Algorithmic Parody Protection in the European Union: CDSM Directive and DSA Regulation Perspective

1. Barata, Joan. “The Digital Services Act and Its Impact on the Right to Freedom of Expression: Special Focus on Risk Mitigation Obligations.“ (July 2021) // https://dsa-observatory.eu/2021/07/27/the-digital-services-act-and-its-impact-on-the-right-to-freedom-of-expression-special-focus-on-risk-mitigation-obligations/.Search in Google Scholar

2. Bridy, Annemarie. “The Price of Closing the “Value Gap”: How the Music Industry Hacked EU Copyright Reform.“ Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law 22 (2020): 323-358.Search in Google Scholar

3. Brieske, Jasmine. “The Digital Services Act and Its Impact on the Right to Freedom of Expression: Special Focus on Risk Mitigation Obligations.“ The Journal of World Intellectual Property (2023): 1-23 // DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12286.Search in Google Scholar

4. “The Digital Services Act and Its Impact on the Right to Freedom of Expression: Special Focus on Risk Mitigation Obligations.“ The Journal of World Intellectual Property (2023): 7.Search in Google Scholar

5. Buri, Ilaria and Joris van Hoboken. “The Digital Services Act (DSA) Proposal: a critical overview.“ (October 2021) // https://dsa-observatory.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Buri-Van-Hoboken-DSA-discussion-paper-Version-28_10_21.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

6. Burk, Dan L. “Algorithmic Fair Use.“ The University of Chicago Law Review 86 (2019): 283-307.Search in Google Scholar

7. Dellwing, Michael. “The Continuities of Twitter Strategies and Algorithmic Terror.“ Wiley Online Library (January 2022): 483-487 // DOI: 10.1002/symb.585.Search in Google Scholar

8. Elkin-Koren, Niva. “Fair Use by Design.“ UCLA Law Review 64 (2017): 1082–1100.Search in Google Scholar

9. Elkin-Koren, Niva and Orit Fischman-Afori. “Rulifying Fair Use.“ Arizona Law Review 59 (2017): 162–200.Search in Google Scholar

10. Erickson, Kristofer and Martin Kretschmer. “This Video is Unavailable. Analyzing Copyright Takedown of User-Generated Content on YouTube.“ JIPITEC 9, 1 (2018): 75–89.Search in Google Scholar

11. Ferri, Federico. “The dark side(s) of the EU Directive on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market.“ China-EU Law Journal (2021): 21-38.Search in Google Scholar

12. Fontaine, Gilles, Grece, Christian and Marta Jimenez Pumares. Online video sharing: Offerings, audiences, economic aspects. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory (European Commission), 2018.Search in Google Scholar

13. Frosio, Giancarlo. Reconciling copyright with cumulative creativity. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018.Search in Google Scholar

14. Frosio, Giancarlo F. “Reforming Intermediary Liability In The Platform Economy: A European Digital Single Market Strategy.“ Northwestern University Law Review 112 (2017): 20–46.Search in Google Scholar

15. Frosio, Giancarlo F. “Reforming the C-DSM Reform: a User-Based Copyright Theory for Commonplace Creativity.“ IIC – International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 51, 6 (2020): 709-750.Search in Google Scholar

16. Geiger, Christophe and Bernd Justin Jütte. “Platform liability under Article 17 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive, Automated Filtering, and Fundamental Rights: An Impossible Match.“ GRUR International 70, 6 (2021): 517–569.Search in Google Scholar

17. Geiger, Christophe and Bernd Justin Jütte. “The EU Commission’s Guidance on Article 17 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive – A Guide to Virtue in Content Moderation by Digital Platforms?“ SSRN (2021): 1–20 // DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3876608.Search in Google Scholar

18. Gorwa, Robert, Binns, Reuben and Christian Katzenbach. “Algorithmic content moderation: Technical and political challenges in the automation of platform governance.“ Big Data and Society 7, 1 (2020): 1-15.Search in Google Scholar

19. Grosse Ruse-Khan, Henning. “Automated Copyright Enforcement Online: From Blocking to Monetization of User-Generated Content.“ PIJIP Research Paper Series 51 (2020): 1-21.Search in Google Scholar

20. Guzel, Sevra Guler. “Article 17 of the CDSM Directive and the Fundamental Rights: Shaping the Future of the Internet.“ European Journal of Law and Technology 12, 1 (2021): 1–29.Search in Google Scholar

21. Holznagel, Daniel. “A Self-Regulatory Race to the Bottom through Art. 18 Digital Services Act. How the DSA will introduce competition for the Meta Oversight Board (and the German FSM) and why we should be worried about this.“ (March 2022) // https://verfassungsblog.de/a-self-regulatory-race-to-the-bottom-through-art-18-digital-services-act/.Search in Google Scholar

22. Husovec, Martin. “The Promises of Algorithmic Copyright Enforcement: Takedown or Staydown? Which Is Superior? And Why?“ Journal of Law and the Arts 42, 53 (2018): 53–84.Search in Google Scholar

23. Hümmer, Finn J. “Balancing Article 17 CDSMD and the Freedom of Expression.“ Stockholm Intellectual Property Law Review 5, 2 (2022): 22–35.Search in Google Scholar

24. Hümmer, Finn J. “The German transposition of Article 17 of the Copyright DSM Directive and its ‘presumed legal use’: incompatible with EU law or a model for balancing fundamental rights in the age of upload filters?“ Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 17, 1 (2022): 22–26. Search in Google Scholar

25. Jongsma, Daniël. “Parody after Deckmyn. A comparative overview of the approach to parody under copyright law in Belgium, France, Germany, and the Netherlands.“ International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 48 (2017): 652–682.Search in Google Scholar

26. Kulk, Stefan. Internet and Intermediaries and Copyright Law: Towards a Future-proof EU Legal Framework. Alblasserdam: Ridderprint, 2018.Search in Google Scholar

27. Lai, Amy. The Right To Parody – Comparative Analysis of Copyright and Free Speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019.Search in Google Scholar

28. Lambrecht, Maxime. “Free Speech by Design. Algorithmic protection of exceptions and limitations in the Copyright DSM directive.“ JIPITEC 68, 1 (2020): 68–94.Search in Google Scholar

29. Laurent, Philippe. “The concept of parody and the legitimate interests of parodists and copyright holders.“ (September 2014) // http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2014/09/08/the-concept-of-parody-and-the-legitimate-interests-of-parodists-and-copyright-holders/.Search in Google Scholar

30. Lodder, A. R. and Jorge Morais Carvalho. “Online Platforms: Towards an Information Tsunami with New Requirements on Moderation, Ranking, and Traceability.“ European Business Law Review 33, 4 (2022): 537–554.Search in Google Scholar

31. Marciszewski, Mark. “The Problem of Modern Monetization of Memes: How Copyright Law Can Give Protection to Meme Creators.“ University of Virginia School of Law 9, 1 (2020): 1–47 // DOI: https://doi.org/10.58948/2329-9894.1076.Search in Google Scholar

32. Margoni, Thomas, Quintais, Joao Pedro and Sebastian Felix Schwemer. “Algorithmic propagation: do property rights in data increase bias in content moderation? Part I.“ (June 2022) // http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2022/06/08/algorithmic-propagation-do-property-rights-in-data-increase-bias-in-content-moderation-part-i/?fbclid=IwAR2nGKcbP9e0IyUNei2Sdt_Pw8SYG5nA_zOPSa14px2kB-pAZBqjrupIDiHk.Search in Google Scholar

33. Moscon, Valentina. “Free Circulation of Information and Online Intermediaries – Replacing One “Value Gap” with Another.“ IIC – International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 51 (2020): 977–982.Search in Google Scholar

34. Moreno, Felipe Romero. “Upload filters’ and human rights: implementing Article 17 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market.“ International Review of Law, Computers, and Technology 34, 2 (2020): 153–182.Search in Google Scholar

35. Ochoa, Tyler T. “Dr. Seuss, The Juice And Fair Use Revisited: Two Decades Of Parody And Satire In Copyright Law.“ The Law Review of the Franklin Pierce Center for Intellectual Property 59, 1 (2018): 233–267.Search in Google Scholar

36. Ortolani, Pietro. “The resolution of content moderation disputes under the Digital Services Act.“ Giustizia Consensuale 2 (2022): 533–573.Search in Google Scholar

37. Peukert, Alexander and Jasmin Brieske. “Coming into force, not coming into effect? The Impact of the German Implementation of Art. 17 CDSM Directive on Selected Online Platforms.“ Weizenbaum Journal of the Digital Society (2022): 1–31 // DOI: 10.34669/wi.wjds/2.1.4.Search in Google Scholar

38. Peukert, Alexander, Husovec, Martin, Kretschmer, Martin, Mezei, Peter and Joao Pedro Quintais. “European Copyright Society – Comment on Copyright and the Digital Services Act Proposal.“ IIC – International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 53 (2022): 358–376 // DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-022-01154-1.Search in Google Scholar

39. Quintais, Joao Pedro and Martin Husovec. “How to License Article 17 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive? Exploring the Implementation Options for the New EU Rules on Content-Sharing Platforms.“ GRUR International 4 (2021): 325-348.Search in Google Scholar

40. Quintais, Joao Pedro. “The New Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive: A Critical look.“ European Intellectual Property Review 42, 1 (2020): 28–41.Search in Google Scholar

41. Quintais, Joao Pedro, Frosio, Giancarlo, van Gompel, Stef, Hugenholtz, P. Bernt, Husovec, Martin, Jütte, Bernd Justin, and Martin Senftleben. “Safeguarding User Freedoms in Implementing Article 17 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive: Recommendations From European Academics.“ SSRN (2019): 1–8 // DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3484968.Search in Google Scholar

42. Rosati, Eleonora. “Five considerations for the transposition and application of Article 17 of the DSM Directive.“ Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice (2021): 265-270.Search in Google Scholar

43. Rosati, Eleonora. “Just a matter of laugh? Why the CJEU decision in Deckmyn is broader than parody.“ Common Market Law Review 52, 2 (2015): 511–529.Search in Google Scholar

44. Rosati, Eleonora. “The legal nature of Article 17 of the Copyright DSM Directive, the (lack of) freedom of Member States and why the German implementation proposal is not compatible with EU law.“ Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice 15, 11 (2020): 874–878.Search in Google Scholar

45. Schovsbo, Jens. “Making sure copyright works – safeguarding authors‘ and users‘ rights“: 208-221. In: Gustavo Ghidini and Valeria Falce. Reforming Intellectual Property. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2022.Search in Google Scholar

46. Schwemer, Sebastian Felix and Jens Schovsbo. “What is Left of User Rights? – Algorithmic Copyright Enforcement and Free Speech in the Light of the Article 17 Regime“: 569–589. In: Paul Torremans, ed. Intellectual Property Law and Human Rights, 4th edition. Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer, 2020.Search in Google Scholar

47. Senftleben, Martin. “Institutionalized Algorithmic Enforcement – The Pros and Cons of the EU Approach to UGC Platform Liability.“ FIU Law Review 14, 2 (2020): 301–328.Search in Google Scholar

48. Shipley, David E. “Derivative Works And Making Sense Of The Maxim That “Others Are Free To Copy The Original. They Are Not Free To Copy The Copy.“ University of Dayton Law Review 44, 2 (2019): 235-272.Search in Google Scholar

49. Spindler, Gerald. Digital services act: Adapting commercial and civil law rules for commercial entities operating online: Legal assessment. Research Paper. Brussels: European Union, 2020.Search in Google Scholar

50. Spindler, Gerald. “The Liability system of Art. 17 DSMD and national implementation: Contravening prohibition of general monitoring duties?“ JIPITEC 10 (2019): 344–374.Search in Google Scholar

51. Spoerri, Thomas. “On Upload-Filters and other Competitive Advantages for Big Tech Companies under Article 17 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market.“ JIPITEC 10, 2 (2019): 173–186.Search in Google Scholar

52. Thronson, Mark J., Roth, Gabrielle S. and Jon D. Grossman. Intellectual Property Legal Opinions. Second Edition. New York: Wolters Kluwer, 2021.Search in Google Scholar

53. Towse, Ruth, Handke, Christian and Paul Stepan. “The Economics of Copyright Law: A Stocktake of Literature.“ Review of Economic Research on Copyright 5, 1 (2008): 1–22.Search in Google Scholar

54. Weese, Joshua L., Hsu, William H., Murphy, Jessica C. And and Kim Brillante Knight. “Parody Detection: An Annotation, Feature Construction, and Classification Approach to the Web of Parody“: 67-89. In: Shalin Hai-Jew. Data Analytics in Digital Humanities. Cham: Springer International Publishing AG, 2017.Search in Google Scholar

55. Wilman, Folkert. “The EU’s system of knowledge-based liability for hosting service providers in respect of illegal user content – between the e-Commerce Directive and the Digital Services Act.“ JIPITEC 12, 1 (2021): 317–341.Search in Google Scholar

56. Wimmers, Jörg. “The Out-of-court dispute settlement mechanism in the Digital Services Act: A disservice to its own goals.“ JIPITEC 12, 4 (2021): 381–401.Search in Google Scholar

1. Belgische Vereniging van Auteurs, Componisten en Uitgevers CVBA (SABAM) v Netlog NV. Court of Justice of the European Union, 2012, no. C-360/10.Search in Google Scholar

2. Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce). Official Journal, 2000, no. L178.Search in Google Scholar

3. Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society. Official Journal, 2001, no. L-167.Search in Google Scholar

4. Directive (EU) 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. Official Journal, 2019, no. L 130.Search in Google Scholar

5. European Commission. “Commission Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (14 September 2016) pt 1, COM (2016) 593 final (‘CDSMD Proposal’).“ (September 2016) // https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52016PC0593.Search in Google Scholar

6. Frank Peterson v Google LLC and Others and Elsevier Inc v Cyando AG (‘YouTube v Cyando’). Opinion of Advocate General Saugmandsgaard Øe. Court of Justice of the European Union, 2020, no. C-682/18 and C-683/18.Search in Google Scholar

7. Johan Deckmyn and Vrijheidsfonds VZW v Helena Vandersteen and Others. Opinion of Advocate General Cruz Villalon. Court of Justice of the European Union, 2014, no. C-201/13.Search in Google Scholar

8. Johan Deckmyn and Vrijheidsfonds VZW v Helena Vandersteen and Others. Court of Justice of the European Union, 2014, no. C-201/13.Search in Google Scholar

9. Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act) (Text with EEA relevance). Official Journal, 2022, no. L-277.Search in Google Scholar

10. Republic of Poland v European Parliament and Council of the European Union. Opinion of Advocate General Saugmandsgaard Øe. Court of Justice of the European Union, 2021, no. C-401/19.Search in Google Scholar

11. Sky Österreich GmbH v. Österreichischer Rundfunk. Opinion of Advocate General Bot. Court of Justice of the European Union, 2012, no. C-283/11.Search in Google Scholar