Digital Rights Management and Regime-Shifting: The Implications of Backdoor Propertization of Creative Works in Digital Copyright Law for Digital Dist

从网上购物到跨境获取和传播用于娱乐和教育目的的版权材料的数字化，互联网的不断发展塑造了其用户管理其日常生活和业务的方式，从而创造了一个日益跨国的数字社会。因此，互联网更简单、更廉价的信息传播和获取(A2K)模式使版权权利人对其数字化内容失去控制的前景产生了经济上的担忧，这并不是什么新壮举。因此，内容权利人从不同角度寻求加强知识产权(IPR)也不是什么新现象，包括游说政策制定者和使用技术保护措施(TPM)使数字权利管理(DRM)系统能够作为对其数字化内容的额外一层控制。使用TPM的部分原因是传统著作权法难以跟上技术进步的步伐；这可以说是导致版权法范式(‘范式’)的轮廓变得模糊的原因之一。TPM作为一种监管模式模糊了范例的轮廓的一个领域涉及用于数字远程教育(DDL)目的的数字化版权内作品的A2K。有证据表明，作为后来版权内容保护的补充，版权权利人已经利用TPM来控制A2K，超出了规范TPM的治理规定的反规避法律的范围。因此，本研究探讨了第2001/29/EC‘s 7(Infosoc)第7条(信息)第6条的反规避措施，旨在确定第6(4)条中的S含糊措辞，在解释和实施欧盟成员国国内法律时，起到了为版权权利人增加知识产权的后门的作用；通过为权利人创造一条途径，实现制度转换。有鉴于此，分析认为，在Infosoc第5(3)(A)条的教学例外情况下，创造性作品的后门财产化对终端用户获取和利用用于DDL目的的知识的影响。之所以采用这种方法，是因为围绕教育者作为最终用户有能力以数字方式传播版权内内容用于教育目的的程度存在争议。由于这种争议以及将第6条信息写入国家法律的无数实施，本研究缩小了调查范围，主要分析了第6(4)条“S在英国1988年版权、外观设计和专利法中的实施”S s.32(说明性说明)和热门的第29A条文本和数据挖掘(TDM)例外。这一办法旨在加强其立场，即后门知识产权对最终用户为教育目的获取知识的能力造成负担。鉴于这一负担，本项目认为，数字著作权法需要进行改革，通过扩大第5条信息系统的例外和限制(E&L)的范围来支持经济和社会发展。正如查阅的文献所表明的那样，目前的教育和法律制度对最终用户行使其基本权利的能力提供了有限的保护。第5(3)(A)条规定了传播和获取版权内数字化材料的权利，而这一权利与传统教育机构为数字图书馆的目的不同。探讨这一改革的理由时，将注意到需要采取补充措施来保护创作者和版权权利持有人的利益。

From online shopping to cross-border accessing and disseminating digitised in copyright materials for entertainment and educational purposes, the continuous development of the internet has shaped the way in which its users manage their daily lives and businesses; consequently creating a progressively transnational digital society. Thus, it is no new feat that the internet's simpler and inexpensive modes of information dissemination, and access to knowledge (A2K), has brought to the fore economic concerns for copyright right-holders at the prospect of losing control over their digitised content.As a consequence, it is also no new phenomenon that content right-holders have sought strengthened intellectual property rights (IPRs) from various angles including, lobbying policymakers and use of technical protection measure (TPM) enabled digital rights management (DRM) systems as an additional layer of control over their digitised content. The use of TPMs is, in part, a consequence of traditional copyright law's difficulty in keeping pace with technological advancements; which has arguably contributed to the contours of copyright law's paradigm (the 'paradigm') becoming blurred. One area in which TPMs as a mode of regulation blurs the paradigm's contours pertains to A2K of digitised in-copyright works for digital distance learning (DDL) purposes. As evidence suggests TPMs have been utilised, as an additional later of in copyright content protection, by copyright right-holders to control A2K beyond the scope of governance prescribed anti-circumvention laws that regulate TPMs.As such, this research explores Directive 2001/29/EC's7 (Infosoc) Art.6 anticircumvention measures and aims to establish that Art.6(4)'s ambiguous wording, when interpreted and implemented into EU member state domestic laws, functions as a backdoor to increased IPRs for copyright right-holders; by creating an avenue for right-holders to 'regime-shift.' In view of this, the analysis considers the implications of backdoor propertization of creative works for end-users accessing and utilising knowledge for DDL purposes under Infosoc's Art.5(3)(a) teaching exception. This approach is undertaken due to existing contention surrounding the extent to which educators, as end-users, have the ability to digitally disseminate in-copyright content for educational purposes.Due to this contention and the myriad of implementation of Art.6 Infosoc into national laws, this research narrows its line of enquiry by predominantly analysing Art.6(4)'s implementation into the UK's Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988's s.32 (Illustration for instruction) and the topical s.29A Text and Data-Mining (TDM) exception. This approach aims to strengthen its position that backdoor IPRs place burdens upon end-users' ability to access knowledge for educational purposes. Due to this burden, this project argues that digital copyright law requires reform to support economic and societal development by extending the scope of Art.5 Infosoc's exceptions and limitations (E&Ls). As literature consulted suggests that the current E&Ls afford limited protection to end-users' ability to exercise their fundamental Art.5(3)(a) right to disseminate and access digitised in-copyright materials outwith traditional education institutional setting for DDL purposes.This argument for reform will be explored with attention paid to the requirement of supplementary measures to safeguard the paradigm's protection of the interests of creators and copyright right-holders.