Beyond IP–The Cost of Free: Informational Capitalism in a Post IP Era

Critical copyright scholarship rightly emphasizes the social costs of ordering cultural production through proprietary intellectual property law regimes. This scholarship also celebrates the virtues of free content and free access, particularly in digital domains. The purpose of this article is to question this critique, which tends to pair proprietary intellectual property protection with informational capitalism and the commodification of culture. This article argues that the drawbacks of cultural commodification and informational capitalism are also apparent in market-oriented media environments that are based on free distribution of content. The article makes a novel contribution by untying the seemingly Gordian knot binding proprietary IP to capitalist structures of corporate media. Media environments based on free distribution of content are no less vulnerable to market powers. This analysis has significant normative implications for the desirability of contemporary approaches that advocate mobilization towards non-proprietary “beyond IP” legal regimes

An International-Comparative Perspective on Peer-to-Peer File-Sharing and Third Party Liability in Copyright Law

In the last decade, the phenomenon of peer-to-peer file-sharing and its various legal aspects have been dealt with extensively by legal scholarship. The purpose of this Article is to take a closer inspection of several particular legal aspects that are related to peer-to-peer file-sharing as a comparative, social, economic, and cultural phenomenon. The Article begins by providing critical comparative analysis of distinct paradigms that different legal systems have offered regarding the question of third party liability for copyright infringements that occur through peer-to-peer file-sharing platforms. The Article then presents three focal policy considerations that should serve as copyright law\u27s compass in the context of peer-to-peer file-sharing. (a) adopting a requirement of compliance between the legal liability of third parties and copyright law\u27s exemptions and limitations regime; (b) striking a socially desired allocation of risk between positive and negative externalities that peer-to-peer file-sharing platforms tend to generate; (c) understanding the unique distributional concerns that are raised by legal regulation of peer-to-peer file-sharing platforms, especially when taking into account the nature of such platforms as a novel emerging speech resource that society has to decide upon its allocation. The last part of the Article focuses on some of the next generation legal questions that peer-to-peer networks are already beginning to give rise to, including the legal liability of internet service providers for managing peer-to-peer traffic through active caching and routing applications

Copyright and the Holocaust

This article explores the interface between copyright law and the Holocaust. The Holocaust\u27s duration and scope, its occurrence in the midst of the twentieth century with photography and film technologies already available, and its setting at the heart of Europe, yielded countless documents, diaries, notes, memoirs, musical works, photographs, films, letters, and additional artifacts. On the victims\u27 part, many of those items-including secret archives comprised at various ghettos, music composed in concentration camps, and personal diaries-manifest an explicit act of real-time historical documentation for future generations. On the perpetrators\u27 side, some materials were produced as a result of organized documentation and others-such as Joseph Goebbels\u27 diaries or Hitler\u27s Mein Kampf--comprise records of prominent figures in the Nazi regime. Numerous Holocaust-related materials are still subject to copyright protection. Yet, the impact of copyright law on the memory of the Holocaust remains largely unexplored

Robotic Collective Memory

The various ways in which robots and AI will affect our future society are at the center of scholarly attention. This Commentary, conversely, concentrates on their possible impact on humanity’s past, or more accurately, on the ways societies will remember their joint past. We focus on the emerging use of technologies that combine AI, cutting-edge visualization techniques, and social robots, in order to store and communicate recollections of the past in an interactive human-like manner. We explore the use of these technologies by remembrance institutions and their potential impact on collective memory. Taking a close look at the case study of NDT (New Dimensions in Testimony)—a project that uses ‘virtual witnesses’ to convey memories from the Holocaust and other mass atrocities—we highlight the significant value, and the potential vulnerabilities, of this new mode of memory construction. Against this background, we propose a novel concept of memory fiduciaries that can form the basis for a policy framework for robotic collective memory. Drawing on Jack Balkin’s concept of ‘information fiduciaries’ on the one hand, and on studies of collective memory on the other, we explain the nature of and the justifications for memory fiduciaries. We then demonstrate, in broad strokes, the potential implications of this new conceptualization for various questions pertaining to collective memory constructed by AI and robots. By so doing, this Commentary aims to start a conversation on the policies that would allow algorithmic collective memory to fulfill its potential, while minimizing its social costs. On a more general level, it brings to the fore a series of important policy questions pertaining to the intersection of new technologies and intergenerational collective memory

Beyond IP–The Cost of Free: Informational Capitalism in a Post IP Era

Critical copyright scholarship rightly emphasizes the social costs of ordering cultural production through proprietary intellectual property law regimes. This scholarship also celebrates the virtues of free content and free access, particularly in digital domains. The purpose of this article is to question this critique, which tends to pair proprietary intellectual property protection with informational capitalism and the commodification of culture. This article argues that the drawbacks of cultural commodification and informational capitalism are also apparent in market-oriented media environments that are based on free distribution of content. The article makes a novel contribution by untying the seemingly Gordian knot binding proprietary IP to capitalist structures of corporate media. Media environments based on free distribution of content are no less vulnerable to market powers. This analysis has significant normative implications for the desirability of contemporary approaches that advocate mobilization towards non-proprietary “beyond IP” legal regimes