Dr. Heiko Richter, LL.M. (Columbia)

Senior Research Fellow

Intellectual Property and Competition Law

+49 89 24246-423

Areas of Interest:

Competition Law; Copyright Law; Information Law; Data and Regulation; Digital Transformation and Society; Law and Economics

Academic Résumé

Since 2020
Senior Research Fellow
Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich

PhD Humboldt University of Berlin, Supervisor Prof. Dr. Heike Schweitzer, LL.M. (Yale)

2014 — 2020
Doctoral Student and Junior Research Fellow
Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich

Second Legal State Examination (Ass. jur.), Berlin (legal training i.a. Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (Berlin), European Commission DG Competition (Brussels))

Legum Magister (LL.M.), Columbia University, New York

Scientific Assistant to Prof. Dr. Gregor Bachmann, LL.M. (Michigan), Free University of Berlin

First Legal State Examination (Dipl.-Jur.), Free University of Berlin

Master in Business Administration (Dipl.-Kfm.), University of Mannheim (one year study abroad University of South Australia, Adelaide)

Academic Prizes and Honours

Humboldt Prize 2020 for the dissertation “Information as Infrastructure”

James Kent Scholar 2010/11, Columbia Law School, New York

Laureate 2nd Prize Humboldt Forum Recht, 7th paper-award: “Law in Times of Terrorism”, 2008

Laureate Barbara-Hopf-Foundation 2007, for an outstanding diploma thesis


Förderungsfonds Wissenschaft der VG WORT, printing costs grant

Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science, doctoral research scholarship

ERP-scholarship (European Recovery Program), German National Academic Foundation/Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology for postgraduate studies in the United States of America

German National Academic Foundation for legal and economic studies

Scholarship State of Baden-Wurttemberg for studies in Australia


Academic Society for Competition Law (ASCOLA)

Deutsche Vereinigung für gewerblichen Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht e.V. (GRUR)

German-American Lawyers‘ Association (Deutsch-Amerikanische Juristenvereinigung, DAJV)


Edited Works

To Break Up or Regulate Big Tech Avenues to Constrain Private Power in the DSA/DMA Package (Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition Research Paper Series, No. 21-25), Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich 2021, 112 pp. (together with Marlene Straub, Erik Tuchtfeld). DOI

Smart Urban Mobility - Law, Regulation, and Policy (MPI Studies on Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 29), Springer, Berlin; Heidelberg 2020, VI + 340 pp. (together with Michele Finck et al.).

    Books and Monographs

    Information als Infrastruktur - Zu einem wettbewerbs- und innovationsbezogenen Ordnungsrahmen für Informationen des öffentlichen Sektors (Geistiges Eigentum und Wettbewerbsrecht, 164), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2021, XXXIII + 635 pp.

      Informationsweiterverwendungsgesetz (IWG), C.H. Beck, München 2018, XXIV + 380 pp.

        Studiengebühren und deren Verwendung (Public Management - Diskussionsbeiträge, Nr. 56), Universität Hamburg, Fakultät Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Arbeitsbereich Public Management, Hamburg 2007, XI + 91 pp.

          Contributions to Collected Editions, Commentaries, Handbooks and Encyclopaedias

          Rechte an Daten und Datenzugangsrechte, in: Kuuya Josef Chibanguza, Christian Kuß, Hans Steege (eds.), Künstliche Intelligenz - Recht und Praxis automatisierter und autonomer Systeme, Nomos, Baden-Baden 2021, forthcoming (together with Jure Globocnik).

            The Law and Policy of Government Access to Private Sector Data ('B2G Data Sharing'), in: German Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection, Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition (eds.), Data Access, Consumer Interests and Public Welfare, Nomos, Baden-Baden 2021, 529 - 572. DOI

            • The tremendous rate of technological advancement in recent years has fostered a policy de-bate about improving the state’s access to privately held data (‘B2G data sharing’). Access to such ‘data of general interest’ can significantly improve social welfare and serve the common good. At the same time, expanding the state’s access to privately held data poses risks. This chapter inquires into the potential and limits of mandatory access rules, which would oblige private undertakings to grant access to data for specific purposes that lie in the public interest. The article discusses the key questions that access rules should address and develops general principles for designing and implementing such rules. It puts particular emphasis on the opportunities and limitations for the implementation of horizontal B2G access frameworks. Finally, the chapter outlines concrete recommendations for legislative reforms.
            • Also published as: Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 20-06

            Smart Urban Mobility as a Regulatory Challenge, in: Michele Finck et al. (ed.), Smart Urban Mobility - Law, Regulation, and Policy (MPI Studies on Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 29), Springer, Berlin 2020, 1 - 17 (together with Michele Finck et al.). DOI

            • The ‘smart city’ has become shorthand for developments in technology that influence how cities are organised and how citizens coexist in them. ‘Smart mobility’, one of its most visible sub-domains, has been considerably affected by ecological, demographic and economic pressures. Emerging methods of transporta- tion and innovative business models can overcome old problems, but they also pose new societal, economic and legal challenges. This introduction aims to shed light on the law, regulation and policy of ‘smart urban mobility’ by critically examining its substantial transformation from a regulatory perspective. It outlines the notion of the ‘smart city’, highlights trends in ‘smart’ urban mobility, points to related legal challenges and explains the conception and chapters of this book.

            Administrative und staatliche Selbstdarstellung: Informationsweitergabe der öffentlichen Hand, in: Kai von Lewinski (ed.), Formate des Datenjournalismus (Journalismus: Theorie und Praxis, 24), LIT, Berlin 2019, 35 - 55.

              The Power Paradigm in Private Law – Towards a Holistic Regulation of Personal Data, in: Mor Bakhoum et al. (ed.), Personal Data in Competition, Consumer Protection and Intellectual Property Law (MPI Studies on Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 28), Springer, Berlin 2018, 527 - 577. DOI

              • Currently there is no holistic concept linking the various areas of private law that are concerned with the regulation of personal data. However, there is a strong need for one. This study elaborates on such an approach by focusing on the private power paradigm. Private power is of utmost relevance for personal data and pervades various areas of private law. This study applies recent findings of research conducted by private law scholars, who have conceptualized private power in private law, to the regulation of personal data in private law, namely in the areas of the law of contract, consumer protection, competition, (intellectual) property, data protection and anti-discrimination. It draws descriptive as well as normative conclusions which can help to better understand the regulatory implications and serve as a methodology for identifying and shaping coherent and prudent regulation of personal data in the future.

              Die Hydra des Dateneigentums – eine methodische Betrachtung, in: Stiftung Datenschutz (ed.), Dateneigentum und Datenhandel (DatenDebatten, 3), Erich Schmidt Verlag, Berlin 2018, 241 - 260 (together with Reto M. Hilty).

              Zwischen Liberalisierungspolitik und Gemeinwohlinteressen: Das deutsche Presse-Grosso und Dienstleistungen von allgemeinem wirtschaftlichem Interesse gemäß Art. 106 Abs. 2 AEUV, in: Das Publicness-Puzzle – Öffentliche Aufgabenerfüllung zwischen Staat und Markt, Festschrift für Peter Eichhorn zum 75. Geburtstag, Jacobs, Lage 2014, 345 - 368.

                Contracting Co-Determination: The SE-Directive as a Model?, in: Horst Eidenmüller (ed.), Regulatory Competition in Contract Law and Dispute Resolution, C.H. Beck/Hart Publishing/Nomos, München/Oxford/Baden-Baden 2013, 189 - 199 (together with Gregor Bachmann).

                  Preisgleichheit und kartellrechtliche Missbrauchsaufsicht im Bereich der Energieversorgung, in: Katharina Boesche (ed.), Rechtsaspekte bei Preisen (Das Recht der Preise), Liber, Berlin 2009, 65 - 136.

                    Journal Articles

                    Europäisches Datenprivatrecht: Lehren aus dem Kommissionsvorschlag für eine "Verordnung über europäische Daten-Governance", Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht 29, 3 (2021), 634 - 666.

                      Lehren aus der jüngeren Gesetzgebung zur wirtschaftlichen Nutzung von Informationen der öffentlichen Hand, Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht 40, 11 (2021), 760 - 768.

                        Copyright Protection of Government-Related Material Before the Courts of the United States and Canada: Considerations for Future Reforms, IIC 52, 1 (2021), 6 - 33. DOI

                        • Copyright protection of government-related material lies at the intersection of private incentives, public interest, and political motivation. These interests naturally clash. Therefore, the justification and scope of copyright protection for such materials has been the subject of intense controversy ever since. Recently, the Supreme Court of the United States and the Supreme Court of Canada handed down landmark decisions on the application of the respective century-old doctrines and provisions. Moreover, courts in the U.S. and Canada have lately addressed the protectability of privately created, government-adopted industry standards. This article takes these decisions as an occasion to reflect on the copyright protection of government-related material against the background of rapid technological advancement and substantial ongoing societal and political change. Taking into account the regulatory experiences in the EU, this article questions the prevalent assumptions of trustworthy state action and undistorted functioning of markets, which considerably underlie the design of current government copyright regimes around the globe. In this light, the article aims to provide avenues for future legislative reforms that address the copyright of government-related materials. It suggests a more focused, nuanced, and holistic regulatory approach for strengthening and maintaining open, democratic societies.

                        Zugang des Staates zu Daten der Privatwirtschaft, Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik 53, 8 (2020), 245 - 248.

                          Neues zum Werkbegriff und zur Erstveröffentlichung? Das Zusammenspiel zwischen Urheber- und Informationszugangsrecht vor dem BVerwG, GRUR 122, 4 (2020), 358 - 361.

                            Informationen der öffentlichen Hand als Rohstoff für den Datenjournalismus. Rechtliche Gestaltungsprinzipien zum Erhalt der Meinungsvielfalt, UFITA 2019,1 (2019), 196 - 237. DOI

                            • In der Presselandschaft entwickelt sich der Datenjournalismus mittlerweile von einer Randerscheinung hin zu einer festen redaktionellen Größe. Entsprechend wächst seine Bedeutung für die öffentliche Meinungsbildung. „Datenjournalismus“ erfasst sowohl Rechercheansätze als auch Veröffentlichungsformen, bei denen Datensätze im Mittelpunkt stehen. Eine wichtige Datenquelle bilden dabei Informationen der öffentlichen Hand. Allerdings kann die öffentliche Hand ihrerseits die Weitergabe von Informationen als strategisches Instrument zur Selbstdarstellung begreifen und auf diesem Weg die öffentliche Meinung ebenso breitenwirksam wie subtil prägen. Der Datenjournalismus befindet sich dann in der ambivalenten Rolle, sowohl als Mittler als auch als Wachhund in Bezug auf solche Informationen zu fungieren. Dieser Beitrag untersucht, welche Möglichkeiten der öffentlichen Hand eröffnet sind, sich durch die digitale Informationsweitergabe selbstdarzustellen. Dafür ana- lysiert er den geltenden Rechtsrahmen mit besonderem Blick auf den Datenjournalismus. Berücksichtigt werden dabei auch Wirkzusammenhänge und empirische Befunde. Auf Grundlage der Analyse formuliert der Beitrag Gestaltungsprinzipien, nach denen sich der Rechtsrahmen für die Informationsweitergabe der öffentlichen Hand fortentwickeln lässt. Diese Prinzipien sollen letztlich dazu beitragen, die für die Demokratie unabdingbare Meinungsvielfalt in einer zunehmend datengetriebenen Gesellschaft zu gewährleisten.

                            The Data Sharing Economy: On the Emergence of New Intermediaries, IIC 50, 1 (2019), 4 - 29 (together with Peter R. Slowinski). DOI

                            • Data-driven markets depend on access to data as a resource for products and services. Since the quality of information that can be drawn from data increases with the available amount and quality of the data, businesses involved in the data economy have a great interest in accessing data from other market players. However, companies still appear to be reluctant to share their data. Therefore, the key question is how data sharing can be incentivized. This article focuses on data sharing platforms, which are emerging as new intermediaries and can play a vital role in the data economy, as they may increase willingness to share data. By comparing data sharing to the exchange of patents based on the FRAND principles, this article suggests a possible way for self-regulation to provide more transparency and fairness in the growing markets for data sharing.

                            The Intellectual Property Chapter of the Association Agreement between the EU and Ukraine, GRUR Int 68, 1 (2019), 28 - 32 (together with Moritz Sutterer).

                              Open Science and Public Sector Information – Reconsidering the exemption for educational and research establishments under the Directive on re-use of public sector information, Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and Electronic Commerce Law 9, 1 (2018), 51 - 74.

                              • The article discusses the possibilities of including public research and educational establishments within the scope of the Directive regulating the re-use of public sector information (2003/98/EC – ‘PSI Directive’). It subsequently evaluates the legal consequences of such an inclusion. Focusing on scientific information, the analysis connects the long-standing debates about open access and open educa-tion to open government data. Their common driving force is the call for a wide-spread dissemination of publicly funded information. However, the regulatory standard set out by the PSI Directive is characterized by considerable legal uncer-tainty. Therefore, it is difficult to derive robust assumptions that can form the ba-sis for predicting the effects of extending the PSI Directive’s scope to research in-formation. A potential revision of the PSI Directive should reduce this uncertain-ty. Moreover, PSI regulation must account for the specific incentives linked to the creation and dissemination of research results. This seems of primary importance for public-private research collaborations because there is a potential risk that a full application of the PSI Directive might unduly affect incentives for such col-laborations.
                              • http://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-9-1-2018/4679

                              „Open Government Data“ für Daten des Bundes - Die Open-Data-Regelung der §§ 12 a, 19 E-Government-Gesetz, Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht 36, 19 (2017), 1408 - 1413.

                              • Die am 13.7.2017 in Kraft getretene „Open-Data-Regelung“ des § 12 a EGovG verpflichtet Behörden der unmittelbaren Bundesverwaltung zur Veröffentlichung strukturierter, unbearbeiteter Daten. Mit Blick auf die bevorstehende Umsetzung in den Ländern erörtert der Beitrag Auslegungsprobleme und vertieft weiterführende, übergreifende Rechtsfragen.

                              Zur Weiterverwendung von Informationen der öffentlichen Hand: BVerwG klärt erstmals grundsätzliche Anwendungsvoraussetzungen des IWG, Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht 35, 16 (2016), 1143 - 1146.

                                Die kartellrechtliche Unwirksamkeit von Schiedsvereinbarungen: Zur Gewährleistung von Verfahrensgarantien mittels des europäischen und deutschen Kartellrechts, WuW 11 (2015), 1078 - 1093 (together with Philipp Eckel).

                                  Fingierte Belobigungen im Internet – Eine lauterkeits- und vertragsrechtliche Analyse am Beispiel von Hotelbewertungsportalen, WRP 57, 7 (2011), 814 - 826 (together with Alexander Ahrens).

                                    Joint Ventures in the Video on Demand Sector – Challenges for Merger Control in Europe, Columbia Journal for European Law 17 (2011), 57.

                                      Referendarexamensklausur – Zivilrecht: Beförderungsvertrag und Fluggastverordnung – Flugverspätung dank Aschewolke, Juristische Schulung 50, 9 (2010), 805 - 811.

                                        Anti-Terrorismusgesetzgebung in Deutschland – eine Institutionenökonomische Analyse, Humboldt Forum Recht 2008, 231 - 251.

                                        • Was vermag Recht in Zeiten des Terrors zu leisten? Diese Frage erörtert der Autor anhand eines interdisziplinären Ansatzes, nämlich der ökonomischen Analyse des Rechts. Ausgehend von der Identifikation ökonomischer Charakteristika des globalen Terrorismus ergeben sich für die institutionelle Gestaltung von Gegenmaßnahmen grundsätzliche Implikationen. Diese werden als Maßstab dazu herangezogen, die gegenwärtige Anti-Terrorismusgesetzgebung in Deutschland auf den institutionenökonomischen Prüfstand zu stellen. Der Autor weist nach, dass das Spannungsfeld zwischen Freiheit und Sicherheit bzw. zwischen Rechtsstaat und Überwachungsstaat, welches die juristische Debatte in der Bundesrepublik dominiert, letztlich auf ökonomische Dilemmastrukturen zurückzuführen ist. Abschließend werden institutionelle Lösungsansätze im Hinblick auf ökonomische Neben- bzw. Wechselwirkungen und Grundgesetzkonformität diskutiert.
                                        • Anti-Terrorismusgesetzgebung-in-Deutschland_HFR_2008-19.pdf

                                        Möglichkeiten zur Verwendung von Studiengebühren – Wertkettenansatz von Porter, Wissenschaftsmanagement 13, 2 (2007), 34 - 41 (together with Jens Heiling).

                                          Entscheidungsmodell zur Verwendung von Studiengebühren, Wissenschaftsmanagement 13, 4 (2007), 33 - 40 (together with Jens Heiling).

                                            Case notes

                                            Anmerkung zu EuGH, Urteil vom 14.11.2018 – C-215/17, Nova Kreditna Banka Maribor - Zugang zu Informationen öffentlicher Unternehmen zulässig, GRUR-Prax 10, 24 (2018), 581.

                                              Anmerkung zu BGH, Urteil vom 29.03.2018 - I ZR 34/17, Kein Verstoß gegen Tarifpflicht bei Rabattaktion - Bonusaktion für Taxi App, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 71, 34 (2018), 2484 - 2489.

                                                Anmerkung zu LG Bonn, Urteil vom 15.11.2017 - 16 O 21/16, Kostenfreie Wetter-App des DWD ist unzulässig - WarnWetter-App, GRUR-Prax 10, 2 (2018), 60.

                                                  Anmerkung zu BVerwG, Urteil vom 20.10.2016 – 7 C 6/15, Kosten für die Gewährung von Informationszugang, Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht 36, 7 (2017), 487 - 488.

                                                    Anmerkung zu BGH, Urteil vom 10.11.2016 - I ZR 29/15, Schaufensterware ohne Preis verstößt nicht gegen PAngV, GRUR-Prax 9, 3 (2017), 83.

                                                      Anmerkung zu BVerwG, Urteil vom 29.6.2016 – 7 C 32/15, Informationszugang zu Unterlagen aus einem Vertragsverletzungsverfahren, Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht 35, 21 (2016), 1570 - 1572.

                                                        Anmerkung zu EuGH, Urteil vom 19.10.2016 – C-582/14, Speicherung von IP-Adressen beim Besuch einer Website, Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 27, 23 (2016), 912 - 914.

                                                          Comment on "Central Negotiating Mandate" -Decision of the Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof) 6 October 2015 – Case No. KZR 17/14, IIC 47, 3 (2016), 373 - 381. DOI

                                                            Anmerkung zu VG Köln, Urteil vom 22.9.2014 – 13 K 4674/13, Pflicht zur Herausgabe einer indizierten Filmkopie durch die BPjM, MMR 2 (2015), 127 - 131.

                                                              Anmerkung zu BVerwG, Urteil vom 25.6.2015 – 7 C 1/14, Informationszugang zu Arbeiten der Wissenschaftlichen Dienste des Bundestags, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 68, 44 (2015), 3262 - 3263 (together with Michael W. Müller).


                                                                Review of: Stefan A. Schmidt: Zugang zu Daten nach europäischem Kartellrecht, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2020. XXII + 629 S. ISBN: 978-3-16-159580-6, IIC 52, 3 (2021), 370 - 374. DOI

                                                                  Review of: Daniela Heinemann (Hrsg.): Praxiskommentar Transparenzgesetz (LTranspG RLP), Grundlagen des LTranspG und das Verhältnis zum Informations- und Datenschutzrecht, Springer Gabler 2019. 424 S. ISBN: 978-3-658-18436-0, Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht 39, 1-2 (2020), 41.

                                                                    Review of: Dacian C. Dragos, Polonca Kovač, Albert T. Marseille (Hrsg.): The Laws of Transparency in Action - A European Perspective, Palgrave Macmillan 2019. 666 S. ISBN: 978-3-319-76459-7, IIC 51, 1 (2020), 137 - 139.

                                                                      Review of: Mat Callahan and Jim Rogers (eds.): A Critical Guide to Intellectual Property, Zed Books, London 2017. 281 S. ISBN: 978-1-78699-114-0, IIC 49, 4 (2018), 503 - 505. DOI

                                                                        Review of: Wirtz, Hannah: Die Kommerzialisierung kultureller Informationen der öffentlichen Hand. Auswirkungen der Einbeziehung kultureller Einrichtungen in den Anwendungsbereich der PSI-Richtlinie (Beiträge zum Informationsrecht; Band 38), Duncker & Humblot Berlin 2017. 340 S. ISBN 978-3-428-14918-6, Bulletin Kunst & Recht 9, 1 (2018), 154 - 155.

                                                                          Review of: Daly, Angela, Private Power, Online Information Flows and EU Law: Mind the Gap, Oxford, Portland/Oregon: Hart (2016), International journal of law and information technology 25, 3 (2017), 239 - 241. DOI

                                                                            Rezension Epstein, Lee/Landes, William M./Posner, Richard A.: The Behavior of Federal Judges – A Theoretical & Empirical Study of Rational Choice. – Cambridge/Massachusetts, London/England: Harvard University Press (2013), Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht 78, 4 (2014), 932 - 939.

                                                                              Conference Reports

                                                                              "Artificial Intelligence, Innovation and Competition: New Tools, New Rules?" – Report on the Conference of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition in collaboration with the MPI Alumni Association in Munich, 5 July 2019, GRUR Int 68, 8/9 (2019), 794 - 798 (together with Jure Globocnik, Luc Desaunettes).

                                                                              • Event: Conference of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition in collaboration with the MPI Alumni Association, Munich, 2019-07-05

                                                                              Research Papers

                                                                              The Proposed EU Digital Services Regulation 2020: Data Desiderata (Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 21-21), 2021, 18 pp. (together with Peter Georg Picht).

                                                                              • With the drafts of the Digital Markets Act (DMA), the Digital Services Act (DSA), and the Data Governance Act (DGA), the EU Commission has presented three cornerstones of its digital regulation approach in November and December of 2020. This Discussion Paper looks at data transactions and focuses on four aspects which illustrate that the proposed Acts leave much room for advancing the coherence and specificity of its respective rules: the specificity of data-related provisions; the role of FRAND in the package context; the role of data intermediaries; and the upcoming Data Act. Beyond diagnosis, the Discussion Paper calls for a more integrative approach and proposes improvements. It aims to spark a more intense discourse on data transactions under the Package.
                                                                              • Available at SSRN

                                                                              Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property Law - Position Statement of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition of 9 April 2021 on the Current Debate (Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 21-10), 2021, 26 pp. (together with Josef Drexl et al.).

                                                                              • This Position Statement presents a broad overview of issues arising at the intersection of AI and IP law based on the work of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition research group on Regulation of the Digital Economy. While the analysis is approached mainly from a perspective de lege lata, it also identifies questions which require further reflection de lege ferenda supported by in-depth interdisciplinary research. The scope is confined to substantive European IP law, in particular, as regards copyright, patents, designs, databases and trade secrets. Specific AI-related issues are mapped out around the core questions of IP law, namely, the eligibility for protection under the respective IP regimes, allocation of rights and the scope of protection. The structure of the analysis reflects three key components of AI: inputs required for the development of AI systems, AI as a process and the output of AI applications. Overall, it is emphasised that, while recent legal and policy discussions have mostly focused on AI-aided and AI-generated output, a more holistic view that accounts for the role of IP law across the AI innovation cycle is indispensable.
                                                                              • Available at SSRN

                                                                              Exposing the Public Interest Dimension of the Digital Single Market: Public Undertakings as a Model for Regulating Data Sharing (Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 20-03), 2020, 30 pp. DOI

                                                                              • The availability of public and private data plays a crucial role for the digital single market. Increasing the availability of data by incentivizing and mandating public and private actors to share their data ranks high on the EU policy agenda. When designing suitable legal data sharing regimes, there is an inevitable need to balance multiple public and private interests. While there have been considerable discussions on data sharing between private businesses (B2B), no binding rules have been established yet. In contrast, public undertakings are increasingly covered by mandatory rules. This article focuses on data sharing regulation for public undertakings, which lie at the state-market interface. The way their data is regulated offers a prototype for how to reconcile business reasoning with the public interest. In particular, the article inquires into the design of the recast Public Sector Information (PSI) Directive regarding public undertakings as well as into different national rules which mandate access to public undertakings’ data. On this basis, it discusses four general characteristics which can inform other strands of regulatory debate on data sharing in the EU.
                                                                              • Available at SSRN

                                                                              Technical Aspects of Artificial Intelligence: An Understanding from an Intellectual Property Law Perspective (Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 19-13), 2019, 15 pp. (together with Josef Drexl et al.).

                                                                              • The present Q&A paper aims at providing an overview of artificial intelligence with a special focus on machine learning as a currently predominant subfield thereof. Machine learning-based applications have been discussed intensely in legal scholarship, including in the field of intellectual property law, while many technical aspects remain ambiguous and often cause confusion. This text was drafted by the Research Group on the Regulation of the Digital Economy of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition in the pursuit of understanding the fundamental characteristics of artificial intelligence, and machine learning in particular, that could potentially have an impact on intellectual property law. As a background paper, it provides the technological basis for the Group’s ongoing research relating thereto. The current version summarises insights gained from background literature research, interviews with practitioners and a workshop conducted in June 2019 in which experts in the field of artificial intelligence participated.
                                                                              • Available at SSRN


                                                                              Stellungnahme zum Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Änderung des E-Government-Gesetzes und zur Einführung des Gesetzes für die Nutzung von Daten des öffentlichen Sektors vom 17.12.2020, 2021, 20 pp.

                                                                              Gesetz über die urheberrechtliche Verantwortlichkeit von Diensteanbietern für das Teilen von Online-Inhalten (Urheberrechts-Diensteanbieter-Gesetz – UrhDaG) - Stellungnahme zum Referentenentwurf vom 2. September 2020, 2020, 20 pp. (together with Reto M. Hilty et al.).

                                                                              Comments of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition of 11 February 2020 on the Draft Issues Paper of the World Intellectual Property Organization on Intellectual Property Policy and Artificial Intelligence, 2020, 9 pp. (together with Josef Drexl et al.).

                                                                              Stellungnahme zum Regierungsentwurf vom 23. Januar 2019 für ein Thüringer Transparenzgesetz, 2019, 15 pp. (together with Reto M. Hilty).

                                                                              Position Statement of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition of 26 April 2017 on the European Commission's "Public consultation on Building the European Data Economy", 2017, 13 pp. (together with Josef Drexl et al.).

                                                                              • This Position Statement responds to the Communication of 10 January 2017 by which the European Commission launched a public consultation on the future legal framework for data-driven markets that emerge in the course of the current digitization of industrial production and the advent of smart products in which sensors are embedded. In particular, the Position Statement comments the Commission’s ideas on a possible future data producer’s right as a means of promoting access to data. While the Max Plank Institute agrees that there are indeed instances where there is a need to “unlock data”, it rejects a data producer’s right. Rather, the Institute recommends considering more targeted data access rights that would specifically react to situations in which a manufacturer of smart products would otherwise try to reserve related markets for itself. The Max Planck Institute thereby takes inspiration from the data portability right that has already been implemented as part of the Basic Data Protection Regulation. Moreover, general principles on the design of data access regimes are developed. In sum, the Max Planck Institute favours a sector-specific approach to the introduction of a general data access right or a generally applicable data access regime. Sector-specific rules are especially needed for answering more concrete questions such as regarding the person entitled to claim access or the one of whether a data holder should be remunerated for granting access to data.
                                                                              • MPI_Statement_Public_consultation_on_Building_the_EU_Data_Eco_28042017 Copy.pdf
                                                                              • Chinese Translation of the Position Statement
                                                                              • Also published as: Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 17-08

                                                                              Position Statement of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition on the Proposed Modernisation of European Copyright Rules Part B Exceptions and Limitations (Art. 3 – Text and Data Mining), 2017, 27 pp. (together with Reto M. Hilty).

                                                                              Position Statement of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition of August 16, 2016 - On the current debate on exclusive rights and access rights to data at the European level, 2016, 12 pp. (together with Josef Drexl et al.).

                                                                              • Also published in GRUR Int under the title: Ausschließlichkeits- und Zugangsrechte an Daten - Positionspapier des Max-Planck-Instituts für Innovation und Wettbewerb vom 16.8.2016 zur aktuellen europäischen Debatte, GRUR Int 65,10 (2016), 914 - 918
                                                                              • This position statement of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition has been released against the background of the European Free Flow of Data Initiative of the European Commission and the on-going political, economic and academic debate on the related issues. The Institute takes a stance as regards the introduction of exclusive rights in data, special legal protection of algorithms used in data analysis, as well as the questions on the applicability of the current EU legal framework for the sui-generis database rights and trade secrets to individual data and data-sets. The Institute sees no economic justification for the introduction of new exclusive rights in data, which could even hamper the functioning of the data-driven economy. In contrast, the statement emphasizes the importance of access to data in order to ensure the proper functioning of data-driven markets. It identifies the need for further research in this regard and recommends the general approach and principles to be considered if the special regulation of access to data is necessary.
                                                                              • Positionspaper-Data-Eng-08-31_def-korr Copy.pdf
                                                                              • Also published as: Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 16-10 under the title: Data Ownership and Access to Data - Position Statement of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition of 16 August 2016 on the Current European Debate

                                                                              Further Publications, Press Articles, Interviews

                                                                              Datentreuhandmodelle - Themenpapier, 2020, 10 pp., 28.04.2020 (together with Aline Blankertz et al.).

                                                                              • Datentreuhandmodelle werden im politischen Raum im Zusammenhang mit der Lösung unterschiedlicher Fragestellungen der Datenpolitik diskutiert. Eine gereifte wissenschaftliche Auseinandersetzung mit den verschiedenen Modellen, ihren Zwecken, Randbedingungen und Limitationen ist derzeit noch nicht verfügbar. Als Hilfestellung für die politische Debatte und Entscheidungsfindung haben wir als Expertin und Experten, die das Thema aus unterschiedlichem Blickwinkel bearbeiten, die nachfolgende zusammenfassende Darstellung erstellt.
                                                                              • Richter_Datentreuhandmodelle.pdf

                                                                              Vom Drang, Freiheit zu regulieren, MaxPlanckForschung 3/19 (2019), 10 (together with Reto M. Hilty).


                                                                              Selected lectures

                                                                              Unlocking the value from data held by public sector bodies
                                                                              European Data Summit 2020
                                                                              Location: Representation of the European Commission in Germany, Berlin

                                                                              Rights Inflation or Rights Realization? Access to Information and the Ancillary copyright for press publishers
                                                                              Max Planck Law Annual Conference 2020
                                                                              Location: Online

                                                                              Open Data, Public Sector Information, and the Future of EU Data Regulation
                                                                              GRUR Expert Round Table concerning the “Legal framework of a European Data Economy”
                                                                              Location: Online


                                                                              Reverse PSI: Anspruch des Staates auf Zugang zu Daten der Privatwirtschaft
                                                                              Verbraucherrechtstage 2019
                                                                              Location: Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz, Berlin


                                                                              Rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen bei der Nutzung von Open Public Data durch Kommunen
                                                                              Expert Workshop on Public Open Data
                                                                              Location: VDI/VDE Innovation + Technik, Berlin


                                                                              Lobby Zone EU: The Legislative Process and the Copyright Reform
                                                                              Location: Civic School for Sound EU Practice, Kiev, Ukraine


                                                                              Data of Public Undertakings: Towards a Common Framework?
                                                                              TILTing Perspectives 2019
                                                                              Location: University of Tilburg, Tilburg, NL


                                                                              The propertization of data in the data-driven economy: A case for regulation in the EU?
                                                                              Conference Paradigms of Internet Regulation in the EU
                                                                              Location: Renmin Law School, Peking, China


                                                                              Administrative und staatliche Selbstdarstellung: Informationsweitergabe der öffentlichen Hand
                                                                              Conference Formate des Datenjournalismus
                                                                              Location: University of Passau, Passau


                                                                              B2B and B2G Data Sharing
                                                                              European Data Summit
                                                                              Location: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, Berlin


                                                                              PSI-Directive and Research Establishments
                                                                              Location: League of European Research Universities, Cambridge, UK


                                                                              Is the PSI Directive suitable for research establishments?
                                                                              Participant Workshop on Open Research Data under the Public Sector and Reuse of Information Directive (Directive 2003/98/EC)
                                                                              Location: European Commission, Brussels, Belgium