Peggy Valcke

Access to premium content on mobile television platforms: The case of mobile sports

As broadcasting sports content has proved to be a popular strategy for driving the growth of the digital premium content marketplace in the past, mobile service operators aim to enter the sports rights market. However, as the markets for live sports broadcasting are still dominated by established broadcasters, mobile network operators are facing significant barriers to access premium content creating bottlenecks in the construction of business models. Therefore, content regulation is seen as essential for the development of mobile television platforms. This article aims to stress the strategic importance of content in the development of sustainable business models for mobile broadcasting services and will discuss the implications of bundling strategies and regulations for the viability of these emerging platforms.

The European Media Pluralism Monitor : Bridging Law, Economics, and Media Studies as a First Step towards Risk-Based Regulation in Media Markets

The European Media Pluralism Monitor : Bridging Law, Economics, and Media Studies as a First Step towards Risk-Based Regulation in Media Markets

Graduated regulation of ‘regulatable’ content and the European Audiovisual Media Services Directive: One small step for the industry and one giant leap for the legislator?

Abstract The aim of this article is to contribute to the ongoing discussions relating to the modernisation of the EU regulatory framework for the broadcasting sector. This revision would entail the extension of existing content regulations in the Television without Frontiers Directive to new platforms, including next generation broadband. In a first chapter (theoretical framework), the article will test the validity of the arguments traditionally invoked to justify content regulation (are they still valid in the converging info-communications sector and if so, can they justify the expansion of content regulation beyond traditional broadcasting?). Second, it will critically analyse the Commission’s legislative proposal for a new Audiovisual Media Services Directive and assess its impact on new content providers, such as mobile operators and ISP’s. It ends with some critical and sometimes provocative thoughts that intend to stimulate the debate on Europe’s current strategy for a convergent content regulation.

Towards a better protection of social media users: a legal perspective on the terms of use of social networking sites

The ‘Terms of Use’ of Social Networking Sites (SNS) increasingly attract attention from policymakers and civil society. It is argued that these terms are rarely read by users and that, consequently, users cannot correctly assess their implications. This article attempts to evaluate the validity of SNS Terms of Use based on the requirements that are imposed in existing legal instruments. n nFirstly, we look at the phenomenon of standard contracts in the offline world. Secondly, we try to identify whether the SNS environment adds additional elements to the manner in which consumers approach standard Terms of Use. Thirdly, as a case study, we examine the Terms of Use of Facebook and assess whether the clauses could be found invalid on the basis of several law requirements. Finally, we try to put forward a number of remedies for the imbalance of the rights and responsibilities that can currently be found in SNS Terms of Use.

Employing Robot Journalists: Legal Implications, Considerations and Recommendations

Algorithmic processes that convert data into narrative news texts allow news rooms to publish stories with limited to no human intervention (Carlson, 2015, p. 416). The new trend creates many opportunities, but also raises significant legal questions. Aside from financial benefits, further refinement could make the smart algorithms capable of writing less standard, maybe even opinion, pieces. The responsible human merely needs to define clear questions about what the algorithm needs to discuss in the article and in what manner. But how does it square with the traditional rules of publishing, editorial control and the privacy and data protection framework? This paper analyses the legal implications when employing robot journalists. More specifically, the question of authorship for algorithmic output and the liability issues that could arise when the algorithmic output includes unlawful personal data processing as well as inaccurate, harmful or even illegal content will be assessed. The analysis is performed analyzing European legislation on copyright and data protection and applying Belgian legislation on press liability as a consistent country example to support certain legal considerations and conclusions. Furthermore, the paper answers the question as to how publishers could prevent the creation of inaccurate content by the algorithms they use.

A Global Perspective on Media Pluralism and Diversity: Introduction

The term ‘media pluralism’ is regularly used in critiques of media and in arguments for public intervention in media markets. It is employed so loosely, however, that it allows varied interpretations to be attached, and this makes it highly challenging to turn general support for the concept into specific policies. Much of the lack of clarity is the consequence of indefiniteness of the term and because it is used as a proxy for more involved concepts. The term is derived from ‘plural’, an indistinct quantitative concept indicating the existence of more than a single thing, and plurality itself merely indicates a state of being numerous. This alone allows the term plurality to be used in various ways when applied to media. For some it means a plurality of media outlets. This is indicated by having multiple types of media and multiple units of each media, and the existence of a range of print, broadcast, satellite, and Internet content providers can also represent pluralism. For other observers pluralism means plurality in ownership, that is, a range of owners and different types of ownership. For others it is indicated by the existence of public service as well as private commercial firms so some content is provided by an organization(s) without direct individual economic self- interest(s).

Indicators for Media Pluralism

The European Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM) starts from the assumption that, in order to obtain a complete and accurate picture of actual or imminent threats to media pluralism in a country, different sets of indicators should be combined (KU Leuven — ICRI et al. 2009). It distinguishes between three types of indicators that assess respectively legal, economic, and socio-demographic factors relevant for media pluralism. The aim of this chapter is to describe these different indicators, give an overall account of the methods adopted to select and measure them, and explain how they interrelate.

'Spam, spam, spam, spam... Lovely spam!' Why is Bluespam different?

The sending of unsolicited communications (commonly known as ‘spam’) is considered as a great intrusion into the privacy of the user of electronic communications services, and is therefore regulated in Article 13 of the ePrivacy directive. At the time of the adoption of the directive, the most common ways of spamming were via telephone, fax, electronic mail and SMS. Technological progress, however, has since created more types of spamming, one of which is Bluespam, i.e. the action of sending spam to Bluetooth-enabled devices, such as mobile phones, PDAs or laptop computers. Although, at first sight, it would seem that Bluespam should be considered as any other type of spam, and would therefore fall under the ambit of Article 13 of the ePrivacy directive, a closer look reveals that the answer is in fact not so obvious.

A Critical Analysis of the Right of Reply in Online Media

The technological and sociological developments call into question traditional legal concepts. One of the most compelling issues at this moment is the concept of the right of reply in the online media environment. It provides victims of press crimes with a better legal remedy, but the transposition of the concept as used in the context of the traditional media (printed press and audiovisual press) to the online environment raises many questions, mainly because of the specific characteristics of the borderless Internet. Despite the objections, there is a clear tendency to introduce the concept in the online media as legal initiatives taken on European, international and national level point out.

Designing-by-Debate: A Blueprint for Responsible Data-Driven Research & Innovation

The emergence and rapid development of ICT-centred research methodologies, and data-driven research and innovation in particular, fundamentally challenge ethical values, human rights and security in the EU and beyond. This is especially—though not exclusively—the result of fragmented legal, ethical and terminological frameworks; a mismatch between rules and how they are applied or disregarded in practice; the privatisation of research data and methods; the fact that these challenges are spread over multiple actors and disciplines and issues raised by data opportunism. These challenges keep Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) largely hypothetical in many contexts and may lead to social rejection and distorted legislation of emerging research methodologies as well as the huge socio-economic potential they hold. This contribution advances the first blueprint for an innovative approach aimed at overcoming the challenges obstructing the full realisation of RRI. The Designing-by-Debate (DbD) approach provides a systematic model and method for inclusive dialogue through smart stewardship, enabling researchers and the broader stakeholder community to develop, fine-tune and operationalise the framework for RRI to their situation. It is an iterative process based on different forms of participatory debate, aimed at formulating RRI protocols and policies with maximal participation from all stakeholders. The method relies on sharing protocols and guidelines so that they can be used and improved simultaneously through new RRI applications. The DbD approach has different well-defined layers and components, that are aimed at making RRI work in the field. Notwithstanding its greater ambitions, the scope of this contribution is confined to DbD in the context of data-driven research and innovation (and how to align it with ethical, normative, and societal values that are central to the EU identity). DbD, we argue, provides the prerequisites for a holistic yet concrete approach to key legal, ethical and social challenges emerging from ubiquitous use of technology and ‘data’ to do research and innovation.