Between July and September, 2013, we surveyed members of the Global Congress community to learn more about their projects and priorities. We invited participation through email lists and solicited anyone who had either been to a Global Congress, been invited to one, or expressed interest in coming. We received around 90 responses.
Rather than create an agenda document, we’ve decided to let the responses speak mostly for themselves. We’ve split them into two parts: a searchable, sortable database for Current Projects (below) and a series of posts on Research Priorities (forthcoming on Infojustice) that compile perspectives on research opportunities and its relationship to policymaking in the next several years.
Here are the caveats: The responses are drawn from–but do not exhaustively reproduce–the responses we received. Responses have been cherry picked, edited, and loosely organized under primary themes. We favored detailed responses over lists of projects or statements of general interests or concerns. The list is also quite limited: it attributes projects to the person or persons who reported it–not necessarily to all contributors to a project. We can, of course, make adjustments where the attribution is clearly inadequate (let us know if that’s the case). But we are not aiming for a rigorous accounting of the research field, just a useful one given the usual constraints on time and resources. If this proves popular, we can discuss expanding it as part of future Global Congresses.
Priorities for Future Research
Want to Contribute 2-3 Paragraphs on Research Priorities?
|Primary Investigator(s) and/or Person Who Reported It||Research Venue||Project Title||Topic(s)||Geographical Focus||Description|
|Niva Elkin-Koren||University of Haifa, Israel||Users' Rights|
|Global||I am currently involved in two projects on user rights. One seeks to articulate exceptions and limitations as rights, as the rights of online users are increasingly under siege due to the shift to digital and the expansion of copyright protection. Against this background, I seek to offer a legal framework that moves beyond exceptions to copyright and articulate permissible uses as rights. Another study seeks to define the legal status of Fair Use Best Practices and to identify the practical implications.|
|American University Washington College of Law, USA||The IP Enforcement Network||Enforcement||Global||A loose network of 450+ academics and advocates run by PIJIP at American University. The Network mobilizes public-interest interventions in international intellectual property policy debates, from ACTA to TPP and TTIP.|
|Fundação Vargas, Brazil|
University of Sao Paulo, Brazil
|Balanced Enforcement at the CNCP||Enforcement||Brazil||Prior research and advocacy efforts in Brazil led to the appointment of CTS-FGV and the University of São Paulo's GPOPAI to Brazilian National Antipiracy Council (CNCP)—the first non-industry members. Both institutions are trying to push for a more balanced research agenda within the council. GPOPAI is working on a consumer survey, and FGV is trying to reinvent "The CNCP Monograph Contest” as a vehicle for promoting serious research.|
|The American Assembly, Columbia University, USA|
University of California, Berkeley, USA
|Robo-Notice and Takedown||Enforcement||USA||An empirical study that examines the integrity of the notice and takedown process as the process is automated by senders and targets.|
|Rosana Pinheiro Machado||University of Oxford, UK||Enforcement in Brazil and China||Enforcement||Brazil|
|In the official discourse of both countries, innovation requires strong enforcement against all kind of copies. But Brazil and China have followed sharply different paths regarding the presence of state in the control. This work compares anti-piracy efforts in Brazil and China, with the aim of understanding the ideologies and historical developments that produced these policies.|
|Rebecca Giblin||Monash University, Australia||Evaluation of the Global Graduated Response||Enforcement||Australia||Recently completed project examining each jurisdiction in which graduated response is currently operational, or on its way to adoption, including evaluation of the evidence to determine the extent to which such laws help achieve copyright law's underlying aims.|
|Natasha Tusikov||Australian National University||Private Trademark Enforcement Practices||Enforcement||Global||My dissertation examines how trademark owners are working with Internet intermediaries to remove infringing content (for marketplaces and trading platforms) and withdraw critical services (for infringing sites). These voluntary enforcement programs constitute global, extra-legal, private enforcement that in many cases is carried out secretly by intermediaries based on allegations, not proof of infringement, by rights holders. As there is little research, particularly in the scholarly realm, on private, online anti-counterfeiting efforts, my research will give an idea of how rights holders, state actors and intermediaries are working together in that area and some of the divergent and convergent interests shaping their involvement. More broadly, my research will demonstrate how state and private interests are converging in relation to private, voluntary regulation on the Internet.|
|Niva Elkin-Koren||University of Haifa, Israel||Changes in Intermediary Enforcement||Enforcement||Israel||I am currently working on two projects on copyright enforcement by online intermediaries. One seeks to map actual copyright enforcement practices in the shadow of the law (in Israel). The study looks settlements, legal warnings, cease & desist, Public Relations, OSPs' “voluntary” technological measures (i.e. filtering, blocking, removing), and Notice and Take-down actual practices. I am also involved in more theoretical study of the changing nature of online intermediaries, and the new convergence of control over content, access and end-users.|
|Alex Dent||George Washington University, USA||Enforcement||Global||My work focuses on two general questions: (1) What are the "costs" of IP policing, where costs are conceived of not only in financial terms, but also in social and cultural terms? Put somewhat differently, what does it mean that the vast majority of the world`s population experiences IP as an interdiction? (2) What is the relationship between policy-making in DC and global policing practice? How does one translate into the other, and then back into policy once more? Specifically, I've been looking at the ways in which the Brazilian police integrate what they are doing with long-standing cultural discourses about objects and ideas, as well as their relationship with international NGOs. Despite the relative uniformity of international IP policies, I've found that its implementation needs to be looked at on a local basis. All my research is ethnographic and historical.|
|Alberto Cerda||University of Chile Law School, Chile||Enforcement||Latin America|
|I am working on a doctoral dissertation that focuses on human rights challenges for Latin American countries facing copyright enforcement. I examine a few Latin American countries: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Costa Rica, Mexico, and Peru. And I pay close attention to criminal enforcement and measures for enforcing copyright online. While most scholarship has focused on free speech and access to knowledge, I try to broaden the discussion by providing a comparative law analysis that focuses on other fundamental rights granted by both international instruments on human rights and domestic constitutions.|
|Kimberlee Weatherall||University of Sydney, Australia||Fair and Equitable Enforcement||Enforcement||Global||What, if anything, is the content of the obligation to ensure that enforcement procedures are 'fair and equitable' (TRIPS 41.2; ACTA article 6; EU IP Enforcement Directive, Article 1). Having observed that trade negotiators argue that all the detailed enforcement provisions that we see in recent treaties are balanced by the inclusion of such general articles, the chapter will test the extent to which such obligation might have 'teeth'.|
|Lawrence Liang||Alternative Law Forum, India||Private Enforcement Between Policing and Law Firms’||Enforcement||India|
|In the last few years we have seen the mushrooming of enforcement agencies in india who are a strange breed since they are essentially private entities (enforcement companies, detective companies, law firms). Most of these are headed by former members of the police and hence have an inside knowledge of how the criminal justice system especially at the level of everyday policing function works and they also have the ability to obtain the cooperation of the local police. While these enforcement agencies were active for a while in the space of commercial piracy, we see them shifting gradually to the online enforcement space, and we are interested in tracking the shift as a continuation of earlier ethnographic work that we have done on enforcement.|