On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 1:25 AM, Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov <dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com> wrote:
Salut la liste!

I had an Observatory meeting of the WG "IP in the digital world" which will deal with our study. Had a chance to discuss things with the Observatory's economists and we decided to engage in a more intensive discussion over email, phone and at the annual plenary in Alicante next month. In the room it was basically just me and the economist speaking as no other member (i.e. none of the industry representatives) seemed to show an interest in this one.

Here the main requests and my comments:

1. They really want us to compile a list of sectors.

I asked for a economic modelling study that assess the whole situation, but they aren't keen on this. Apparently their budget for this for 2015 is 25.000 Euro and - I am really quoting here - they want something "quick&credible".

Additionally they want to make this study a counterpoint to their IP contribution study [1], which was released last year. This was also our initial starting point, as we wanted to be able to say "yes, IP is important but it builds up on a thriving commons".  In the first study they just used a number of industry sectors and looked at it. They proposed we should start by taking this list and amending it as we see fit. ([2] page 27 ff.)

My feeling is that we should go for this approach as a start, but I am a bit scared that this could limit the results not in our favour. A longer list with sectors we know free&open is king would help. Also, the Observatory has a tendency to do follow-up and complementary studies, so I could very well see them continuing with such research after this initial experiment.

What a frustratingly framed question. I am half-tempted to respond with the list of Disney movies based on public domain works ;)
 
2. They really want to know if infringements is a problem for us

The official name of the Observatory being "EU Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights", they seemed really keen on including infringements of PD&OL in the study. I said I could give them a few case studies or examples, but hadn't heard of any studies on this. Should we give in and let them do research on this, although it might take focus off the economic contribution part?

If it helps them act at all, I can't see how it hurts us to have them think about it. It's not the most frustrating mis-framing to come out of Brussels. :)

I was pointed by an acquaintance at these studies that are specific to the use of open source in the Android App Store (a space that is easy to study):

The press releases for the initial study and a follow-up are here:

I also wrote aaa 3-part blog series on the research, results, etc. here: 

The headline number is that they found 71% non-compliance in the first study; down to 38% of apps non-compliant in the followup (in 2012).
 
3. They are grateful for any help or pointers, especially on evaluation methods

Their economists seem a bit... excited to tackle a completely new field for them. Frankly speaking, they are a bit usure what to do, which is why they want to stick to a limited list of sectors. They are also asking for advice on evaluation we might give them. I promised to point them to the 'Wikipedia evaluation study' and the Polish 'study on the reuse value of open data'. Anything else we might pitch in?

I will continue discussing and thinking on it.

Luis
 

Feel free to share this with your circles. Also, we'll be integrated and get to comment pretty much every step of the way, so there will be many opportunities to contribute and to nudge things in our direction.

Thanks for reading,
Dimi

2014-09-19 20:18 GMT+02:00 Timothy Vollmer <tvol@creativecommons.org>:


On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Luis Villa <lvilla@wikimedia.org> wrote:
Here are the four basic questions (copied from the document) and some quick comments in italics.

"In effect the first point, which we propose as the starting point for our study, amounts to a quantification of the contribution of works made available under PD&OL to the economy. In order to make such quantification, we need to answer some basic questions:
  • Which are the sectors that produce works that are licensed under PD&OL, and which are the sectors that use them (the proposal provides some examples, but we need more systematic information)—is this information available?

    LV: We could create a more rigorously compiled list, but I’m not aware of “quantification” in the sense they seem to be wanting.

  • Given that these works are not registered anywhere, where should we look for data on the quantity of such works?

    LV: CC has gathered numbers on this in the past; could talk to them about it?
Yah, lemme ask around to see if there are any useable numbers we can get on this. 
tvol

  • Do BEUC/EDRi/Wikimedia have any suggestions as to valuation methods?

    LV: The best thing I’m aware of on this is http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2338563 (Economic Value of Wikipedia, by Jonathan Band), which contains a number of valuation metrics that could be extended to open culture more generally.

  • “Open license” does not mean that one can do with the work whatever one wants. Is infringement or misuse a problem for the open source community, and if so, are there are any studies that have examined its extent and impact? 

    LV: None that I’m aware of, but I’ll ask around and get back to the list.
Luis Villa
Deputy General Counsel
Wikimedia Foundation
415.839.6885 ext. 6810

This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer.


On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 9:00 AM, Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov <dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

The IPR Observatory [1] of the European Commission have now officially included a study requested by us with the support of other civil society actors in their 2015 working programme. The study is on "economic contribution of public domain and open licensing".

The Observatory has sent us some additional questions now that might be important for the final outcome. I would appreciate any comments/ideas/help in answering those in the best possible way. The questions can be seen in the PDF attachment.

Thanks a lot!
Dimi
<Questions_WG_23092014.pdf>


_______________________________________________
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors




--
Timothy Vollmer
Public Policy Manager, Creative Commons
Get Creative Commons Updates http://bit.ly/commonsnews

_______________________________________________
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors



_______________________________________________
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors




--
Luis Villa
Deputy General Counsel
Wikimedia Foundation
415.839.6885 ext. 6810

This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer.