The Lisbon Council and Innovation Economics have published the "2015 Intellectual Property and Economic Growth Index: Measuring the Impact of Exceptions and Limitations in Copyright on Growth, Jobs and Prosperity". The report was written by Benjamin Gibert, non-resident fellow at the Lisbon Council.

It found that:

1. Countries that employ a broadly “flexible” regime of exceptions in copyright also saw higher rates of growth in value-added output throughout their economy.

2. Somewhat more surprisingly, economies that employ a broadly “flexible” regime of exceptions to copyright also saw higher growth rates in the publishing, audiovisual and broadcasting industries – a preliminary finding with deep potential implications given the strong opposition to copyright reform from many incumbent economic interests in these sectors.

3. Economies that employ a broadly “flexible” regime of exceptions in copyright also typically saw faster growth in the wider information technology and services sectors.

4. Countries with broader flexibility in their copyright regimes also saw higher levels of compensation in the overall economy, and specifically in information and communication technology goods and services and information technology sectors.

5. Greater scope and flexibility of exceptions to copyright have valuable positive externalities, specifically in the promotion of education, independent research, free-speech, user-generated content and text and data mining.

6. Policymakers often perceive the positive externalities and innovations associated with exceptions to copyright as a trade off with the economic growth driven by strong intellectual property protection. Instead, the evidence suggests that broad and flexible exceptions to copyright embedded within a strong intellectual property framework may be the best way to achieve both simultaneously.

The report builds a system for measuring the impact of exceptions to copyright on economic growth and finds that countries that employ a broadly “flexible” regime of exceptions in copyright also saw higher rates of growth in value-added output throughout their economies.

The Report concludes, amongst other things, that:

“New opportunities to regulate copyright online must be assessed empirically and the full range of policy options available discussed in a transparent manner that includes all stakeholders in the emerging digital environment.

The importance of making sure Europe’s copyright framework is “fit for purpose” cannot be overstated. (...)

The EU is poised to benefit enormously from the digital revolution. However, it can only do so if it is supported by a copyright policy that appreciates the new dynamics of innovation and the complex ecosystem in which economic value is embedded online. Copyright law, more than ever before, is integral to the creation, dissemination and exchange of information goods and cultural works. The question is not whether copyright remains relevant today but instead what form the copyright regime should take in order to best promote innovation and growth? In the words of Australians Birgitte Andersen, Lucy Montgomery and Benjamin Reid: “Future intellectual property policies must focus on creating and expanding markets for ideas and creative expression, rather than being bogged down in analogue-era debates about how narrowly defined interests of individual industry sectors, formats, channels or business models can be protected. This is crucial because it is through the growth of these markets that research and development costs will be recovered, innovation incentivised, knowledge spread and competition and entrepreneurship stimulated.”

Text freigegeben unter Creative Commons BY 3.0 de.
Diese Lizenz gilt nicht für externe Inhalte, auf die Bezug genommen wird.