Abstract

The premise for choice of the research problem is the impact of new technologies on directions in the discussion of copyright law. The goal is the integrated look at the regulation of the market of new technologies in the context of intellectual property rights. The method of research is the analysis of the law, case law and literature. It must be concluded that the economic analysis of intellectual property rights should take into account not only the interests of authors and publishers, but also the owners and users of online platforms. New technologies have an impact on the economic sense of copyright protection - it is appropriate to suggest a more flexible approach to systems of protection of these rights.

Bibliography

• Aigrain P., Dzielenie się. Kultura i gospodarka epoki Internetu, Fundacja Nowoczesna Polska, Warszawa 2011, http://nowoczesnapolska.org.pl/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/aigrain-dzielenie-sie.pdf.
• Antas P.D., „Notice and take down” - usługi hostingowe w kontekście odpowiedzialności za naruszenia osób trzecich - uwagi krytyczne do założeń do projektu ustawy o zmianie ustawy o świadczeniu usług drogą elektroniczną, 2011, http://www.prawoautorskie.pl/aktualnosci/id30,Notice-and-take-down-uslugi-hostingowe-w-kontekscie-odpowiedzialnosci-za-naruszenia-osob-trzecich-uwagi-krytyczne-do-zalozen-do-projektu-ustawy-o-zmianie-ustawy-o-swiadczeniu-uslug-droga-elektroniczna.html.
• Antitrust: Commission welcomes Court judgment in Telefónica margin squeeze case, 2014, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-479_en.htm.
• Arlandis A., Baranes E., Interactions Between Network Operators, Content Producers and Internet Intermediaries: Empirical Implications of Network Neutrality, „Intereconomics” 2011, Vol. 46, No. 2, s. 98-105, http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/s10272-011-0370-y.
• Avramen A., Tamadon P., Internet Innovations: Exploring New Horizons, „European Journal of Law and Technology” 2014, Vol. 5, No. 2.
• Baratsits A., Copyright in the Digital Age - Exceptions and Limitations to Copyright and Their Impact of Free Access to Information. An Analysis of the Implementation of Art. 6 (4) Information Directive and Its Impact on Limiting the Copyright Protection in Czech Republic and Austria, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Linz 2005, http://www.rechtsprobleme.at/doks/baratsits-copyright-digital-age.pdf.
• Barker G.R., Agreed Use and Fair Use: The Economic Effects of Faire Use and Other Copyright Exceptions, 2013 Annual Congress of the Society for Economic Research on Copyright Issues (SERCI), conference proceedings, Paris, 09.07.2013, http://www.serci.org/2013/Barker.pdf.
• Bäumer U., Mara P., Meeker H., IT Outsourcing and Offshoring. A Comparative Legal Analysis Under UK, Indian and German Law, „Computer Law Review International” 2012, Vol. 13, No. 1, s. 9-19, http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cri-2012-9.
• Bittmann D., EuGH: Websurfen durch Urheberrechtsausnahme gedeckt, „Multimedia und Recht” 2014, Nr. 7, http://rsw.beck.de/cms/?toc=mmr.root&docid=359775.
• Braha O., Syed T., Beyond Efficiency: Consequence-Sensitive Theories of Copyright, „Berkeley Technology Law Journal” 2014, Vol. 29, s. 229-316, http://btlj.org/data/articles/29_1/0229-0316_BrachaSyed_060914+WEB.pdf.
• Broemel R., Vielfaltsgewährleistung auf virtuellen Plattformen. Anpassung des kartellrechtlichen Konzepts an die medienrechtliche Regulierung, „Multimedia und Recht” 2013, Nr. 2, s. 83-87.
• Brown N., A Decentralised Approach to Online Trust Validation. Looking Behind and Beyond the Hierarchical Certification Authority Model of Trust, „Computer Law Review International” 2013, Vol. 14, No. 1, s. 1-7, http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/cri.2013.14.1.1.
• Cease and desist by the German government for publishing a document received under FOI law, 2014, http://blog.fragdenstaat.de/post/74158554995/cease-and-desist-by-the-german-government-for.
• Chaber P., Zmiany w świadczeniu usług drogą elektroniczną, 2013, http://www.pi.gov.pl/PARP/chapter_86197.asp?soid=B9AEAA44668341B9BC6ACAA1D5E19285.
• Chiou T., Music Licensing in the Cloud: The Greek Experience, „Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht Internationaler Teil” 2014, Nr. 3, s. 228-236.
• Cisek R., 2013, Komentarze pod artykułem prasowym w internecie to nie prasa, http://di.com.pl/news/48755,0,Komentarze_pod_artykulem_prasowym_w_internecie_to_nie_prasa-Anna_Wasilewska-Spioch.html.
• Conrad A., Kuck' mal, wer da spricht: Zum Nutzer des Rechts der öffentlichen Zugänglichmachung anlässlich von Links und Frames, „Computer und Recht” 2013, Vol. 29, No. 5, s. 305-318, http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cr-2013-305.
• De Wachter J., Intellectual Property in an Age of Big Data: an Exercise of Futility? An Examination of Big Data1s Impact on Patents and Database Protection, „Computer Law Review International” 2014, Vol. 15, No. 1, s. 1-6, http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cri-2014-1.
• Dilger D., Oracle Wins Key Reversal in Java Copyright Case Against Google's Android, 2014, http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/05/09/oracle-wins-key-reversal-in-java-copyright-case-against-googles-android.
• Drexl J., Collective Management of Copyrights and the EU Principle of Free Movement of Services after the OSA Judgment - In Favour of a More Balanced Approach, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 14-06, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2397062&rec=1&srcabs=2382603&alg=1&pos=1.
• ECJ confirms Deutsche Telekom Margin Squeeze, 2010, http://www.contentandcarrier.eu/?p=410.
• Geercken K., Holden K., Rath M., Surguy M., Stretton T., Irreconcilable Differences? Navigatiing Cross-Border E-Discovery. How Best to Understand and Deal with the Conflict between E-Discovery and Data Protection Principles, „Computer Law Review International” 2013, Vol. 14, No. 2, s. 44-55, http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cri-2013-44.
• Geiger Ch., Challenges for the Enforcement of Copyright in the Online World: Time for a New Approach, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 14-01, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2382603.
• Gerry F., Berova N., The Rule of Law Online: Treating Data Like the Sale of Goods: Lessons for the Internet from OECD and CISG and Sacking Google as the Regulator, „Computer Law & Security Review” 2014, Vol. 30, No. 5, s. 465-481, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2014.07.005.
• Google Books-Projekt als „faire use” urheberrechtlich zulässig, „Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht Internationaler Teil” 2014, Nr. 1, s. 69-73.
• Google Spain SL v. Agencia Espanola de Protección de Datos. Court of Justice of the European Union Creates Presumption that Google Must Remove Links to Personal Data upon Request, „Harvard Law Review” 2014, Vol. 128, No. 2, http://harvardlawreview.org/2014/12/google-spain-sl-v-agencia-espanola-de-proteccion-de-datos.
• Handke Ch., Quintais J.P., Balazs B., The Economics od Copyright Compensation Schemes for Digital Use, 2013 Annual Congress of the Society for Economic Research on Copyright Issues (SERCI), conference proceedings, Paris, 09.07.2013, http://www.serci.org/2013/Handke.pdf.
• Heckmann J., Nordmeyer A., Pars pro toto: Verletzung des Urheberrechtsgesetzes durch das öffentliche Zugänglichmachen von Deteifragmenten („Chunks“) in Peer-to-Peer Tauchbörsen? Wann sich der Anschlussinhaber mit Hinweis auf „Chunks“ verteidigen kann, „Computer und Recht” 2014, Vol. 30, No. 1, s. 41-43, http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cr-2014-41.
• Hoppen P., Technische Schutzmaßnahmen bei Software. Verfahren zur Kontrolle der unberechtigten Nutzung, „Computer und Recht” 2013, Vol. 29, No. 1, s. 9-16, http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/cr.2013.29.1.9.
• Humphrey M.C., Digital Domino Effect: the Erosion of First Sale Protection for Video Games and the Implications for Ownership of Copies and Phonorecords, „Southwestern Law Review” 2013, Vol. 42, No. 3, s. 441-480, http://www.swlaw.edu/pdfs/lr/42_2humphrey.pdf.
• Huber A., Vernetzter Kontinent oder überregulierte TK-Branche. Die Debatte über den Verordnungsvorschlag der EU-Kommission zum TK-Binnenmarkt, „Multimedia und Recht” 2014, Nr. 4, s. 221-224.
• Kawashima N., The Rise of 'User Creativity' - Web 2.0 and a New Challenge for Copyright Law and Cultural Policy, „International Journal of Cultural Policy” 2010, Vol. 16, No. 3, s. 337-353, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10286630903111613.
• Kemp R., Legal Aspects of Managing Big Data, „Computer Law & Security Review” 2014, Vol. 30, No. 5, s. 482-491, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2014.07.006.
• Kirchner Ch., Regulierungsanreize für VDSL-Vectoring. Regulatorische Möglichkeiten und Grenzen einer Aufrüstung von Kupferzugängen für NGA-Netze, „Computer und Recht” 2013, Vol. 29, No. 2, s. 85-89, http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/cr.2013.29.2.85.
• Kirn S., Müller-Hengstenberg C., Intelligente (Software-)Agenten: von der Automatisierung zur Autonomie?, „Multimedia und Recht” 2014, Nr. 4, s. 225-231.
• Klicki W., Ograniczenie wolności komentowania? Sprawa Delfi przeciwko Estonii, 2013, http://panoptykon.org/wiadomosc/ograniczenie-wolnosci-komentowania-sprawa-delfi-przeciwko-estonii.
• Knaak R., Metatags und Keywords als vergleichende Werbung - zum EuGH-Urteil Belgian Electronic Sorting Technology, „Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht Internationaler Teil” 2014, Nr. 3, s. 209-214.
• Knight A., Gleeson N., Walden I., 'It's a Jungle out There'?: Cloud computing, Standards and the Law, „European Journal of Law and Technology” 2014, Vol. 5, No. 2, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2441182.
• Koseła D., Nowy etap sporu o zarządzanie Internetem ważny także dla polskich firm, „Rzeczpospolita”, 04.04.2014.
• Kwiatkiewicz D., Odpowiedzialność dostawców usług hostingowych w świetle projektowanych zmian, 2013, http://www.codozasady.pl/odpowiedzialnosc-dostawcow-uslug-hostingowych-w-swietle-projektowanych-zmian.
• Laszczyk A., Imagine There Is No Countries - Digital Single Market for Creative Content - the Case of Music, II Polish Law & Economics Conference, University of Warsaw, conference proceedings, Warsaw, 6-7.05.2011.
• Latusek M., Zalega T., Trendy w konsumpcji na rynku książki elektronicznej, „Studia i Materiały. Wydział Zarządzania UW” 2012, nr 1-2, s. 152-166.
• Lessons from Hutchinson/Orange, http://www.jonesday.com/files/Event/302e22bb-ff54-420e-ae34-6b2a266628fb/Presentation/EventAttachment/3f47edd2-0859-4468-9e9c-1f70f07ac9c8/eutelecoms.pdf.
• Lev-Aretz Y., Copyright Lawmaking and Public Choice: From Legislative Battles to Private Ordering, „Harvard Journal of Law & Technology” 2013, Vol. 27, No. 1, s. 203-256, http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v27/27HarvJLTech203.pdf.
• Liability of One-Click Hosting Providers for Users' Copyright Infringements under German Law, 2013, http://www.osborneclarke.com/connected-insights/publications/liability-one-click-hosting-providers-users-copyright-infringements-under-german-law/#sthash.IncqnLz0.dpuf.
• Lipski P., Wyrok w sprawie UsedSoft, 2012, http://ipwsieci.pl/wpis,40,Wyrok_w_sprawie_Usedsoft_.html.
• Litwiński P., Internet - zbędna procedura, 2011, http://prawo.rp.pl/artykul/794324.html.
• Lodder A.R., When 'there' can be everywhere: On the cross-border use of WhatsApp, Pandora, and Grindr, „European Journal of Law and Technology” 2014, Vol. 5, No. 2.
• Lopez-Tarruella A., Google and the Law. Empirical Approaches to Legal Aspects of Knowledge-Economy Business Models, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg 2012.
• Luch A.D., Schulz S.E., Die digitale Dimension der Grundrechte. Die Bedeutung der speziellen Grundrechte im Internet, „Multimedia und Recht” 2013, Nr. 2, s. 88-93.
• Lutz H., Weigl M., Unified Communications as a Service. Rechtliche Herausforderungen, „Computer und Recht” 2014, Vol. 30, No. 2, s. 85-93, ,a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cr-2014-85" target="_blank">http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cr-2014-85.
• Maj M., Jak służba celna załatwia blokowanie treści? Ciąg dalszy ws. AntyApps.pl, 2014, http://di.com.pl/news/49870,0,Jak_sluzba_celna_zalatwia_blokowanie_tresci_Ciag_dalszy_ws_AntyAppspl-Marcin_Maj.html.
• Mantelero A., The Future of Consumer Data Protection in the E.U. Re-thinking the „Notice and Consent” Paradigm in the New Era of Predictive Analytics, „Computer Law & Security Review” 2014, Vol. 30, No. 6, s. 643-660, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2014.09.004.
• Marczuk J., Kto chce pociągać za kable, „Bloomberg Businessweek Polska” 2014, nr 15.
• McIntyre S., Game Over for First Sale, „Berkeley Technology Law Journal” 2014, Vol. 29, No. 1, s. 1-60, http://btlj.org/data/articles/29_1/0001-0060_McIntyre_060914+WEB.pdf.
• McLean S., Overseas Website Operators Beware? - The International Reach of the UK Defamation Laws. Status Quo and Potential Changes by Pending Defamation Bill, „Computer Law Review International” 2012, Vol. 13, No. 5, s. 141-147, http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cri-2012-141.
• Mizielińska-Chmielewska M., Nowy model konsumpcji treści telewizyjnych - użytkownik zdobywa przewagę nad oferentem telewizji, „Studia i Materiały. Wydział Zarządzania UW” 2012, nr 1-2, s. 140-151.
• Narechania T.N., Network Nepotism and the Market for Content Delivery, „Stanford Law Review” 2014, Vol. 67, No. 27, s. 27-36, http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/sites/default/files/online/articles/67_Stan_L_Rev_Online_27_Narechania.pdf.
• Nolte G., Wimmers J., Wer stört? Gedanken zur Haftung von Intermediären im Internet - von praktischen Konkordanz, richtigen Anreizen und offenen Fragen, „Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht” 2014, Nr. 1, s. 16-27.
• OSA - EU Copyright Law Checks in for a Long Stay at a Health SPA, 2013, http://eulawradar.com/case-c-35112-osa-eu-copyright-law-checks-in-for-a-long-stay-at-a-health-spa.
• Ostrowski I, Tarkowski A., Batalia o Internet, „Rzeczpospolita”, 13.06.2013.
• Picht P., Standardsetzung und Patentmissbrauch - Schlagkraft und Entwicklungsbedarf des europäischen Kartellrechts, „Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht Internationaler Teil” 2014, Nr. 1, s. 1-16.
• Pollock R., Stepan P., Valimati M., The Size of the Public Domain, „Review of Economic Research on Copyright Issues” 2009, Vol. 1.
• Redeker H., Das Konzept der digitalen Erschöpfung - Urheberrecht für die digitale Welt. Was eigentlich übertragen wird und weitergegeben werden darf, „Computer und Recht” 2014, Vol. 30, No. 2, s. 73-78, http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cr-2014-73.
• Rössel M., Filterpflichten in Cloud. Vom Wortfilter der Sharehoster zum Crawler für Linkportale, „Computer und Recht” 2013, Vol. 29, No. 4, s. 229-236, http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cr-2013-229.
• Rub G.A., Stronger than Kryptonite? Inalienable Profit-Sharing Schemes in Copyright Law, „Harvard Journal of Law & Technology” 2013, Vol. 27, No. 1, s. 49-133, http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v27/27HarvJLTech49.pdf.
• Sartor G., de Azevedo Cunha M.V., The Italian Google-Case: Privacy, Freedom of Speech and Responsibility of Providers for User-Generated Contents, „European Journal of Law and Technology” 2010, Vol. 18, No. 4, s. 356-378, http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eaq010.
• Saxby S., Identity crisis: Global Challenges of Identity Protection in a Networked World, „Computer Law & Security Review” 2014, Vol. 30, No. 6, s. 617-632, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2014.09.001.
• Schneider A., Modchips für Konsolen können legal sein, Fragdenstaat-Abmahnung, Friend-Finder-Urteil, 2014, http://irights.info/artikel/modchips-fuer-konsolen-koennen-legal-sein-fragdenstaat-abmahnung-friend-finder-urteil/21360.
• Schöttle H., Der Patentleft-Effekt der GPLv3. Risiken für das Patentportfolio beim kommerziellen Einsatz von Open-Source-Software, „Computer und Recht” 2013, Vol. 29, No. 1, s. 1-8, http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/cr.2013.29.1.1.
• Schröder M., Rechtsmäßigkeit von Modchips. Stellt der Vertrieb von Modchips eine Urheberrechtsverletzung dar?, „Multimedia und Recht” 2013, Nr. 2, s. 80-82.
• Schwarz C., Rechtfertigen rechtsdogmatisch schwierige Fragen die Abschaffung von „Software-Patenten?, „Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht ” 2014, Nr. 3, s. 224-229.
• Senftleben M., Breaking Space for Cloud-Based Business Models, „Journal for Intellectual Property, Information Law and Electronic Commerce” 2013, Vol. 4, No. 2, s. 87-103, http://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-4-2-2013/3743/senftleben.pdf.
• Sikorski M., Usługi on-line. Jakość, interakcje, satysfakcja klienta, Wyd. WPJSTK, Warszawa 2013.
• Spindler G., Bei Streaming handelt es sich um keine Urheberrechtsverletzung (Streaming-Abmahnungen), 2013, http://irights.info/artikel/gerald-spindler-bei-streaming-handelt-es-sich-um-keine-urheberrechtsverletzung/20350.
• Spindler G., Rockenbauch M., Die elektronische Identifizierung. Kritische Analyse des EU-Verordnungsentwurfs über elektronische Identifizierung der Vertrauensdienste, „Multimedia und Recht” 2013, Nr. 3, s. 139-147.
• Steinhau H., Soundcloud verärgert mit Sperrungen und Kurswechsel seine Nutzer (Musik - Plattformen), 2014, http://irights.info/artikel/soundcloud-veraergert-mit-sperrungen-und-kurswechsel-seine-nutzer/23669#more-23669.
• Surden H., Technological Cost as Law in Intellectual Property, „Harvard Journal of Law & Technology” 2013, Vol. 27, No. 1, s. 135-202, http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v27/27HarvJLTech135.pdf.
• Suzor N., Free Riding Cooperation and Peaceful Evolutions in Copyright, „Harvard Journal of Law & Technology” 2014, Vol. 28, No. 1, s. 137-193, http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v28/28HarvJLTech137.pdf.
• Tamo A., George D., Oblivion, Erasure and Forgetting in the Digital Age, „Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law” 2014, Vol. 5, No. 2, s. 71-87, http://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-5-2-2014/3997.
• Tassis S., Margin Squeeze as Abuse of Dominant Position on Networks. Case C-490/10, „European Networks Law and Regulation Quarterly” 2013, Vol. 1, No. 1, s. 99-107.
• TeliaSonera: ECJ Defines Margin Squeeze Infringement broadly, 2011, http://www.freshfields.com/uploadedFiles/SiteWide/Knowledge/TeliaSonera-%20ECJ%20defines%20margin%20squeeze%20infringement%20broadly.pdf.
• Tiffe A., Social Media, Musik-Downloads, Cloud Computing und „Beratungsklau” - wo werden die Herausforderungen im Verbraucherschutz in Zukunft liegen?, „Verbraucher und Recht” 2013, Nr. 5.
• Tóth A., The Most Recent EU Competition Law Developments in the Telecommunication Market, „European Networks Law and Regulation Quarterly” 2013, Vol. 1, No. 1, s. 3-14.
• Van der Sloot B., Zuiderveen Borgesius F.J., Google's Dead End, or: on Street View and the Right to Data Protection. An Analysis of Google Street View1s Compatibility with EU Data Protection Law, „Computer Law Review International” 2012, Vol. 13, No. 4, s. 103-109, http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cri-2012-103.
• Verizon v. FCC. D.C. Circuit Holds that Federal Communications Commission Violated Communications Act in Adopting Open Internet Rules, „Harvard Law Review” 2014, Vol. 128, No. 2, s. 2565-2574, http://cdn.harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/vol127_verizon_v_FCC.pdf.
• Vinje T., Marsland V., Gärtner A., Software Licensing After Oracle v. UsedSoft. Implications of Oracle v. UsedSoft (C-128/11) for European Copyright Law, „Computer Law Review International” 2012, Vol. 13, No. 4, s. 97-102, http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cri-2012-97.
• Waglowski P., Wyrok Trybunału Sprawiedliwości w sprawie C-128/11 - wyczerpanie prawa do cyfrowej kopii programu komputerowego, 2014, http://prawo.vagla.pl/node/9813.
• Westermeier J., New Strategies for Strengthening the Protection for Databases. A Focus on Collective Works, „Computer Law Review International” 2014, Vol. 13, No. 1, s. 7-11, http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cri-2014-7.
• Witzel M., Legal Challenges For US Based IT-Providers Entering the DACH-Market. On the Significant Differences Between Germany, Austria and Switzerland for US IT-Providers Targeting German Speaking Countries, „Computer Law Review International” 2012, Vol. 13, No. 1, s. 19-26, http://dx.doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cri-2012-19.