The European Policy for Intellectual Property (EPIP) Association was founded in 2005 with the aim “to promote research regarding economic, legal, social, politi – cal and historical aspects of intellectual property rights at national, European and international levels”. This interdisciplinary approach was visionary. It is not an overstatement to say that EPIP’s annual conferences opened a new field of enquiry . Intellectual Property Law left the back office. The difficult questions how to promote innovation, creativity, productivity were now exposed to empirical research. From the beginning, the EPIP Association intended to make a difference beyond academe, by contributing “ideas, concepts and discussions that will promote inno – vation” and “inform and encourage policy-oriented discussion”. As the 10th Annual Conference arrives in Glasgow (and for the first time in the UK), EPIP is well estab – lished as a forum where the best new research meets a wide range of policy makers, from international organisations and governments, to industry and trade bodies. We are very pleased that our now regular collaboration with the European Commis-sion is continuing, involving pre-discussion of topical issues that feed into our call for papers and panels. If you look through the list of delegates and speakers, you will also notice an extraordinarily diverse range of representation, from the W orld Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), OECD, the European Trade Marks and Designs Office (OHIM), to think tanks, law firms, and stakeholders such as the British Film Institute, Society of Authors, UK Music and F undación Autor SGAE. The UK IP Office contributed as conference sponsor, as did Microsoft and NESTA for specific panels. There are not many conferences where academics mix that easily with Members of Parliament, government officials and firms. Will we make a difference? This year, we are focussing on the Creative Economy and copyright law. Here, evidence based policy continues to be a particular struggle. We have facilitated a cross-pollination with the SERCI Congress, the annual event of the Society for Economic Research on Copyright Issues, including joint keynotes, panels and mutually free attendance. We are also pursuing our traditional topics, with some excellent plenaries and sessions, ranging from the role of disclosure in patent systems, to 3D printing, big data, and a panel on trade dress (the visual characteristics of a product that signal its origin – which will take a more central role at the conference in Oxford next year). We had to turn down many paper submissions, and are reaching the limits of what can be accommodated in a two-day conference. I believe it is important that, as an Association, we take our responsibility seriously for the next generation of researchers. If we want interdisciplinary academics who can shape policy in this important field (and we need them), we must offer development opportunities, even a job market for economists, social scientists and lawyers with a focus on innovation. During my tenure as president of EPIP, creating such opportunities through links between innovation centres will be a particular priority, building on our successful pre-conference PhD workshops. I wish you a fruitful conference.
I am delighted to welcome you all to the University of Glasgow and to this, the 10th annual European Policy for Intellectual Property Conference – EPIP 2015. I understand this is the first time the conference has taken place in the UK and so I’m doubly thrilled that you chose to come to Glasgow. I know too that we, along with the organisers, are particularly pleased to see such an encouraging response: around 200 delegates are here from all over the world. That’s great and a source of encouragement to all those involved in pulling together the content of the conference – it tells them they’ve got it right – and that’s a tremendous validation of all their hard work. But it’s also immensely encouraging for my colleagues in Glasgow and for the work that goes on here.
Address by Kamil Kiljanski (Chief Economist, Directorate-General Internal Market and Industry (DG GROW), European Commission) to the delegates of EPIP 2015.
A year has passed since EPIP 2014 edition was hosted by the European Commission and the European Parliament in Brussels. The idea – for which the credit goes to Prof. Patrick Waelbroeck, Kerstin Jorna and Malwina Mejer – to embed the conference at the premises of the European Parliament was quite symbolic of the synergy between policy making and the creation of an evidence base underpinning this policy.
Many things have changed since last year’s EPIP. Better Regulation Package adopted by the Juncker Commission on 19th of May 2015 will transform the Impact Assessment Board into an even more independent watchdog, represented equally by the Commission as well as external experts. A clear signal that data is preferred to dogma.
Other things have not changed – we … still keep talking about copyright reform… With all due respect to copyright though, there are other forms of IP ‘life’ in the corridors of the EU Institutions in Brussels. The reform of the EU trademark regulation will soon enter into force. After not 40 days, but 40 years of fasting in rather difficult legislative desert conditions, the unitary patent will soon arrive, and this opens the door to, say, European Supplementary Protection Certification (SPC). There is also loads of activity around IP enforcement, trade secrets and maybe even non-agricultural geographical indications.
Whatever the IP theme, EPIP is the arena where scientific discussion takes place, and where the evidence needed to guide policy-making is nurtured. CREATe’s efforts in underlining and promoting the importance of empirical evidence is exemplary. We spent quite some time with Prof. Martin Kretschmer on handpicking the items for this year’s call for papers. So please rest assured – all this is strictly RELEVANT. And now we count on policy predictions which are not obvious, reliable and useful for policy making. We’re open to accepting the verdict of the data. Bring it on! Have a great EPIP!
For further details on EPIP2015 including full programme, click here.
Transcript & Video of Opening Keynote by Prof. Ian Hargreaves
It is a great pleasure to be here in Glasgow at the first annual EPIP Conference to be held in the UK. The choice of location, I think, reflects great credit upon CREATe, which in I think less than three years has established itself as a stronghold of evidence based thinking about IP issues, and so embraced as well as interpreted the standards set by the Intellectual Property Office of producing work that is “clear, verifiable and able to be peer reviewed”.
Petra Moser (an economist from New York University) presents “Copyright and Science: Evidence from the World War II Book Republication Program” and Lionel Bently (a law academic from Cambridge University) responds.
Read Petra’s full paper here.
Session Transcript (under review, coming soon)
Lilian Edwards (University of Strathclyde)
Dinusha Mendis (Bournemouth University), “A Legal and Empirical Study into the Intellectual Property Implications of 3D Printing – Conclusions and Recommendations”
Davide Secchi (University of Southern Denmark), “A Legal and Empirical Study of 3D Printing Online Platforms and an Analysis of User Behaviour”
Sophie Jones (Stratasys), “The Current Status and Impact of 3D Printing Within the Industrial Sector: An Analysis of Six Case Studies”
Pippa Hall (UK Intellectual Property Office), “A Legal and Empirical Study into the Intellectual Property Implications of 3D Printing – Policy Considerations”
Chair: Geertrui Van Overwalle (KU Leuven/Louvain)
Bronwyn Hall (University of California, Berkeley)
Bruno Van Pottelsberghe (Université libre de Bruxelles)
Esther van Zimmeren (KU Leuven/Louvain)
This is a recording of the session which served as a joint keynote of SERCI & EPIP 2015.
The joint keynote, titled “Copyright Collectives and Contracts: An Economic Theory Perspective“, was presented by Richard Watt (University of Canterbury, NZ) and was chaired by Towse (CREATe and Bournemouth University). The respondents were Sylvie Nérisson (Max-Planck Institute), Morten Hviid (University of East Anglia), and, Scott Walker (Performing Rights Society/UK Music).
The existing economic theory of copyright collectives, or copyright management organizations (CMOs) is strongly focused on the benefits of sharing of transaction costs. Here, we appeal to the contractual environment of CMOs to offer a different perspective. Copyright collectives form contracts at two principle points along the supply chain. First, there are the contracts between the collective’s members themselves (the copyright holders), for distribution of the collective’s income. And second there are the licensing contracts that the collective signs with users of the repertory. Using standard economic theory, the paper argues that there are significant efficiency benefits from having copyrights managed as an aggregate repertory, rather than individually, based on risk-pooling and risk-sharing through the contracts between the members themselves. Similarly, there are also aggregation benefits (at least in terms of the profit of the CMO) of licensing only the entire repertory, rather than smaller sub-sets. Interestingly, there is a link between these two theories of the efficiency of collective, rather than individual, management, and it lies at the heart of the theory of syndicates, and the characteristics that imply that the group (or syndicate as a whole) can be considered as a valid “representative”, sharing the same preferences as each individual syndicate member.
The keynote is also available to download as a CREATe working paper from here.
SERCI / EPIP 2015 Joint Plenary Panel: Compensating Creators
Chair: Marcel Boyer (Université de Montréal and CIRANO)
Presenters: Christian Handke (Erasmus University Rotterdam), Ruben Gutierrez Del Castillo (Fundacion Autor), Peter Jenner (Sincere Management), Nicola Solomon (Society of Authors), John Street (University of East Anglia), Eva Van Passel (Vrije Universiteit Brussel)
Data Needs for Assessing the Function of Copyright
Speaker: Joel Waldfogel (University of Minnesota)
Responding: Nathan Wajsman (OHIM), Kamil Kiljanski (European Commission DG Internal Market and Industry), Pippa Hall (UK Intellectual Property Office), Mosahid Khan (WIPO)
Transcript & Video of Closing Keynote by Pamela Samuelson (Berkeley Law)
Please note: Prof. Samuelson’s keynote was accompanied by slides, which are referenced occasionally.
I want to start by saying thank you to Martin and to the CREATe team for a really outstanding conference. I think this is a marvellous event that you’ve put together. I go to a lot of conferences myself and I pretty rarely come away with this much content and things to think about and stimulating ideas. I’m sorry I didn’t get to go to everybody’s parallel session but, as you know, there was a lot of competition. Martin had this really interesting idea, which was that I’d listen to a whole bunch of talks and so forth and then try to wrap up. That’s a risky thing for him and an even riskier thing for me since he had confidence that I would do a good job. I’ll give it my best.