Presentation on theme: "PSI AND PUBLICLY FUNDED RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS PRO INCLUSION IN THE PSI DIRECTIVE? 27012011, LAPSI THEMATIC SEMINAR 4, MUENSTER, ITM DR. MAJA BOGATAJ JAN."— Presentation transcript:
PSI AND PUBLICLY FUNDED RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS PRO INCLUSION IN THE PSI DIRECTIVE? 27012011, LAPSI THEMATIC SEMINAR 4, MUENSTER, ITM DR. MAJA BOGATAJ JAN Č I Č, LL.M., LL.M.,
CURRENT STATUS DIRECTIVE 2003/98 minimal rules for reuse of existing documents held by public sector bodies exemptions for certain documents (tasks, institutions ?)
CURRENT STATUS EXEMPTIONS for documents: –supplied outside of the public task of the public body, –on which 3rd parties hold IPR, –excluded by virtue of access regimes (national security, trade secrets), –held by public service broadcasters, –held by public sectors educational and research institutions, –held by cultural establishments.
POSSIBLE REASONS FOR EXCLUSION - many of documents are covered by IP anyway - to much of administrative burden for these institutions: - difficult to provide on demand service, to identify which documents are included and not included under other exceptions (IP) - PPP – disincentive for potential projects - potential income - interoperability problems - additional financial burden - human resources, technical resources,
PUBLICLY FUNDED RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS 1.publicly funded research vs. publicly funded research institutions 2.publicly funded research institutions hold documents that could not be under PSI - no public body task - access regime prevents - IP regime prevents – 3rd parties rights documents that could be under PSI – if no exception
IF NO EXCEPTION 1. test on three fronts: - which tasks are a tasks of public body (universities, scope of employment, commercial models of public research institution) IP (copyright protected, sui generis database) 2. test whether document excluded because of the access regimes of MS (security, trade secrets, privacy…) 3. test whether 3rd IP rights
IPRs THAT PREVENT ACCESS AND REUSE UNDER THE PSI THIRD PARTIES COPYRIGHTS, SUI GENERIS DATABASE RIGHTS OF THIRD PARTIES - software excluded - industrial property excluded – recital 22? ISSUES: - OWNERSHIP What if joint ownership? Who owns the copyright in the works created by the employed researchers, faculty at universities? - OLDER WORKS Orphan works, which works are in the public domain - MIXED FUNDING Incentives, non incentives for public funding
BENEFITS 1.enhance access, enhance reuse of PUBLICLY FUNDED research 2.unify practices and increase interoperability 3.increase value of research through better visibility of research institutions, 4.better promotion of existing research in new channels, 5.promotion of education in general 6.promotion of new research 7.to clarify general exceptions of the PSI also for these institutions
SPECIFIC BENEFITS IP related specific benefits: 1.may influence to work on efficient mechanism for PD mechanism 2.may influence to work on efficient solutions for orphan works 3.may influence to manage IP in the public funded research in the spirit of IP rules of PSI 4.may influence the management of IP in PPP
SPECIFIC BENEFITS THEY SHOULD BE INCLUDED, but if and only when IP related specific issues are resloved in another legislative instrument PROBLEM: when or if this is possible at all?