Opening Knowledge: Retaining Rights and Licensing in Europe 2023
The new report of the Knowledge Rights 21 project partner SPARC Europe is now available.
‘Opening Knowledge: Retaining Rights and Licensing in Europe 2023’: https://lnkd.in/eVg9HTK7
The report, prepared with the support of Knowledge Rights 21, reveals the progress of institutional rights preservation policies in Europe, provides insights into open access rights preservation policies and offers options to address different situations.
The report is of particular importance because there is a diversity of stakeholders who play an important role in making research publications accessible and re-usable, and the value of dialogue in overcoming fears, misunderstandings and disagreements.
What are some of the key recommendations?
Institutional policymakers: amplify existing policies supporting rights retention.
Funders & legislators: formulate policies accommodating different contexts, but adhering to common frameworks that support institutions and their authors advocating for change relating to author rights retention, copyright transfer and open licensing.
Publishers: support authors and institutions in retaining rights over their creations to foster immediate open access and reuse, respond clearly to rights retention inquiries, set zero embargoes, and use open access Creative Commons licences.
ODIPI is organizing ERA KR21 Conference: Barriers and Incentives for Open Science in the Copyright Law that will take place on 2 December, 2024 at Hotel Four Points by Sheraton (Mons) in Ljubljana and also online.
The District Court of Hamburg ruled in the case of Kneschke v. LAION e.V. that LAION did not infringe the copyright of photographer Kneschke, as the use of his photograph was covered by the exception for text and data mining (TDM) for scientific purposes.
“Can copyright bring artificial intelligence to its knees? Which other circumstances may cause that the “making” of generative AI can dramatically change in the (near) future. This short paper presents potential challenges that copyright poses to the training of the machines on large amount of data. Different jurisdictions address these issues differently. In the USA the legality of these activities is tested in several court cases. Do gentlemen’s agreements and pragmatic symbiosis known from the “search engines business model” provide sufficient basis and/or incentive for the business model of “making” generative AI business model as well?