1. Is Europe falling behind? Copyright’s impact on data mining in academic research C. Handke, L. Guibault, J.J. Vallbé, LIBER, 24.06.2015 Institute for Information Law

2. Question: Does copyright law impact data mining in academic research? 2 Fact: Data mining involves access to and usage of (copyright protected) articles and data in bulk

3. Empirical research Use of data available on academic research output Academic publications as reasonable indicator of the innovation output of academic researchers 3

4. Collection of data...1/ Source of data:  From Thomson Reuter’s Web of Science (WoS)  Entire WoS Core Collection Database including Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Science Citation Index and Art & Humanities Citation Index. For 40 countries, between 1993 and 2014 4

5. Collection of data...2/ Use of key words : ‘data mining’ 18,441 DM-related articles between 1993 and 2014. 23,802,650 articles for the entire panel. For all countries and entire time period covered, 0.7‰ had DM as a topic 5

6. 6 Absolute number of DM research articles published per year (42 countries, 1992 to 2014)

7. Classification of countries Copyright law is not harmonised Protection is determined at national level 4 categories:  Not allowed  Probably not allowed  Probably allowed  Allowed Few countries remained unclassified 7

8. Classification in detail...1/ ‘Not allowed’: countries with a closed list of exception and limitation, without relevant exception = Europe, Switzerland, Russia, Latin America ‘Probably not allowed’: countries with a fair dealing exception, without relevant case law = Australia, India, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand 8

9. Classification in detail...2/ ‘Probably allowed’: countries with fair use defence, without relevant case law = Canada, China, Israel, Korea, Singapore, Taiwan ‘Allowed’: countries with specific relevant exception or fair use defence with relevant case law = Japan, United Kingdom, United States 9

10. Countries that underwent a change in status between 1992 and 2014 From ‘probably not allowed’ to ‘probably allowed’  Canada, China, Israel, Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, From ‘not/probably not allowed’ to ‘allowed’  Japan (2010), United Kingdom (2014) 10

11. Control indicators 1. GDP per capita 2. Country population size 3. The level of rule of law 11

12. Analysis & Results Multilevel linear regression model with varying intercepts by country, also known as a random effects model In all specifications, we find significant positive coefficients for the category ‘probably allowed’ (p<.01). Overall, there is extensive evidence that DM share is greater in countries with more permissive DM- related copyright than in the ‘not allowed’ category of countries. 12

13. Conclusion In most EU/EEA Member States, DM-related copyright protection is comparatively strong. Our results suggest that the net effect is a weaker performance of domestic academic researchers in this increasingly important type of research 13

14. Handke, Christian and Guibault, Lucie and Vallbé, Joan-Josep, Is Europe Falling Behind in Data Mining? Copyright's Impact on Data Mining in Academic Research (June 7, 2015). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2608513 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2608513 http://ssrn.com/abstract=2608513 http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2608513 Draft paper available at: Type the footer here14

15. Thank you very much!! For questions/discussion Christian Handke : handke@eshcc.eur.nl Lucie Guibault : L.Guibault@uva.nl Joan Josep Vallbé : pepvallbe@gmail.com 15