologies and practices to this changing copyright regime? Which challenges do you think future copyright regulation still needs to tackle?

    Want to know more?

    posted in Intermediaries
  • RE: GLAM@Home Training - WIPS 6th ed. (Szeged, Hungary)

    File 3
    Training materials

    reCreating.png inDICEs.png

    Case A – Guide on Exceptions for Text and Data Mining (inDICEs)
    Available in inDICEs Deliverable D2.4, soon at https://indices-culture.eu

    Article 3 of the DSM Directive requires member states to introduce a mandatory exception for text and data mining for research purposes, without the need to ask for authorization from the rightsholder.
    Article 4 of the DSM Directive requires member states to introduce an exception for anyone who wishes to mine materials – but the rightsholder can still oppose to the use of their copyrighted works.

    Article 3:

    • Beneficiaries: research organizations, cultural heritage institutions; any person with lawful access to the copyrighted work and affiliated with a research organization or cultural heritage institution; only research organizations fully dedicated to commercial and for-profit interests are excluded.
    • Copyrighted Works: copyrighted subject matter, subject matter protected by neighboring rights (performances, recordings...), databases. Not software. Lawful access included any acquisition, licensed work, or the open web (content accessible to the public).
    • Scope: the provision creates an exception for acts of reproduction (of copyrighted works) and extraction of the contents of a database. Any reproduction is allowed as long as it is needed to perform text and data mining. This text and data mining can only be done for “scientific purposes” – any form of educational or scientific production. Commercial text and data mining is included. Beneficiaries should be able to rely on their private partners for carrying out their text and data mining (Recital 11).
    • Contractual and technological override: any contractual provision contrary to the exception is unenforceable, regardless of the jurisdiction or place of signing of the contract. Technical protection measures are allowed but they explicitly shall not “undermine the effective application of the exception” (Recital 16), and the beneficiary is granted the right to seek means to remove them.

    Article 4:

    • Beneficiaries: any organization or individual that wants to use copyrighted works for text and data mining, as long as they have lawful access to the content and are not prevented by contract.
    • Copyrighted Works: all the works foreseen in Article 3 + computer programs. Lawful access included any acquisition, licensed work, or the open web (content accessible to the public).
    • Scope: the same acts of reproduction as foreseen in Article 3. Any purpose is accepted. There are no limits on the type of beneficiary (both commercial and non-commercial text and data mining is possible, too).
    • Contractual and technological override: the exception can be restricted by contract (like terms and conditions, but also machine-readable means like robots.txt). A lawful application of the provision cannot be unproportionally restricted by technical measures, and the beneficiary is granted the right to seek means to remove them.

    __

    Case B - Excerpts from reCreating Europe Deliverable 5.3 - Guidelines & FAQs (GM) industries (2021)
    Consult the full deliverable here

    On preservation
    Are there EU copyright exceptions and limitations that promote digital preservation?
    Yes. Generally, exceptions and limitations to copyright permit certain uses of the work or other subject matter that would be otherwise not allowed. Under EU Copyright Law, there are specific exceptions and limitations that make the digital preservation or other use of copyrighted works or other subject matter by CHIs possible.
    Within EU Copyright law and the InfoSoc Directive, Member States have been encouraged to adopt non-mandatory exceptions or limitations for acts of reproduction by cultural institutions, as for when the reproduction has not a commercial aim (Article 5(2) InfoSoc Directive).
    More recently, however, EU Copyright dispositions in the CDSMD have mandated Member States to create new exceptions or limitations and rules addressed to CHIs, that are of mandatory nature. These new dispositions establish Member States shall provide exceptions and limitations (Articles 8- 11 CDSMD) that would allow CHIs to use orphan works - that are works for which the rightholder cannot be identified - and out-of-commerce works - that are works not available through channels of commerce. These specific exceptions and limitations primarily regard the case that works or other subject matter are permanently included in the CHIs collections.
    Another rule (Article 14 CDSMD) establishes that Member States shall exclude copyright or related rights on the reproductions of works of visual arts in the public domain. Finally, a specific provision (Article 6 CDSMD) mandatorily requires Member States to adopt an exception or limitation for CHIs when their objective is preserving works or other subject matter that are permanently in their collections.

    What does Article 6 of the CDSMD provide?
    Article 6 of the CDSMD mandatorily requires Member States to provide for an exception or limitation to copyright, so that CHIs can make copies of works in their permanent collections for the aim of preservation.
    The exception allows CHIs to make copies of any works or other subject matter that are permanently in their collections, e.g., as a result of a transfer of ownership or a licence agreement, legal deposit obligations or permanent custody arrangements. The copy can be in any format or medium and, according to recital n. 27 of the CDSMD, it shall also be made by the appropriate preservation tool, means or technology, in the required number, at any point in the life of a work.

    On orphan works
    What laws apply to the use of orphan works in Europe?
    The essential European legal framework applicable to orphan works comprises the Orphan Works Directive, Directive 2012/28/EU (“OWD”), and its implementation at the national level. The same OWD specifies that its provisions shall not interfere with other national arrangements concerning the management of rights nor with national provisions on anonymous or pseudonymous works. Similarly, the OWD shall be without prejudice to other applicable legal provisions, including those referring to intellectual property rights, competition, data protection and privacy, legal deposit and access to public documents, contracts, freedom of the press and freedom of expression in the media.

    What are the main elements of the Orphan Works Directive?
    The OWD permits certain uses of orphan works by publicly accessible libraries, educational establishments and museums, archives, film or audio heritage institutions and public-service broadcasting organisations, established in the Member States, to achieve their public-interest missions. For that it requires that Member States provide for an exception or limitation to the right of reproduction and the right of making available to the public provided in the Infosoc Directive to ensure that the beneficiary organisations are permitted to use orphan works contained in their collections. Such uses are allowed provided that a diligent search prior to the use is undertaken.
    (...)

    What uses are permitted under the Orphan Works Directive?
    Orphan works can be used in following ways: by making the orphan work available to the public or by acts of reproduction, within the meaning of the Infosoc Directive, for the purposes of digitisation, making available, indexing, cataloguing, preservation or restoration. Such uses are only permitted in order to achieve aims related to the beneficiary organisations’ public-interest missions, in particular the preservation of, the restoration of, and the provision of cultural and educational access to, works and phonograms contained in their collection.
    The name of identified authors and other rightsholders in any use of an orphan work must be indicated.

    On out-of commerce works
    What are out-of-commerce works?
    Copyrighted works that are not available through customary channels of commerce, as no longer commercially exploited by rights holders, or that have never been intended for commercial exploitation, as if not published or disclosed. They can be, e.g., books that are out of print, films that are out of circulation, a leaflet not subject to commercialisation.

    What are the main features of the EU out-of-commerce provisions?
    Articles 8-11 CDSMD provide CHIs with the possibility to digitise out-of-commerce works and make these available to the public, through (a) a licensing mechanism issued by representative Collective Management Organizations (CMOs) that copyright holders appoint to manage their rights, or, in case of not sufficient CMO representation, (b) an exception to copyright. However, rightsholders may optout and request that the works made available be removed. The extended licensing mechanism allows use of out-of-commerce works in any Member States, while the copyright exception only applies in the Member State where the CHI undertaking that use is established. To guarantee the effectiveness of such provisions, the CDSMD urges Member States to facilitate dialogue between the representatives of users and of rights holders.

    Who are the beneficiaries of the EU out-of-commerce provisions?
    Articles 8-11 CDSMD concern cultural heritage institutions that should be allowed for reproduction, distribution, communication to the public or making available to the public of out-of-commerce works or other subject matter that are permanently in their collections. CHIs should sign under a non- exclusive licence for non-commercial purposes with a representative collective management organisation, or based on a copyright exception, also only for non-commercial purposes.

    posted in GLAM (galleries
  • RE: GLAM@Home Training - WIPS 6th ed. (Szeged, Hungary)

    File 2
    Selected legislation

    reCreating.png inDICEs.png

    CDSMD. Directive 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC

    Article 3
    Text and data mining for the purposes of scientific research

    1. Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Article 5(a) and Article 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, and Article 15(1) of this Directive for reproductions and extractions made by research organisations and cultural heritage institutions in order to carry out, for the purposes of scientific research, text and data mining of works or other subject matter to which they have lawful access.
    2. Copies of works or other subject matter made in compliance with paragraph 1 shall be stored with an appropriate level of security and may be retained for the purposes of scientific research, including for the verification of research results.
    3. Rightholders shall be allowed to apply measures to ensure the security and integrity of the networks and databases where the works or other subject matter are hosted. Such measures shall not go beyond what is necessary to achieve that objective.
    4. Member States shall encourage rightholders, research organisations and cultural heritage institutions to define commonly agreed best practices concerning the application of the obligation and of the measures referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 respectively.

    Article 4
    Exception or limitation for text and data mining

    1. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights provided for in Article 5(a) and Article 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Article 4(1)(a) and (b) of Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 15(1) of this Directive for reproductions and extractions of lawfully accessible works and other subject matter for the purposes of text and data mining.
    2. Reproductions and extractions made pursuant to paragraph 1 may be retained for as long as is necessary for the purposes of text and data mining.
    3. The exception or limitation provided for in paragraph 1 shall apply on condition that the use of works and other subject matter referred to in that paragraph has not been expressly reserved by their rightholders in an appropriate manner, such as machine-readable means in the case of content made publicly available online.
    4. This Article shall not affect the application of Article 3 of this Directive.

    Article 6
    Preservation of cultural heritage
    Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Article 5(a) and Article 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 15(1) of this Directive, in order to allow cultural heritage institutions to make copies of any works or other subject matter that are permanently in their collections, in any format or medium, for purposes of preservation of such works or other subject matter and to the extent necessary for such preservation.

    Article 8
    Use of out-of-commerce works and other subject matter by cultural heritage institutions

    1. Member States shall provide that a collective management organisation, in accordance with its mandates from rightholders, may conclude a non-exclusive licence for non-commercial purposes with a cultural heritage institution for the reproduction, distribution, communication to the public or making available to the public of out-of-commerce works or other subject matter that are permanently in the collection of the institution, irrespective of whether all rightholders covered by the licence have mandated the collective management organisation, on condition that:
      (a)the collective management organisation is, on the basis of its mandates, sufficiently representative of rightholders in the relevant type of works or other subject matter and of the rights that are the subject of the licence; and
      (b) all rightholders are guaranteed equal treatment in relation to the terms of the licence.

    2. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights provided for in Article 5(a), (b), (d) and (e) and Article 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC, and Article 15(1) of this Directive, in order to allow cultural heritage institutions to make available, for non-commercial purposes, out-of-commerce works or other subject matter that are permanently in their collections, on condition that:
      (a)the name of the author or any other identifiable rightholder is indicated, unless this turns out to be impossible; and
      (b) such works or other subject matter are made available on non-commercial websites.

    3. Member States shall provide that the exception or limitation provided for in paragraph 2 only applies to types of works or other subject matter for which no collective management organisation that fulfils the condition set out in point (a) of paragraph 1 exists.

    4. Member States shall provide that all rightholders may, at any time, easily and effectively, exclude their works or other subject matter from the licensing mechanism set out in paragraph 1 or from the application of the exception or limitation provided for in paragraph 2, either in general or in specific cases, including after the conclusion of a licence or after the beginning of the use concerned.

    5. A work or other subject matter shall be deemed to be out of commerce when it can be presumed in good faith that the whole work or other subject matter is not available to the public through customary channels of commerce, after a reasonable effort has been made to determine whether it is available to the public.
      Member States may provide for specific requirements, such as a cut-off date, to determine whether works and other subject matter can be licensed in accordance with paragraph 1 or used under the exception or limitation provided for in paragraph 2. Such requirements shall not extend beyond what is necessary and reasonable, and shall not preclude being able to determine that a set of works or other subject matter as a whole is out of commerce, when it is reasonable to presume that all works or other subject matter are out of commerce.

    6. Member States shall provide that the licences referred to in paragraph 1 are to be sought from a collective management organisation that is representative for the Member State where the cultural heritage institution is established.

    7. This Article shall not apply to sets of out-of-commerce works or other subject matter if, on the basis of the reasonable effort referred to in paragraph 5, there is evidence that such sets predominantly consist of:
      (a)works or other subject matter, other than cinematographic or audiovisual works, first published or,
      in the absence of publication, first broadcast in a third country;
      (b)cinematographic or audiovisual works, of which the producers have their headquarters or habitual
      residence in a third country; or
      (c)works or other subject matter of third country nationals, where after a reasonable effort no
      Member State or third country could be determined pursuant to points (a) and (b).
      By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, this Article shall apply where the collective management organisation is sufficiently representative, within the meaning of point (a) of paragraph 1, of rightholders of the relevant third country.

    Article 9
    Cross-border uses

    1. Member States shall ensure that licences granted in accordance with Article 8 may allow the use of out-of-commerce works or other subject matter by cultural heritage institutions in any Member State.
    2. The uses of works and other subject matter under the exception or limitation provided for in Article 8(2) shall be deemed to occur solely in the Member State where the cultural heritage institution undertaking that use is established.

    Article 14
    Works of visual art in the public domain
    Member States shall provide that, when the term of protection of a work of visual art has expired, any material resulting from an act of reproduction of that work is not subject to copyright or related rights, unless the material resulting from that act of reproduction is original in the sense that it is the author's own intellectual creation.

    __

    InfoSoc Directive. Directive 2001/29/EC on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society

    Article 5
    Exceptions and limitations
    (...)

    1. Member States may provide for exceptions or limitations to the reproduction right provided for in Article 2 in the following cases:
      (...)
      (c) in respect of specific acts of reproduction made by publicly accessible libraries, educational establishments or museums, or by archives, which are not for direct or indirect economic or commercial advantage;
      (...)

    2. Member States may provide for exceptions or limitations to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 in the following cases:
      (...)
      (d) quotations for purposes such as criticism or review, provided that they relate to a work or other subject-matter which has already been lawfully made available to the public, that, unless this turns out to be impossible, the source, including the author's name, is indicated, and that their use is in accordance with fair practice, and to the extent required by the specific purpose;
      (...)
      (h) useofworks,suchasworksofarchitectureorsculpture,madetobelocatedpermanentlyinpublic places;
      (i) incidental inclusion of a work or other subject-matter in other material;
      (...)

    3. Where the Member States may provide for an exception or limitation to the right of reproduction pursuant to para- graphs 2 and 3, they may provide similarly for an exception or limitation to the right of distribution as referred to in Article 4 to the extent justified by the purpose of the authorised act of reproduction.

    __

    Orphan works Directive. Directive 2012/28/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on certain permitted uses of orphan works

    Article 1
    Subject-matter and scope

    1. This Directive concerns certain uses made of orphan works by publicly accessible libraries, educational establishments and museums, as well as by archives, film or audio heritage institutions and public-service broadcasting organisations, established in the Member States, in order to achieve aims related to their public-interest missions.
    2. This Directive applies to:
      (a)works published in the form of books, journals, newspapers, magazines or other writings contained
      in the collections of publicly accessible libraries, educational establishments or museums as well as
      in the collections of archives or of film or audio heritage institutions;
      (b)cinematographic or audiovisual works and phonograms contained in the collections of publicly
      accessible libraries, educational establishments or museums as well as in the collections of archives
      or of film or audio heritage institutions; and
      (c)cinematographic or audiovisual works and phonograms produced by public-service broadcasting
      organisations up to and including 31 December 2002 and contained in their archives;
      which are protected by copyright or related rights and which are first published in a Member State or, in the absence of publication, first broadcast in a Member State.
    3. This Directive also applies to works and phonograms referred to in paragraph 2 which have never been published or broadcast but which have been made publicly accessible by the organisations referred to in paragraph 1 with the consent of the rightholders, provided that it is reasonable to assume that the rightholders would not oppose the uses referred to in Article 6. Member States may limit the application of this paragraph to works and phonograms which have been deposited with those organisations before 29 October 2014.
    4. This Directive shall also apply to works and other protected subject-matter that are embedded or incorporated in, or constitute an integral part of, the works or phonograms referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3.
    5. This Directive does not interfere with any arrangements concerning the management of rights at national level.

    Article 2
    Orphan works

    1. A work or a phonogram shall be considered an orphan work if none of the rightholders in that work or phonogram is identified or, even if one or more of them is identified, none is located despite a diligent search for the rightholders having been carried out and recorded in accordance with Article 3.
    2. Where there is more than one rightholder in a work or phonogram, and not all of them have been identified or, even if identified, located after a diligent search has been carried out and recorded in accordance with Article 3, the work or phonogram may be used in accordance with this Directive provided that the rightholders that have been identified and located have, in relation to the rights they hold, authorised the organisations referred to in Article 1(1) to carry out the acts of reproduction and making available to the public covered respectively by Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC.
    3. Paragraph 2 shall be without prejudice to the rights in the work or phonogram of rightholders that have been identified and located.
    4. Article 5 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the rightholders that have not been identified and located in the works referred to in paragraph 2.
    5. This Directive shall be without prejudice to national provisions on anonymous or pseudonymous works.

    Article 6
    Permitted uses of orphan works

    1. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the right of reproduction and the right of making available to the public provided for respectively in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC to ensure that the organisations referred to in Article 1(1) are permitted to use orphan works contained in their collections in the following ways:
      (a)by making the orphan work available to the public, within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC;
      (b)by acts of reproduction, within the meaning of Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, for the purposes of digitisation, making available, indexing, cataloguing, preservation or restoration.
    2. The organisations referred to in Article 1(1) shall use an orphan work in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article only in order to achieve aims related to their public-interest missions, in particular the preservation of, the restoration of, and the provision of cultural and educational access to, works and phonograms contained in their collection. The organisations may generate revenues in the course of such uses, for the exclusive purpose of covering their costs of digitising orphan works and making them available to the public.
    3. Member States shall ensure that the organisations referred to in Article 1(1) indicate the name of identified authors and other rightholders in any use of an orphan work.
    4. This Directive is without prejudice to the freedom of contract of such organisations in the pursuit of their public-interest missions, particularly in respect of public-private partnership agreements.
    5. Member States shall provide that a fair compensation is due to rightholders that put an end to the orphan work status of their works or other protected subject-matter for the use that has been made by the organisations referred to in Article 1(1) of such works and other protected subject-matter in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article. Member States shall be free to determine the circumstances under which the payment of such compensation may be organised. The level of the compensation shall be determined, within the limits imposed by Union law, by the law of the Member State in which the organisation which uses the orphan work in question is established.
    posted in GLAM (galleries
  • GLAM@Home Training - WIPS 6th ed. (Szeged, Hungary)

    Please find below useful contents to prepare and attend the second part of the GLAM@Home training that will take place in occasion of the Sixth Workshop on Intellectual Property Rights in Szeged, Hungary (WIPS 6th ed.).
    The training is co-organised by reCreating Europe and inDICEs.

    --

    The contents below are detailed as follows:

    • File 2 contains legislation

    • File 3 contains training materials

    Please notice these contents are excerpts of completed documents and legal sources. You are invited to consult the full source.

    Case A and Case B (to which the attached contents refer) will be uploaded only as the training starts. More detailed instructions on how to perform the training exercise will also be given as the training starts. It is however desirable that participants dispose of an electronic device (ideally a computer) to connect to the internet in order to fully perform the exercise.

    --

    We would like to remind participants that the training session will take place on the 9th of June 2022, from 13.30.
    Please notice that the second part of the training, to which the attached documents refer, will take place from 14.30 to 15.30.

    The full program of the WIPS 6th ed. and training session is available here.

    posted in GLAM (galleries
  • Copyright and constraints in the creative industries

    ReCreating Europe is exploring how intellectual property, especially copyright, might constrain stakeholders, for example by preventing the digitisation of work or other activities. Recent literature has in fact highlighted that there are economic sectors where stakeholders operate outside of intellectual property frameworks (i.e. in IP’s so-called “negative space”). It is therefore interesting to ask whether and how the current IP framework is experienced as a constraint by stakeholders.

    Does copyright law, and intellectual property law more generally, constrain some activities within the EU creative industries?

    To read more about sectors that operate outside of intellectual property frameworks, please see this interim report on IP's negative space in creative industries. This report provides:

    1. a genealogy of the concept of ‘negative IP space’ taking into consideration contextual debates in a number of other scholarly fields;
    2. an assessment of the definitions of negative IP provided so far;
    3. a systematic literature review covering a breadth of creative industries (e.g. chefs, stand-up comedians, fashion industry);
    4. on the basis of this discussion, the report puts forward a possible new taxonomy of negative IP spaces based on a structural analysis of the creative and innovative sectors investigated in the literature.
    posted in Creative industries
  • The important role libraries play in facilitating access to digital culture for vulnerable end users, primarily for Persons with Disabilities

    The role of national and public libraries was identified as a support by interviewees representing all vulnerable groups, albeit primarily participants who represent Persons with Disabilities.

    Libraries can practically facilitate access to digital cultural content for those who do not otherwise have access by providing access to the internet or to digital devices. Libraries can also act as a legal support to digital cultural access due to their capacity to implement copyright exceptions for the benefit of Persons with Disabilities.

    Additional Material: Deliverable 2.2 Interim Report on Barriers Experienced by Vulnerable Groups – Initial results showing divergences between vulnerable groups, available at: https://zenodo.org/record/5067718#.YpTJCC8QPJO.

    This result is not discussed in D2.2 itself but emerged with further analysis of the dataset, and will be discussed in our final report (D2.4) which is forthcoming.

    However, our data also reveals a sentiment among participants that libraries could do more to help overcome the inequalities that persist in access to digital culture for Persons with Disabilities.

    posted in GLAM (galleries