Dr Christina Angelopoulos

Contact details

Name:
Dr Christina Angelopoulos
Position/Fellowship type:
Associate Research Fellow
Fellowship term:
03-Oct-2016
Institute:
Institute of Advanced Legal Studies
Email address:
cja58@cam.ac.uk
Website:
http://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/peoplemembers/dr-christina-angelopoulos

Research Summary and Profile

Research interests:
Digitisation, Human rights, Law
Regions:
England, Europe, United Kingdom
Publication Details

Related publications/articles:

Date Details
15-Sep-2016 MTE v Hungary: A New ECtHR Judgment on Intermediary Liability and Freedom of Expression

Articles

Case note on Magyar Tartalomszolgáltatók Egyesülete and Index.hu Zrt v Hungary, European Court of Human Rights, App No 22947/13, 2 February 2016.

Published with: Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice (2016) 11(8), p. 582-584.

16-Jun-2016 “Study of Fundamental Rights Limitations for Online Enforcement through Self-Regulation”

Papers

With: A.W. Hins, P.B. Hugenholtz, T. McGonagle, O.L. van Daalen, J.V.J. van Hoboken, A. Brody, T. Margoni & P. Leerssen, “Study of Fundamental Rights Limitations for Online Enforcement through Self-Regulation”, Institute for Information Law (IViR), University of Amsterdam.

01-Feb-2016 “The Term Directive and the Term Extension Directive”

Chapters

This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of the provisions of the EU's Term Directive (Directive 2006/116/EC) and Term Extension Directive (Directive 2011/77/EU).

29-Aug-2015 “Sketching the Outline of a Ghost: the Fair Balance between Copyright and Fundamental Rights in Intermediary Liability”

Articles

Special issue of Info - The journal of policy, regulation and strategy for telecommunications, information and media on the theme of "New Intermediaries in the Hyperconnected Society”, p. 72-96.

In recent years, the national courts of the EU Member States, in an attempt to stem the flow of rampant online copyright infringement, have increasingly sought a convenient enforcement tool in the imposition of obligations on internet intermediaries whose websites and networks are used by the primary wrongdoers. Duties to prevent or remove infringing material have also proliferated.

The emerging case law governing the limits to the imposition of such obligation has rested heavily on the notion of a “fair balance” between conflicting fundamental rights. While recognising that copyright is protected as a fundamental right under Art. 17(2) the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights, the CJEU has emphasised that it is not absolute and must therefore be reconciled with the counter-balancing fundamental rights of others (most notably the right of the intermediary to conduct a business and the rights of its users to the protection of their personal data and their freedom of expression). This has elevated the discussion on intermediary liability to the hierarchically higher legal plane of primary law, while also providing a legal basis in EU law beyond the limited reach of the E-Commerce Directive.

But the vagueness of the basic rules invoked inevitably results in poor guidance as to the appropriate solutions. The individual cases heard only shed light on the specific circumstances that concerned them. As a result, the CJEU’s rulings fail to illuminate the boarder picture: where does this “fair balance” lie? Currently, no general standard is discernible. The result is legal uncertainty for intermediaries and right-holders and chilling effects on the exercise of fundamental rights. In other words, as AG Mazák noted in Case C-47/07 Masdar, “as is generally the case with general principles of law as a legal source, until there is settled case-law on the matter discussing the concrete content of such a principle can be very much like discussing the shape of a ghost.”

19-Aug-2014 “Are Blocking Injunctions against ISPs Allowed in Europe? Copyright Enforcement in the Post-Telekabel EU Legal Landscape”

Articles

(2014) 10 Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, p. 812-821. Republished in GRUR International, Vol. 11, p. 1089-1096.
 

In recent years, the national courts of the EU Member States, in an attempt to stem the flow of rampant online copyright infringement, have increasingly turned to the issuance of blocking injunctions against the intermediaries whose websites and networks are used by third parties to commit infringements. This article examines the legal framework in place at the EU level with regard to the legality of such injunctive orders, making a distinction between filtering measures, used to detect copyright infringements, and blocking measures, used to put an end to them. On the basis of that analysis, a detailed examination will be made of the latest CJEU ruling to apply this framework, Case C-314/12, UPC Telekabel Wien GmbH v Constantin Film Verleih GmbH on the lawfullness of open-ended blocking injunctions against internet access providers.

08-Oct-2013 “Beyond the Safe Harbours: Harmonising Substantive Intermediary Liability for Copyright Infringement in Europe”

Articles

(2013) 3 Intellectual Property Quarterly, p. 253-274.
 

With the adoption and subsequent national implementation of the E-Commerce Directive’s safe harbour regime, the architecture set up for intermediary liability in Europe has become two-tiered: at a first stage, it is necessary to examine whether a given intermediary attracts, in its pursuit of a certain activity, civil liability according to the standards in place in national legislation and only then, in the second instance, must the inapplicability of any immunity be established. As a result, although it provides a veneer of approximation by immunising intermediaries under certain circumscribed conditions, the Directive does not harmonise the underlying substantive liability norms which decide whether the safe harbours will be necessary or redundant. Instead, these are determined by national tort law, leaving ample room for national divergences between the regimes of the various Member States. This paper examines the applicable tort rules currently in place in three selected jurisdictions of the UK, France and Germany, picking out their commonalities and divergences and revealing the confusion that governs the topic across European borders. The intention is to examine the structures in place that could allow for the eventual European harmonisation of substantive intermediary liability beyond the safe harbours.

10-Aug-2012 “The Myth of European Term Harmonisation: 27 Public Domains for the 27 Member States”

Articles

(2012) 5 International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law (IIC), p. 567-594.

12-Jun-2012 “Determining the Term of Protection for Films: When Does a Film Fall into the Public Domain in Europe?”

Articles

IRIS plus 2012-2, European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg 2012, p. 7-21.

06-Dec-2011 “Amended Directive Extends the Term of Protection for Performers and Sound Recordings”

Articles

(2011) 11 GRUR International, p. 987-989.

06-Jul-2011 Open Content Licensing: From Theory to Practice

Edited Book

(ed. with L Guibault) Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press 2011, p. 243-295

06-Jul-2011 “Chapter IX - Creative Commons and Related Rights in Sound Recordings: Are the Two Systems Compatible?”

Chapters

in: Open Content Licensing: From Theory to Practice, L. Guibault & C. Angelopoulos (ed.),

Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press 2011, p. 243-295

Can the will of the author cancel her copyright? The Creative Commons licensing system depends on a positive answer to this question, and indeed, in the area of copyright proper, for the most part this is the case. But the related rights of performers and phonogram producers are a different matter: in addition to their exclusive rights, performers and phonogram producers are also granted a right to equitable remuneration for the use of their phonograms in communications to the public or broadcasting by wireless means. Given that, in many EU Member States the right to equitable remuneration has been implemented in the form of a (waivable or non-waivable) compulsory licensing scheme, while, even where a voluntary license scheme is in place, the functional reality of collecting societies will limit the flexibility that this will allow right-owners, the following question arises: is the legal framework of related rights and the collective management systems in place for the exploitation of these rights compatible with the use of Creative Commons licenses? This book chapter attempts to answer this complicated question with regard to the law of the two EU Member States of the UK and the Netherlands. The issue is examined against the backdrop of the innovative flexible collective management pilot project was initiated for musical works between Buma/Stemra, the Dutch collecting society for music authors and publishers, and Creative Commons Netherlands, the Dutch branch of Creative Commons. The chapter concludes that, when contemplating the application of Creative Commons licenses to musical works in the context of the user’s obligation to pay equitable remuneration to the performer and phonogram producer for use of a phonogram in a communication to the public or broadcast, three main circumstances must be kept in mind: (a) Whether the work has been published for commercial purposes; (b) Whether the work is offered by the user on an interactive, on-demand basis; (c) What type of licensing scheme is established in the country in question for the management of the right.

14-Jan-2011 Digitisation and Online Exploitation of Broadcasters' Archives

Edited Book

(ed. with S Nikoltchev and S J van Gompel), IRIS Special, European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg 2010.

The archives of many television broadcasters now contain materiel which includes more than half a century of contemporary, documentary and entertainment history and are of immense cultural and economic value. Digitisation has created an entirely new technical basis for making these assets available to a wide audience, and there are a whole range of projects aimed at opening up audiovisual archives (including those of broadcasters). However, many projects to open up broadcasters' archives and exploit them online generally run up against serious problems when it comes to clearing the rights for these archived works. These problems arise, firstly, due to a contractual practice that developed in the pre-digital era and to aspects of copyright law that do not really meet the needs of the digital age. Secondly, the very large number of works stored in archives constitutes a challenge that is not easily overcome. The aim of this IRIS Special is to discuss the subject from a number of different perspectives. The team of authors involved is accordingly made up of representatives of many different interests: copyright holders and those who look after their interests, television broadcasters, lawyers and copyright experts.

06-Aug-2010 “Product Placement in European Audiovisual Productions”

Articles

IRIS plus 2010-3, European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg 2010, p. 7-21.

21-May-2009 “Filtering the Internet for Copyrighted Content in Europe”

Articles

IRIS plus 2009-4, European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg 2009, p. 2-12.

30-Mar-2009 “Workshop on Audiovisual Search: Summary of the Discussion”

Chapters

(with J van Hoboken) in Searching for Audiovisual Content, IRIS Special, European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg 2008.

21-Jul-2008 “Freedom of Expression and Copyright – The Double Balancing Act”

Articles

(2008) 3 Intellectual Property Quarterly, p. 328-353.

01-Jul-2008 “Modern Intellectual Property Legislation: Warm for Reform”

Articles

(2008) 2 Entertainment Law Review 35, p. 35-40.

Research Projects & Supervisions

Research projects:

Details
The European Harmonisation of Intermediary Civil Liability for Online Copyright Infringement

PhD research project, 2011-2015

With the adoption and subsequent national implementation of the E-Commerce Directive’s safe harbour regime, the architecture set up for intermediary liability in Europe has become two-tiered: at a first stage, it is necessary to examine whether a given intermediary attracts, in its pursuit of a certain activity, civil liability according to the standards ensconced in the Member States’ legislation and only then, in the second instance, must the inapplicability of any immunity be established. As a result, although it provides a veneer of approximation by immunising intermediaries under certain circumscribed conditions, the Directive does not harmonise the underlying substantive liability norms which determine whether the safe harbours will be necessary or redundant. This leaves ample room for national divergences, particularly as concerns new types of intermediaries whose eligibility for the existing safe harbours is uncertain.

This PhD research seeks to explore the liability in Europe of online intermediaries for secondary or indirect copyright infringement, i.e. where the material act of infringement is committed by a third party, regardless of the applicability of the safe harbour regime. It will therefore begin with an investigation of the current law relating to intermediary liability for copyright infringement in the legal jurisdictions of England, France and Germany, these three jurisdictions representing each of the three major European extra-contractual liability traditions. The relationship between these rules and national substantive tort principles in the selected countries will subsequently be examined. This shall be done with a view to uncovering common European tort principles that can potentially lead the way to a harmonised, clear and comprehensive European liability regime of intermediaries for copyright infringement.
 

Relevant Events

Related events:

Date Details
13-Jul-2016 "Online platforms and copyright - All you wanted to know but never asked"

Training session hosted by MEP Catherine Stihler (S&D), European Parliament, Brussels, Belgium.

12-Jul-2016 “3D Printing in Law and Society”

Chair at book launch of 'Socio-Legal Aspects of the 3D Printing Revolution' by Angela Day (Palgrave 2016), Institute for Advanced Legal Studies, London, UK.

16-Jun-2016 “European Intermediary Liability and Fair Balance” presentation at “Privatising the Rule of Law Online: Freedom of Speech, Copyright and Platforms in the Digital Single Market”

Presentation at event hosted by MEP Marietje Schaake (ALDE Group), European Parliament, Brussels, Belgium.

10-Jun-2016 “The Rules in the Digital World – Economy v. Human Rights”

Participant in panel session, EuroDIG conference, Brussels, Belgium.

10-Jun-2016 “Intermediaries and Human Rights – between Co-Opted Law Enforcement and Human Rights Protection”,

"Key participant" focusing on the notion of a “fair balance” between conflicting fundamental rights and how to achieve it, as this relates to the area of intermediary liability. EuroDIG conference, Brussels, Belgium.

11-Apr-2016 “Notice-And-Fair-Balance: The Law of Fundamental Rights in European Intermediary Liability”

With Stijn Smet, Ghent Univerisity. Presentation at 2016 BILETA Conference, University of Hertfordshire, UK.

08-Apr-2016 “Accommodating freedom of expression within copyright: independent exception?”

Chair of session at CREATe “Copyright and Free Speech” workshop, Information Law and Policy Centre (IALS), London, UK. Main academic organisers: Dr Daithi Mac Sithigh, Newcastle University and Dr Emily Laidlaw, University of Calgary. Host support provided by IALS.

18-Mar-2016 “European Intermediary Liability in Copyright: A Tort-Based Analysis”

Presentation at Institute for Information Law (IViR), University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

16-Mar-2016 “Intermediary liability through the back door: Consequences of extending digital copyright for the open internet”

OpenForum Europe, Brussels, Belgium.
 

11-Feb-2016 “The Definition of Online Intermediaries and their Liability”

Lecture at “Annual Training on Business Models, Innovation and Regulation of the Digital World”, Florence School of Regulation, Communications and Media, European University Institute, Florence, Italy.

13-Apr-2015 The European Harmonisation of Intermediary Accessory Liability for Online Copyright Infringement: at the Intersection of Tort Law and Fundamental Rights

Academic organiser, Roundtable Discussion, Institute for Information Law (IViR), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

13-Apr-2015 Developing Eurocopytort: the European Harmonisation of Intermediary Liability for Third Party Copyright Infringement

Presentation at Roundtable Discussion on “The European Harmonisation of Intermediary Accessory Liability for Online Copyright Infringement: at the Intersection of Tort Law and Fundamental Rights”, Institute for Information Law (IViR), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

24-Mar-2015 Sketching the Outline of a Ghost: The Fair Balance between Copyright and Fundamental Rights in Intermediary Liability

Presentation at EuroCPR, Brussels, Belgium.

08-Sep-2014 Beyond the Safe Harbours: Substantive Third Party Intermediary Liability for Copyright in Europe

Presentation at workshop on “Secondary liability of hosting Internet Service Providers in the European Union”, Maastricht University, the Netherlands.

03-Jul-2014 Filtering away Infringement: Copyright, Injunctions and the Role of ISPs

Academic organiser, panel discussion, Information Influx Conference, 2-4 July 2014, Institute for Information Law (IViR), Amsterdam, the Netherlands

30-May-2014 Their Users’ Keepers? Harmonising Intermediary Liability for Third Party Copyright Infringement in Europe

Presentation at 6th International Conference on Information Law and Ethics (ICIL 2014), Thessaloniki, Greece.

11-Apr-2014 How to Build a Public Domain Calculator

Presentation at workshop on “The Public Domain Calculators”, Bournemouth University, UK.

24-Apr-2010 The Digitisation and Online Exploitation of Broadcasters’ Archives

Academic organisation, Joint Expert Workshop, European Audiovisual Observatory/Institute for Information Law (IViR), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Back to top