International Survey on Private Copying : Law and Practice 2016
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The European Commission has been reviewing the copyright framework for a long time.In 2012, the issue of private copying levies was the subject of an industry mediation process fostered by the Commission and led by former Commissioner António Vitorino.Mr. Vitorino delivered a report on this issue in February 2013, including several recommendations 8 , although it has not led to any legislation; to date, the aim is to make EU copyright law and practice fit for the digital age.The debate on levy systems has continued through stakeholder dialogue.In 2014, the European Parliament published the Castex Report.It describes private copying levies as a virtuous system, which is nonetheless in need of modernization and harmonization.It focused especially on cross-border situations, the scope of the exception and the need for transparent and effective exemptions for professional uses.July 2014 saw the results of the Consultation on Copyright in the 2013-14 3rd consultation (review of EU copyright rules).On December 9, 2015, the communication "Towards a modern, more European copyright framework" was published.The levy systems are not much discussed in the communication and are no longer a priority on the copyright agenda for the new EU Commission.For the most part, the possible impact on the Digital Single Market is a concern and even though the CJEU clarified some issues, some disparities remain. Relevant Jurisprudence from the European Court of JusticeThe table below provides a schematic overview of the case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union on private copying levies.More extensive information about these cases is presented in the Annex of this report.Table 1: Case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union on private copying levies Case No.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.010 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".