Table of Contents

Signaling in Equity Crowdfunding

Gerrit K.C. Ahlers, A.T. Kearney GmbH
Douglas J. Cumming, York University - Schulich School of Business
Christina Guenther, Max Planck Society for the Advancement of the Sciences - Max Planck Institute for Economics
Denis Schweizer, Concordia University

All of This Has Happened Before and All of This Will Happen Again: Innovation in Copyright Licensing

Rebecca Tushnet, Georgetown University Law Center

Limitations and Exceptions as Key Elements of the Legal Framework for Copyright in the European Union – Opinion on the Judgment of the CJEU in Case C-201/13 Deckmyn

Jonathan Griffiths, Queen Mary University of London, School of Law
Christophe Geiger, Centre for International Intellectual Property Studies (CEIPI) - University of Strasbourg, Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition
Martin Senftleben, VU University Amsterdam - Faculty of Law
Raquel Xalabarder, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC)
Lionel A. F. Bently, University of Cambridge - Faculty of Law
Estelle Derclaye, University of Nottingham, School of law
Graeme B. Dinwoodie, University of Oxford - Faculty of Law
Thomas Dreier, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
Severine Dusollier, University of Namur, SciencesPo
Reto Hilty, Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, University of Zurich, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
P. B. Hugenholtz, University of Amsterdam
Marie-Christine Janssens, Leuven University (KU Leuven)
Martin Kretschmer, University of Glasgow
Axel Metzger, Leibniz Universität Hannover
Alexander Peukert, Goethe University Frankfurt - Faculty of Law, Cluster of Excellence Normative Orders
Marco Ricolfi, University of Turin - Faculty of Law
Ole Andreas Rognstad, University of Oslo
Alain M. Strowel, Saint Louis University, University of Liege

Comments of New Media Rights in the Matter of Exemption to Prohibition on Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems for Access Control Technologies

Arthur H. Neill, New Media Rights, California Western School of Law
Patrick McManus, California Western School of Law
Teri Karobonik, New Media Rights, California Western School of Law


Editorial Notes

ERPN is sponsored by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation http://www.kauffman.org/research and provides an online community for entrepreneurship research from all academic disciplines and the users of that information. SSRN is very pleased to work with the Kauffman Foundation in this important and growing area of scholarship.


ENTREPRENEURSHIP & LAW eJOURNAL
Sponsored by the Kauffman Foundation

"Signaling in Equity Crowdfunding" Free Download
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Forthcoming

GERRIT K.C. AHLERS, A.T. Kearney GmbH
Email:
DOUGLAS J. CUMMING, York University - Schulich School of Business
Email:
CHRISTINA GUENTHER, Max Planck Society for the Advancement of the Sciences - Max Planck Institute for Economics
Email:
DENIS SCHWEIZER, Concordia University
Email:

This paper presents a first-ever empirical examination of the effectiveness of signals that entrepreneurs use to induce (small) investors to commit financial resources in an equity crowdfunding context. We examine the impact of venture quality (human capital, social (alliance) capital, and intellectual capital) and uncertainty on fundraising success. Our data highlight that retaining equity and providing more detailed information about risks can be interpreted as effective signals and can therefore strongly impact the probability of funding success. Social capital and intellectual capital, by contrast, have little or no impact on funding success. We discuss the implications of our results for theory, future research and practice.

"All of This Has Happened Before and All of This Will Happen Again: Innovation in Copyright Licensing" Free Download
Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Vol. 28, pp. 1447-1488, 2014

REBECCA TUSHNET, Georgetown University Law Center
Email:

Claims that copyright licensing can substitute for fair use have a long history. This article focuses on a new cycle of the copyright licensing debate, which has brought revised arguments in favor of universal copyright licensing. First, the new arrangements offered by large copyright owners often purport to sanction the large-scale creation of derivative works, rather than mere reproductions, which were the focus of earlier blanket licensing efforts. Second, the new licenses are often free. Rather than demanding royalties as in the past, copyright owners just want a piece of the action — along with the right to claim that unlicensed uses are infringing. In a world where licenses are readily and cheaply available, the argument will go, it is unfair not to get one. This development, copyright owners hope, will combat increasingly fair use — favorable case law.

This article describes three key examples of recent innovations in licensing-like arrangements in the noncommercial or formerly noncommercial spheres — Getty Images’ new free embedding of millions of its photos, YouTube’s Content ID, and Amazon’s Kindle Worlds — and discusses how uses of works under these arrangements differ from their unlicensed alternatives in ways both subtle and profound. These differences change the nature of the communications and communities at issue, illustrating why licensing can never substitute for transformative fair use even when licenses are routinely available. Ultimately, as courts have already recognized, the mere desire of copyright owners to extract value from a market — especially when they desire to extract it from third parties rather than licensees — should not affect the scope of fair use.

"Limitations and Exceptions as Key Elements of the Legal Framework for Copyright in the European Union – Opinion on the Judgment of the CJEU in Case C-201/13 Deckmyn" Free Download

JONATHAN GRIFFITHS, Queen Mary University of London, School of Law
Email:
CHRISTOPHE GEIGER, Centre for International Intellectual Property Studies (CEIPI) - University of Strasbourg, Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition
Email:
MARTIN SENFTLEBEN, VU University Amsterdam - Faculty of Law
Email:
RAQUEL XALABARDER, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC)
Email:
LIONEL A. F. BENTLY, University of Cambridge - Faculty of Law
Email:
ESTELLE DERCLAYE, University of Nottingham, School of law
Email:
GRAEME B. DINWOODIE, University of Oxford - Faculty of Law
Email:
THOMAS DREIER, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
Email:
SEVERINE DUSOLLIER, University of Namur, SciencesPo
Email:
RETO HILTY, Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, University of Zurich, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Email:
P. B. HUGENHOLTZ, University of Amsterdam
Email:
MARIE-CHRISTINE JANSSENS, Leuven University (KU Leuven)
Email:
MARTIN KRETSCHMER, University of Glasgow
Email:
AXEL METZGER, Leibniz Universität Hannover
Email:
ALEXANDER PEUKERT, Goethe University Frankfurt - Faculty of Law, Cluster of Excellence Normative Orders
Email:
MARCO RICOLFI, University of Turin - Faculty of Law
Email:
OLE ANDREAS ROGNSTAD, University of Oslo
Email:
ALAIN M. STROWEL, Saint Louis University, University of Liege
Email:

In (C-201/13) Deckmyn v Vandersteen, the Court of Justice of the European Union has provided important guidance on the interpretation of the parody exception under the Information Society Directive and on the approach to be adopted to limitations and exceptions in European Union copyright law more generally. The judgment is the latest in a series of cases that, while harmonising the law, demonstrate that an exclusively restrictive reading of exceptions cannot be justified in the European legal order and that respect for fundamental rights, particularly the right to free expression, requires a fair balance to be struck between all interests and rights involved. The judgment in Deckmyn sparked a lively discussion among the members of the European Copyright Society. That discussion concerned not only the ruling on the parody exception itself, but also the case’s contribution to the Court’s developing jurisprudence on copyright exceptions and limitations more generally. This discussion led to the drafting of the Society’s “Limitations and Exceptions as Key Elements of the Legal Framework for Copyright in the European Union – Opinion on the Judgment of the CJEU in Case C-201/13 Deckmyn?. Taking the Judgment as a starting point, the Society considered that there are several things to be welcomed in Deckmyn. These include the Judgment’s further harmonisation and rationalisation of the structure of the law relating to exceptions and limitations, the adoption of a purposive, rather than a systematically restrictive, approach to exceptions (in this instance, to the exception for parody) and the acknowledgment of the need to accommodate the right to freedom of expression where appropriate. However, at the same time, members of the Society were also concerned about the potential uncertainty created by the accommodation of the principle of non-discrimination within the assessment of the “fair balance? between the interests of right-holders and users.

"Comments of New Media Rights in the Matter of Exemption to Prohibition on Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems for Access Control Technologies" Free Download

ARTHUR H. NEILL, New Media Rights, California Western School of Law
Email:
PATRICK MCMANUS, California Western School of Law
Email:
TERI KAROBONIK, New Media Rights, California Western School of Law
Email:

New Media Rights filed comments with the Copyright Office supporting four specific exemptions to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s anti-circumvention provisions that will protect both internet users and creators' rights under fair use. Exemptions are argued every 3 years, and ensure that accessing copyrighted material for purposes of fair use don't needlessly violate federal law.

Similar to our 2009 and 2012 comments to the Copyright Office, these comments offer direct evidence supporting the right of internet users and video creators to circumvent technological protection measures to a) allow individuals to take control of the apps and services they use on their mobile devices, and b) allow creators, internet users, and filmmakers to reuse video content for fair use purposes. Thanks to our legal intern California Western School of Law 2L Pat McManus for his assistance in preparing these comments.

What’s new or different in these comments?

Our 2015 comments also argue that these exemptions should be extended to include additional devices and technologies. We argue that jailbreaking should apply to tablets just as it does to smartphones (as we did in 2012), and that bypassing anti-circumvention technology should include non-DVD sources, such as Blu-ray discs and online sources. Our 2015 comments on anti-circumvention also provide direct evidence of filmmakers that depend on the ability to bypass anti-circumvention technology.

Broader problems with the 1201 process

In addition to supporting specific classes of exemptions with direct evidence from clients we serve, New Media Rights also encourages the Copyright Office to explore ways to ensure broader exemption of all otherwise lawful activities. One thing remains constant in the DMCA Anti-Circumvention exemption proceedings: an enormous output of time and energy by legal clinics, nonprofits, and others every three years in pursuit of broad range of worthy, but narrow exemptions. The commonality in the arguments made for the exemptions is that the circumvention should be exempted from violating federal law under the Anti-Circumvention provisions because the uses targeted are not otherwise unlawful. We maintain that an elegant way to improve the provisions, and allow otherwise lawful uses without requiring such a tremendous use of resources, is to simply exempt all uses that are otherwise lawful. Specifically, if a use is deemed a fair use, anti-circumvention should simply not be applicable to the use, and should not be available as a cause of action.

NMR requests that the Copyright Office look systematically to find ways, either through regulation or proposed legislation, to provide broad exemptions to the anti-circumvention provisions that protect otherwise lawful uses of content such as uses made in fair use.

An exemption or exception that allowed for circumvention of technological protection measures (TPMs) for any reuse that falls under fair use would be very efficient because there would be a stable rule of law that does not change every three years. Such a broader exemption would also provide certainty because people would know that they could circumvent TPMs for reuse as long as their reuse constituted fair use; those people would not have to determine if they were included in one of many narrow classes of exemptions. Video creators, for example, would know that circumvention of TPMs is legal as long as the resulting video falls under fair use. Video creators would not have to wait three years to determine whether certain activity is legal, and whether their particular use is the type excused by narrow exemptions. Instead, they would know what type of conduct is permitted, and permitted conduct would not be subject to change over time. As long as one circumvents TPMs for a noninfringing purpose, such as fair use, the circumvention should be legal. A broader exemption would ensure that anti-circumvention don’t needlessly include people who have otherwise not violated the law.

The Proposed Exemptions

The proposed specific exemptions provide a safety valve for otherwise lawful behavior by consumers and creators. Specifically, NMR’s comments relate to Proposed Classes 6, 7, 16, and 17 as requested by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the International Documentary Association, respectively.

Proposed Class 6: Allowing Documentary Filmmakers to Reuse Footage from Motion Pictures for Commercial Purposes

Proposed Class 6 would allow circumvention of encryption technology on DVDs and Blu-ray discs, as well as technology that shields content on online sources. This exemption is important so that documentary filmmakers can bypass anti-circumvention technology to access high quality content for fair use purposes. Our comment argues that these filmmakers should not be excluded from the exemption simply because they profit from their work. Our comment includes the stories of filmmakers who represent a wide array of social and cultural commentary that this exemption would protect.

Proposed Class 7: Accessing videos to reuse footage from DVDs, Blu-ray discs, and online sources

Proposed Class 7 would allow circumvention of encryption technology on DVDs and Blu-ray discs, as well as technology that shields content on online sources. This exemption is meant to allow creators, remixers, and vidders the ability to bypass DVD encryption technology to obtain high quality footage for the videos they create. The exemption only extends to creators who engage in fair use and thus allows those creators to defend themselves under fair use. Our comment includes the stories of creators who represent the wide array of social, political, and cultural commentary that this exemption would protect.

Proposed Class 16: Jailbreaking of Smartphones

Proposed Class 16 would renew the exemption for jailbreaking smartphones. Jailbreaking is essential to ensure competition and innovation. Jailbreaking also provides a safety valve to censorship by OS makers, wireless carriers, and device manufacturers who use their power to control what apps the public can access. Jailbreaking also allows consumers to customize their smartphones and address security and privacy concerns without having to wait for the OS maker to provide relief.

Proposed Class 17: Jailbreaking of Tablets

Proposed Class 17 would extend Class 16’s exemption to tablets. As addressed above, Jailbreaking is useful to consumers, and ensures competition and innovation. Our comment focuses on the similarities between smartphones and tablets. We provide evidence that shows that smartphones and tablets are converging to the point where they are aesthetically and functionally indistinguishable. We therefore argue that due to the similarities between smartphones and tablets, the exemption should be extended to tablets as well as smartphones.

^top

About this eJournal

Sponsored by the Kauffman Foundation

This eJournal distributes working paper and accepted paper abstracts in subject matters that concern how the law, broadly conceived, impacts entrepreneurship, small business, growth companies, entrepreneurship within large companies, and innovation policy generally.

The eJournal welcomes research not only on topics of regulation and public policy, but also the law of contracts, contract design, and informal relationships and networks that affect entrepreneurs and may substitute for legal contracts. Topic areas include contract design, judicial interpretation and enforcement of contracts, corporate law, partnership law and choice of entity, family businesses, franchising and joint ventures, intellectual property and licensing, small business regulation, securities law, bankruptcy, and social responsibility and sustainability. The Journal welcomes submissions from scholars in finance, economics, sociology, and other disciplines as well as legal scholars.

Editor: Victor Fleischer, University of San Diego

Submissions

To submit your research to SSRN, sign in to the SSRN User HeadQuarters, click the My Papers link on left menu and then the Start New Submission button at top of page.

Distribution Services

If your organization is interested in increasing readership for its research by starting a Research Paper Series, or sponsoring a Subject Matter eJournal, please email: RPS@SSRN.com

Distributed by

Entrepreneurship Research & Policy Network (ERPN), a division of Social Science Electronic Publishing (SSEP) and Social Science Research Network (SSRN)

Directors

ERPN SUBJECT MATTER EJOURNALS

ROBERT STROM
Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation
Email: rstrom@kauffman.org

Please contact us at the above addresses with your comments, questions or suggestions for ERPN-Sub.