sutton043

Catch-up with the latest developments in IP, with the 200th edition of Never Too Late! This week's highlights include a report on algorithmic fashion and a perspective on the KitKat shape-mark case.  GuestKat Mirko Brüß reports on the latest referral from the German Federal Court of Justice (FCJ) to the CJEU, on the questions of platform liability and the right of communication to the public. The case, which has been going on since 2009, concerns a lawsuit between the music producer Frank Peterson and YouTube (and Google). Peterson is seeking damages from YouTube and Google because certain videos remained available on YouTube, even after Peterson had asked the platform to remove the content:  BREAKING: FCJ refers case regarding YouTube’s liability for damages to the CJEU . Kat Eleonora Rosati   explores the growing trend for fashion houses to produce garments that consumers already want, so called "algorithmic fashion". Eleonora considers how this is achiev...

Two decades ago, the world of academic publishing was taken by a storm called ‘open access’. The movement of ‘open access’ advocates for making published content available to the public for free. No fees and no (or little) right-based restrictions to limit access (apparently, the wisdom that authors need financial incentives to create does not apply to scholars who write for pleasure or reputation alone). The aim of open access is [was] to democratize access to knowledge.   In ‘The Economics Open Access’ , Thomas Eger and Marc Scheufen investigate whether ‘open access’ strategies have delivered on their promises. Combined with the rise of the Internet and digital technologies, open access strategies should have made the dissemination of knowledge (via academic publications) cheaper than ever. Instead, we find libraries facing higher subscription fees which forces them to cut back on their catalogue listing and monograph in-take…so what went wrong? The book offers an economic empir...