Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Copyright law as a matter of (inter)national security? - The attempt to securitise commercial infringement and its spillover onto individual liability

  • Published:
Crime, Law and Social Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article evaluates the way in which copyright infringement has been gradually shifting from an area of civil liability to one of criminal penalty. Traditionally, consideration of copyright issues has been undertaken from a predominantly legal and/or economic perspectives. Whereas traditional legal analysis can explain what legal changes are occurring, and what impact these changes may have, they may not effectively explain ‘how’ these changes have come to occur. The authors propose an alternative inter-disciplinary approach, combining legal analysis with critical security studies, which may help to explain in greater detail how policies in this field have developed. In particular, through applied securitisation theory, this article intends to demonstrate the appropriation of this field by a security discourse, and its consequences for societal and legal developments. In order to explore how the securitisation framework may be a valid approach to a subject such as copyright law and to determine the extent to which copyright law may be said to have been securitised, this article will begin by explaining the origins and main features of securitisation theory, and its applicability to legal study. The authors will then attempt to apply this framework to the development of a criminal law approach to copyright infringement, by focusing on the security escalation it has undergone, developing from an economic issue into one of international security. The analysis of this evolution will be mainly characterised by the securitisation moves taking place at national, European and international levels. Finally, a general reflection will be carried out on whether the securitisation of copyright has indeed been successful and on what the consequences of such a success could be.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See, for example, Editorial, ‘Creativity Stifled? A joint academic statement on the proposed copyright term extension for sound recordings’ [2008] EIPR 30(9) 341, in which several leading academics in the field of IP heavily criticised plans for a proposal to further extend the copyright on sound recordings

  2. Bently, L. and Sherman. B. ‘Intellectual Property Law’, 6th Ed, Oxford University Publishing (2004) at p.35.

  3. Buzan, B. et al., ‘Security:—A new framework for analysis’, Lynne Rienner Publishers Inc. (1998)

  4. For the purposes of this article, it is not necessary to go into more detail on financial securitisation, but interested parties may refer to Raynes, Sylvain and Rutledge, ‘The Analysis of Structured Securities’, Oxford University Press (2003)

  5. For examples on how securitisation Theory has been applied in International Relations please see: Eriksson, J. ‘Observers or Advocates? One the Political Role of Security Analysis’ [1999] Cooperation and Conflict 3 311–330; Hansen, L. ‘The little Mermaid’s Silent Security Dilemma’ [2000] Millennium: Journal of International Studies 29(2) 285–306; Huysmans, J. ‘Defining social constructivism in security studies. The normative dilemma of writing security’ [2002] Alternatives 27 supplement 41–62; Huysmans, J. ‘The Question of the Limit: Desecuritisation and the Aesthetics of Horror in Political Realism’, [1998] Millennium: Journal of International Studies 27(3) 569–589; McSweeney, B. ‘Identity and Security: Buzan and the Copenhagen School’ [1996] Review of International Studies 22(1) 81–94; Werner, W.G. (1998) ‘Securitisation and Legal Theory’ [1998] COPRI Working Paper no.27/1998; Williams, M.C. ‘Words, Images, Enemies: securitisation and International Politics’ [2003] International Studies Quarterly 47, 511–531; Aradau, C. ‘Security and the democratic scene: desecuritisation and emancipation’ [2004] Journal of International Relations and Development 7 388–413;Aradau, C. ‘Beyond Good and Evil: Ethics and securitisation/Desecuritisation Techniques’ [2001] Rubikon E-journal. ISSN 1505–1161. December 2001. http://venus.ci.uw.edu.pl/~rubikon/forum/claudia2.htm; Diez, T. & Higashino, A. ‘(De)Securitisation, Politicisation and European Union Enlargement’ Paper for presentation at the BISA 29th Annual Conference, University of Warwick, 20–22 December 2004; Huysmans, J. ‘Migrants as a Security Problem: Dangers of “Securitizing” Societal Issues’ [1995] in Miles, R. and Thraenhart, D. (eds) ‘Migration and European Integration: The Dynamics of Inclusion and Exclusion’ Pinter (2006) pp.53–72; Strizel, H. “Towards a Theory of Securitisation: Copenhagen and Beyond” Paper for presentation at the 47th ISA convention San Diego 22–25 March 2006; Balzacq, T. “The Three Faces of securitisation: Political Agency, Audience and Context” [2005] European Journal of International Relations 11(2) 171–201; Williams, M.C. ‘Modernity, identity and security: a comment on the ‘Copenhagen controversy’ [1998] Review of International Studies 24 435–439

  6. Buzan, B. et al. (previously cited at FN.4), p.21

  7. BBC News, ‘BP Oil Disaster’, (26/07/2010) accessible at www.bbc.co.uk/news/special_reports/oil_disaster (last accessed 30/07/2010)

  8. Buzan, B. et al. (previously cited at FN.4), p.24

  9. Ibid, at p.24

  10. Ibid, at p.40

  11. See generally Mitsilegas, V., Monar, J. & Rees, W. ‘The European Union and Internal Security: guardian of the people?’ Palgrave Macmillan (2003), Huysmans, J. ‘Minding Exceptions:—Politics of Insecurity and Liberal Democracy’, [2004] Contemporary Political Theory 3(3), 321–341 and Walker, R.J.B. (ed) ‘Theorising the Liberty-Security Relation:—Sovereignty, Liberalism and Exceptionalism’ [2003] Special Section of Security Dialogue 37(1) 1–82

  12. Buzan, B. et al. (previously cited at FN.4), p.25

  13. See Emmers, R. ‘Securitisation’, to be found in Collins, A. ‘Contemporary Security Studies’ 2nd edition, Oxford University Press (2010) pp.138–140

  14. Buzan, B. et al. (previously cited at FN.4), p.41

  15. Léonard, S. and Kaunert, C. ‘Reconceptualizing the audience in securitization theory’ to be found in Balzacq, T. (Ed.) ‘Securitization Theory- How security problems emerge and dissolve’, Routledge (2011) pp.57–76

  16. Balzacq, T. ‘A Theory of securitization: origins, core assumptions, and variants’ to be found in Balzacq, T. (Ed.) ‘Securitization Theory- How security problems emerge and dissolve’, Routledge (2011) pp.1–30

  17. Neal, A. ‘securitisation and Risk at the EU border: the origins of FRONTEX’, [2009] JCMS 47 (2) pp. 335.

  18. Emmers, R. ‘Securitisation’, in Collins, A. ‘Contemporary Security Studies’ 2nd edition, Oxford University Press (2010) p. 142

  19. Huysmans, J. (1997) ‘Revisiting Copenhagen, or, About the Creative Development of a Security Studies Agenda in Europe’. European Journal of International Relations 4(4) p. 186.

  20. Hearings before the subcommittee on courts, civil liberties and the administration of justice of the committee of the judiciary, House of Representatives, Ninety-Seventh Congress, Second Session on HR 4783, HR 4794, HR 4808, HR 5250, HR 5488 and HR 5705:—Home Recording of Copyrighted Works (1982), accessible at http://cryptome.org/hrcw-hear.htm (last accessed 30/07/2010)

  21. Taken from the USTR Special 301 Report Executive Summary (2009) at p.1, accessible at http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Executive Summary.pdf (last accessed 30/07/2010)

  22. Drahos, P. & Braithwaite, J. ‘Intellectual Feudalism:—Who Owns the Knowledge Economy?’, Earthscan (2002) at p.88.

  23. Services of the European Commission ‘Report on United States Trade and Investment Barriers. Problems of Doing Business with the US’, Brussels (1993) at p.14.

  24. Moncayo von Hase, A. ‘The Application and Interpretation of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights’, to be found in Correa, C.M. & Yusuf, A.A. ‘Intellectual Property and International Trade:—The TRIPS Agreement’ 2nd Edition, Kluwer Law International (2008) at p.83.

  25. Drahos, P. & Braithwaite, J. previously cited at FN.23 at p.137

  26. Dent, C. ‘Economic Security’ to be found in Collins, A. ‘Contemporary Security Studies’ 2nd edition, Oxford University Press (2010) p.253.

  27. Ibid at p.124

  28. Buzan, B. et al., previously cited at FN.4 at p.115

  29. Directive 2001/29/EC on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society [2001] OJ L167/10.

  30. Ibid, preamble paragraph 6.

  31. From the PhD Thesis of Helena Carrapico, ‘The European Union and Organised Crime:—the securitisation of organised crime and its embedment in the construction of a risk-based security policy’, defended at the EUI on 14/06/2010

  32. Lucchi, N. ‘Digital Media & Intellectual Property’, Springer (2006) at p.11.

  33. See Samuelson, P. ‘Digital Media and the Changing Face of Intellectual Property Law’ [1990] 16 Rutgers Computer & Tech LJ 323.

  34. Topham, G. ‘Napster’, The Guardian, (27/07/2000), accessible at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/jul/27/qanda.cybercinema (last accessed 11/08/2011).

  35. Net News, ‘No Killing the Napster Hydra’, The Observer, (15/10/2000), accessible at http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2000/oct/15/business.theobserver (last accessed 01/04/2009).

  36. Press Release, ‘Global Napster usage plummets but new file-sharing alternatives gaining ground, reports Jupiter Media Matrix’, ComScore (20/07/2001), accessible at http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?id=249 (last accessed 01/04/2009).

  37. Gillespie, T. ‘Wired Shut:—Copyright and the shape of digital culture’, MIT Press (2007) at p.5.

  38. A&M Records, Inc. (and others) v Napster, Inc., 239F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001).

  39. Ibid at p.1027 of the judgement.

  40. Buzan, B. et al. (previously cited at FN.4) at p.117

  41. Commission of the European Communities, ‘Green Paper on Combating Counterfeiting and Piracy in the Single Market’, (15/10/1998) COM(98)569 final at p.11

  42. Dowling v US 473 US 207 (1985)

  43. Ibid at p.10

  44. Commission of the European Communities ‘Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee Follow-up to the Green Paper on combating counterfeiting and piracy in the single market’ (30/11/2000) COM(2000) 789 final

  45. Ibid at Introduction, paragraph 1.

  46. Ibid

  47. Conclusions of the Presidency, 21st and 22nd March 2003, Bulletin 24/03/2003 PE 329.771 at paragraph 37

  48. Directive 2004/48 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights [2004] OJ L195/16.

  49. Enforcement Directive, Recitals 4–5.

  50. Kierkegaard, S. ‘Taking a sledge-hammer to crack the nut:—The EU Enforcement Directive’, [2005] Computer Law and Security Report 21(5) 488 at p.489

  51. Ibid.

  52. ipeg, ‘Summary of the implementation of Directive 2004/48/EC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights in EU Member States as of October 2006’, October 2006

  53. Cases C-329/07 Commission v France 13/07/2007, C-340/07 Commission v Luxembourg 19/07/2007 and C-341/07 Commission v Sweden 20/07/2007 respectively.

  54. Europa Press Release, ‘Proposed Directive on enforcement of intellectual property rights—frequently asked questions’, MEMO/03/20 (30/01/2003)

  55. Kierkegaard, S. previously cited at FN.51 at p.491.

  56. Drexl, J., Hilty., R. & Kur, A. ‘Proposal for a Directive on measures and procedures to ensure the enforcement of intellectual property rights—a first statement’, [2003] IIC 34(5) 530 at p.530.

  57. See, for example, Case C-275/06 Promusicae v Telefonica de Espana SAU [2008] OJ C 64/9

  58. European Commission, Previous initial legislative document COM/2005/0276 (12/07/2005)

  59. Commission Impact Assessment Document annexed to the procedure SEC/2005/0848 (12/07/2005)

  60. Criminal measures aimed at ensuring the enforcement of intellectual property rights, Council Activities COD/2005/0127 (05/10/2006)

  61. Amended Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and Council on Criminal Measures Aimed at Ensuring the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, COM/2006/0168 final COD 2005/0127

  62. Ibid, ‘Justification for the proposal’.

  63. Ibid.

  64. The Law Society, ‘Proposal for a Directive on Criminal Measures aimed at ensuring the enforcement of IP rights:—Comments by the Law Society of England and Wales’, August 2006, at paragraph 15.

  65. Corrigendum to the position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 25 April 2007 on the adoption of Directive 2007/…/EC of the European Parliament and Council on Criminal Measures Aimed at Ensuring the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, OJL C74 E, 20 March 2008.

  66. Case 176/03 Commission v Council, 13 September 2005 ECR 2005 I-7879.

  67. Ibid, at paragraph 48.

  68. Ibid, at paragraph 49.

  69. Commission Staff Working Document, ‘Analysis of the application of Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the Member States’ SEC(2010) 1589 final (22/12/2010) at p.25

  70. Swiss Federation of Intellectual Property, ‘The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement—Summary of Key Elements Under Discussion’ November 2009 at p.1, accessible at http://www.ige.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/Juristische_Infos/e/transparency_paper.pdf (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  71. Ibid

  72. EFF Our Work section, ‘Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement’, EFF (last modified 04/08/2010) accessible at www.eff.org/issues/acta (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  73. EFF Deeplinks Blogs, ‘Senator Bayh Responds on ACTA’, EFF (01/12/2009) accessible at http://www.eff.org/related/6160/blog?page=1 (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  74. Letter from the Executive Office of the President, Office of the United States Trade Representative, March 10 2009 at p2. Accessible at http://www.keinonline.org/misc-docs/3/ustr_foia_denial.pdf (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  75. News, ‘Leaks:—EU pushes for criminalising non-commercial usages in ACTA’ La Quadrature Du Net (24/06/2010) accessible at http://www.laquadrature.net/en/leak-eu-pushes-for-criminalizing-non-commercial-usages-in-acta (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  76. Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement Public Predecisional/Deliberative Draft, April 2010, accessible at http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/April/tradoc_146029.pdf (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  77. Love, J. ‘RIAA Suggestions for content of ACTA’, KEI Online (26/06/2008) at s.A(2), accessible at http://accessvector.org/oldkei/content/view/190/ (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  78. Ibid, at s.H(1)

  79. India’s intervention to the WTO TRIPS Council, ‘TRIPS plus IPR Enforcement’, 09/06/2010 accessible at http://keionline.org/node/864 (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  80. Ibid

  81. Geist, M. ‘The ACTA Threat to the Future of WIPO’, Intellectual Property Watch (14/04/2009) accessible at http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2009/04/14/the-acta-threat-to-the-future-of-wipo (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  82. Lynn, J. ‘States clash over anti-counterfeiting enforcement’, Reuters (09/06/2010) accessible at http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-49179920100609 (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  83. Ibid

  84. Drucker, P. ‘The Age of Discontinuity’, 2nd Edition, Transaction Publishers (1992) at p.24

  85. Powell, W. & Snellman, K. ‘The Knowledge Economy’ [2004] Annual Review of Sociology 30 199–220 at p.201

  86. Lynn, J., previously cited at FN.83

  87. Godart, B. ‘IP crime:—the new face of organised crime’ [2010] JIPLP 5(5) 378–385 at p.379

  88. Mackenzie, S. ‘Counterfeiting as corporate externality: intellectual property crime and global insecurity’ [2010] Crime Law Soc Change 54 21–38 at p.25

  89. Europol, ‘The State of Internal Security in the EU:—A Joint Report by EUROPOL, EUROJUST and FRONTEX’ (19/07/2010)

  90. Ibid at s.6(2) at p.9

  91. IFPI, ‘Music Piracy:—Serious, Violent and Organised Crime’, 4th Edition (2005) accessible at http://www.ifpi.org/content/section_resources/piracy-organised-crime-and-terrorism.html (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  92. Ibid at p.3

  93. European Commission Taxation and Customs Union, ‘Report on EU Customs Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights—Results at the Border’ (2009) accessible at http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/documents/customs/customs_controls/counterfeit_piracy/statistics/statistics_2009.pdf (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  94. Ibid at p.17

  95. Ibid at pp.20–21

  96. Mackenzie, S. previously cited at FN.82 at p.23

  97. Mackenzie, S. previously cited at FN.89 at p.34

  98. Ibid

  99. European Commission Service Contract, ‘A study to assess the scope, scale and impact of counterfeiting and piracy in the internal market, through a defined methodology for collecting, analysing and comparing data’ 2010/S 46-067187 (06/03/2010)

  100. Godart, B. previously cited at FN.88 at p.383

  101. Framework Decision (2008/841/JHA) Art 1.

  102. Ibid

  103. For example, see Masnick, M. ‘Saying you can’t compete with free is saying you can’t compete period’, TechDirt online (15/02/2007) accessible at http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070215/002923.shtml (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  104. MEP for the Pirate Party

  105. Personal Blog of Engström, C. ‘IP Observatory Amendments in JURI’, (26/02/2010) accessible at http://christianengstrom.wordpress.com/2010/02/26/ip-observatory-amendments-in-juri/ (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  106. Pepper D. Culpepper, Quiet Politics and Business Power:—Corporate Control in Europe and Japan (Cambridge University Press 2011) at p.14

  107. Issues concerning fiduciary duties in a company, for example, are unlikely to be issues that ‘make or break’ a political candidate.

  108. ACTA Consolidated Text, Informal Predecisional/Deliberative Draft 01/07/2010, at Article 2.14 accessible at http://www.laquadrature.net/files/ACTA_consoldiatedtext_EUrestricted130710.pdf (last accessed 12/08/2011)

  109. Ibid

  110. Ibid

  111. Council of the European Union, ‘Council resolution of 1 March 2010 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the internal market’ 299th COMPETITIVENESS Council Meeting, Brussels, 1 March 2010

  112. Ibid at s.19

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. European University Institute, Florence, Italy

    Benjamin Farrand

  2. Institute for European Integration Research of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, Austria

    Helena Carrapico

Authors
  1. Benjamin Farrand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Helena Carrapico
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Helena Carrapico.

Additional information

The authors would like to express their gratitude to Zdenek Kudrna, Malgorzata Staniaszek, Florian Trauner and Guilherme Vasconcelos Vilaça for their support, insight and review of the current article. They would equally like to thank the anonymous reviewer for his/her comments.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Farrand, B., Carrapico, H. Copyright law as a matter of (inter)national security? - The attempt to securitise commercial infringement and its spillover onto individual liability. Crime Law Soc Change 57, 373–401 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-011-9356-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-011-9356-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation