Digital Content, Consumer Law, General Contract Law, Copyright Law, Telecommunications Law
The application of consumer law to digital content contracts encounters a number of obstacles. Some of these are rather typical for digital content markets, e.g., the legal consequences of the classification of digital content as “goods” or “services”, and more importantly, the absence of general benchmarks to evaluate the conformity of digital content. Other problems, such as the limited usefulness of consumer information and the position of underage consumers, are not as such reserved to digital consumers, but they are amplified in the digital content markets. Moreover, particular attention is paid to the complex relationship between copyright law and consumer law. This paper explores the extent to which consumer (contract) law is fit to address the problems faced by digital consumers wishing to enjoy the benefits of digital content and examines whether the on-going initiatives at national and European level are likely to provide relief. Finally, recommendations for improvement are put forward in cases where the analysis shows that the problems identified are not or are insufficiently solved by these initiatives.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Natali Helberger et al, "Digital Content Contracts for Consumers" (2013) 36 J Consumer Policy 37.
Consumer Protection Law Commons, Contracts Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons, Science and Technology Law Commons
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Also available digitally: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-012-9201-1
Formerly Centre for the Study of European Contract Law Working Paper Series No. 2012-05 and Amsterdam Law School Research Paper No. 2012-66.