We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This book has investigated trilogues as the democratic secret of European legislation. To this end, it has proceeded in two steps. The first step has been analytical in nature, in that it has described and reconstructed the law and practice of European legislation through a close engagement with the relevant normative sources (Chapters 1–3). The second step has been partly doctrinal and partly theoretical (Chapters 4–6). It has been doctrinal, to the extent that it has sought to capture and give distinctive meaning to “informality,” as both a key concept of EU law and an essential feature of trilogues. It has been theoretical, to the extent that it has discussed, appraised, and legitimized trilogues in the light of theories of public authority and democracy beyond the nation state. In this second step, the line of reasoning has also benefitted from a comparative chapter, which has thrown into sharper relief the advantages of a legislative process based on trilogues.
The difference in the relative bargaining power of musicians and their corporate partners not only has consequences for the negotiation and formation phase of the contract, but also for its performance, consisting of the exploitation of protected content and the ensuing remuneration. Unfair situations may arise in both respects. This chapter analyses to what extent the legal framework intervenes – and should intervene. First, it reviews exploitation obligations, both in terms of the existence and scope of a duty to exploit and the possible limitations to the content of exploitation activities. Subsequently, the requirement of ‘fair’ remuneration, the available tools for ex post contract adjustment and legislative measures seeking to enhance transparency in the music value chain are scrutinised. The chapter then moves on the performance stage of contracts in secondary relationships, before making a case for a harmonised residual remuneration right for digital exploitation, and concluding.
Both corporate partners and musicians may have valid reasons for wanting to terminate a contract. Forcing them to uphold the contract curbs party agency. Relevant reasons may include the aim of avoiding undue investment in an artist who has proven to be commercially unviable, the wish to escape unfair situations in terms of rights transfer, or cases of (perceived) unfairness in terms of exploitation and/or remuneration. The excessive duration of a contract may in itself also give rise to problems. On a more general level, the exclusive nature of many music industry contracts sits uneasily with the vision of musicians as independent, creative actors. This chapter reviews how the selected substantive legal regimes affect parties’ possibility to terminate the contractual relationship. First, the chapter reviews potentially applicable limitations on contract duration, as well as grounds for termination on the basis of breach of contract. Taking a more practical view, the consequences of contract termination are then assessed in order to gauge whether these consequences may amount to switching costs that prevent the termination of contracts in practice.
In practice, there are several obstacles to the application of the substantive legal framework analysed in the previous chapters. First, there is a risk of contractual provisions that deviate from the legal norm. The qualification of certain rules as mandatory law may prevent such contractual deviation. Even so, effective recourse to the protective regimes throughout the course of the contract is not guaranteed. Reference may be made to the possibility for corporate partners to have recourse to trade secret protection and the apparent limited invocation of the protective legal framework. Collective enforcement may contribute to enhanced transparency throughout the music value chain and counter musicians’ fear of commercial retaliation. Further bolstering extra-judicial enforcement is likely to fulfil an important complementary role.
Chapter 4 is dedicated to the concept of informality as a crucial legal concept for the understanding of trilogues. It begins from a twofold observation. First, the informal nature of trilogues is stated in black and white in a significant variety of legal instruments. Secondly, the role of legal scholarship is to make sense of that unequivocal characterization. Drawing on institutional theory, this chapter argues that informality is a full-blown concept of EU law, and it sets about defining its characteristics. To that end, it compares trilogues with two other informal bodies, namely the Euro Group and the Informal Council meetings. The core idea of this chapter is that the codification of informality translates into legal terms the intention of the institutions to protect certain spaces from an excessive penetration of legal normativity. This intention, in turn, is indicative of the desire to preserve those spaces for the emergence of powerful social frameworks where genuine exchanges among actors may occur; exchanges that should be conducive to compromise.
This chapter brings together the research findings and answers the main research question, namely how the legal framework can contribute to a achieving a fair(er) balance between the interests of musicians and their main corporate partners. It summarises the potential bottom-up initiatives, as well as the possible regulatory action identified throughout the book.
This chapter first analyses the rights and interests of the primary stakeholders in the music industry and introduces the various contracts entered into between musicians and their corporate partners. It then discusses the music value chain that results from such contracts in the streaming age. Two separate subsections are dedicated to, respectively, the division of revenues and the ongoing quest towards enhanced transparency. A concluding ‘bridge’ brings together the most relevant findings that lead into the analysis of the relevant legal framework in the subsequent chapters.
This book focuses on music industry contracts and the contractual dynamics between composing and/or performing musicians and their primary partners in the digitised music industry, namely music publishers and record companies, taking account of the ubiquitous nature of music streaming. It focuses on the question of how the legal framework intervenes and should intervene in such contracts, both in theory and in practice. Its objective is to contribute to a level playing field that counteracts the imbalance in bargaining power between musicians and their corporate partners in a proportionate way. The book draws upon an analysis of copyright contract law at the European Union and national level, as well as relevant principles of general contract law, competition law and related applicable rules that curb business-to-business contract terms and trade practices characterised as unreasonable. The book studies the applicable legal framework in Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.This title is part of the Flip it Open Programme and may also be available Open Access. Check our website Cambridge Core for details.
We exhibit a mechanism by which two parties leverage their social relationship to ratchet up the rents they collect from a third party residual claimant. Specifically, in a laboratory environment, we study a novel three-person insider game in which ‘insiders’ decide how to distribute profits among themselves and an ‘outsider’ who is the residual claimant. We find that the distribution of payments is largely determined by an informal quid pro quo among the two decision makers at the expense of the outsider. We then manipulate pay transparency and the competition to keep interaction partners, thereby improving the strategic position of one insider. Pay transparency increases the profit share that goes to rent seekers. In addition, rent extraction from the third party persists when competition for interaction partners is introduced. As a result, we find that payments both affect and reflect the influence of social relationships.
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has gained significant popularity in recent years. It is being integrated into a variety of sectors for its abilities in content creation, design, research, and many other functionalities. The capacity of GenAI to create new content—ranging from realistic images and videos to text and even computer code—has caught the attention of both the industry and the general public. The rise of publicly available platforms that offer these services has also made GenAI systems widely accessible, contributing to their mainstream appeal and dissemination. This article delves into the transformative potential and inherent challenges of incorporating GenAI into the domain of judicial decision-making. The article provides a critical examination of the legal and ethical implications that arise when GenAI is used in judicial rulings and their underlying rationale. While the adoption of this technology holds the promise of increased efficiency in the courtroom and expanded access to justice, it also introduces concerns regarding bias, interpretability, and accountability, thereby potentially undermining judicial discretion, the rule of law, and the safeguarding of rights. Around the world, judiciaries in different jurisdictions are taking different approaches to the use of GenAI in the courtroom. Through case studies of GenAI use by judges in jurisdictions including Colombia, Mexico, Peru, and India, this article maps out the challenges presented by integrating the technology in judicial determinations, and the risks of embracing it without proper guidelines for mitigating potential harms. Finally, this article develops a framework that promotes a more responsible and equitable use of GenAI in the judiciary, ensuring that the technology serves as a tool to protect rights, reduce risks, and ultimately, augment judicial reasoning and access to justice.
Chapter 12 discusses accountability in regulation. Accountability is part of a family of concepts that relate to the exercise of power and its abuses. It construes the relationship between regulators and regulatees according to principal-agent theory and explains how accountability can be an important mechanism for requiring answerability, ensuring that agents (regulators) do not drift from the interests of regulatees. The chapter explains that accountability consists of four elements: (i) a duty to explain; (ii) exposure to scrutiny; (iii) a potential ‘sanction’ or a consequence of some kind; and (iv) the possibility of being subject to independent review.
Although the 13 United States courts of appeals are the final word on 99 percent of all federal cases, there is no detailed account of how these courts operate. How do judges decide which decisions are binding precedents and which are not? Who decides whether appeals are argued orally? What administrative structures do these courts have? The answers to these and hundreds of other questions are largely unknown, not only to lawyers and legal academics but also to many within the judiciary itself. Written and Unwritten is the first book to provide an inside look at how these courts operate. An unprecedented contribution to the field of judicial administration, the book collects the differing local rules and internal procedures of each court of appeals. In-depth interviews of the chief judges of all 13 circuits and surveys of all clerks of court reveal previously undisclosed practices and customs.
Although the 13 United States courts of appeals are the final word on 99 percent of all federal cases, there is no detailed account of how these courts operate. How do judges decide which decisions are binding precedents and which are not? Who decides whether appeals are argued orally? What administrative structures do these courts have? The answers to these and hundreds of other questions are largely unknown, not only to lawyers and legal academics but also to many within the judiciary itself. Written and Unwritten is the first book to provide an inside look at how these courts operate. An unprecedented contribution to the field of judicial administration, the book collects the differing local rules and internal procedures of each court of appeals. In-depth interviews of the chief judges of all 13 circuits and surveys of all clerks of court reveal previously undisclosed practices and customs.
For most of the 20th century and earlier, central banks went about their business without ever feeling the need to communicate what they were doing to the financial markets or the general public. Then from around 1990 onwards, central banks became ever more transparent, trying to make clear to the markets and the public what they were doing and why. The purpose of this chapter is to understand why this change came about and how successful it has been.
Access challenges for China researchers have increased, including for online research. This paper focuses on one subset of such challenges: policy documents. As no studies have to date analysed variation in data availability over time, researchers studying official documents risk conflating variation in transparency with actual policy change. This paper analyses missingness and finds that publication of policy documents under China's “open government information” initiative increased until the mid-late 2010s but then began to decrease. A key determinant of policy transparency is whether a document is related to citizens’ daily lives, as opposed to national security. Furthermore, nearly 20 per cent of policy documents become unavailable two years after their publication. The paper concludes with a discussion on how to mitigate these challenges.
Research on social robots in dementia care has focused on their effects, for example in relation to the patients’ wellbeing or the care-givers’ working environment. Such approaches to social robots treat them as stable objects with a singular function. Combining social gerontology with social studies of science, the current study offers a new angle by asking: How do patients and care-givers in care homes for older people establish a shared definition of the situation in interactions involving robot animals? Drawing on ethnography and multimodal conversation analysis of 211 minutes of video recordings in two care homes in Sweden, we demonstrate the embodied work by which participants in interactions establish activities with robot animals. In contrast to the ideal of transparency in social robotics, we show that a central affordance of the robots is their vagueness, which allows for their inclusion in playful interactions. Playful framings of the robots highlight their social functions and downplay care-giver–patient asymmetries. However, situations where patients resist a playful frame actualise a dilemma of social inclusion, on the one hand, and the right to not participate in play, on the other. Showing this, the article contributes to knowledge on how people age with technology; in particular, it draws attention to the limits of an ideal of transparency when social robots are included in dementia care.
This chapter examines the impact of insider regulation on the board-shareholder dialogue. It offers a comparative analysis, revealing that EU and UK laws are more restrictive than those in the US. Drawing from this analysis, the paper raises the question of whether the EU should introduce a safe harbour rule to facilitate shareholder engagement through private disclosure of inside information. While shareholder engagement is considered beneficial for corporate governance and long-term firm value, the paper questions the necessity of selectively disclosing inside information to investors. It argues that mandating greater transparency in the board-shareholder dialogue is preferable, ensuring all shareholders have equal access to information. The feasibility and practicality of a safe harbour rule are doubted due to associated costs and challenges. In conclusion, the chapter rejects proposals to enact such rules, citing limited benefits and substantial costs.
Despite the benefits of the convergence of AI in ecommerce, it is necessary to address some concerns. The presence of AI-powered platforms raises significant challenges to consumer autonomy. This chapter discusses the overlap and interplay among three main legal regimes – EU AI Act Proposal, Digital Services Act (DSA), and EU Consumer Law.These laws will need to be amended with new articles to adequately address AI-specific concerns
Disseminating data is a core mission of international organizations. The Bretton Woods Institutions (BWIs), in particular, have become a main data source for research and policy-making. Due to their extensive lending activities, the BWIs often find themselves in a position to assist and pressure governments to increase the amount of economic data that they provide. In this study, we explore the association between loans from the BWIs and an index of economic transparency derived from the data-reporting practices of governments to the World Bank. Using a matching method for causal inference with panel data complemented by a multilevel regression analysis, we examine, separately, loan commitments and disbursements from the IMF and the World Bank. The multilevel regression analysis finds a significant association between BWI loans and the improvement of economic transparency in all developing countries; the matching method identifies a causal effect in democracies.
This chapter discusses the impact of particular policies at the global level. It turns out that coordination and common standards can make a big difference. First, it is shown that the global traceability of minerals can cut rebel funding significantly. Next, the role of monitoring multinationals is highlighted. Notably, recent studies have pinpointed the importance of corporate social responsibility of mining firms, revealing that the best-run mineral extractors may have a beneficial impact on the local population, while poorly run firms yield disastrous outcomes. Further, given that wars tend to trigger a series of vicious cycles, there is a powerful case for facilitating refugee admission. It is discussed how a well-coordinated refugee policy can reduce violence perpetuation over future generations. Next, we investigate what role international trade can play for fostering peace and what harmful effects arms trade can entail. It is shown how arms-producing countries can – without bearing large economic costs – reduce the ability of bad regimes to attack their civilians. Finally, the importance of a rule-based international order and a well-managed green transition is highlighted.