Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

(Re)Structuring Data Law: Approaches to Data Property

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover The Art of Structuring

  • 1947 Accesses

Abstract

Data itself is referred to as the driving force behind an advancing digital economy. Thus, a broad discussion on the “ownership” of data is in progress. Structuring the corresponding rights to data requires a legal approach to the relationship between data as such, information that can be contained in data, and data carriers. Since data is traded like tangible objects under the law of obligations, a corresponding assignment of data in rem may also be required in German civil law. Therefore, the creation of a property-like right de lege lata was considered with regard to the handling of data in criminal law. However, data law does not require a comprehensive restructuring in terms of general data ownership de lege ferenda as it is partly considered.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Althammer, C. (2016). In K.-H. Gursky (Ed.). Staudingers Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch—Buch 3: Sachenrecht (rev. ed. 2016). Berlin: Sellier—de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbeitsgruppe “Digitaler Neustart”. (2017). Bericht vom 15. Mai 2017, Retrieved from https://www.justiz.nrw.de/JM/schwerpunkte/digitaler_neustart/zt_bericht_arbeitsgruppe/bericht_ag_dig_neustart.pdf.

  • Beckmann, R. M. (2013). In M. Martinek (Ed.). Staudingers Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch—Buch 2: Kaufrecht (rev. ed. 2013). Berlin: Sellier—de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boehm, F. (2016). Herausforderungen von Cloud Computing-Verträgen: Vertragstypologische Einordnung, Haftung und Eigentum an Daten. ZEuP, 2, 358–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bräutigam, P., & Klindt, T. (2015). Industrie 4.0, das Internet der Dinge und das Recht. NJW, 16, 1137–1142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchner, B. (2006). Informationelle Selbstbestimmung im Privatrecht. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brückner, B. (2017). In F. J. Säcker, et al. (Eds.). Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch Band 7 (7th ed.). Munich: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • CJEU. (2004a). 9 September 2004—C-203/02, ECLI:EU:C:2004:695—The British Horseracing Board Ltd und andere gegen William Hill Organization Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • CJEU. (2004b). 9 September 2004—C-338/02, ECLI:EU:C:2004:696—Fixtures Marketing Ltd v Svenska Spel AB.

    Google Scholar 

  • CJEU. (2004c). 9 September 2004—C-444/02, ECLI:EU:C:2004:697—Fixtures Marketing Ltd v Organismos prognostikon agonon Podosfairou AE (OPAP).

    Google Scholar 

  • CJEU. (2004d). 9 September 2004—C-46/02, ECLI:EU:C:2004:694—Fixtures Marketing Ltd v Oy Veikkaus Ab.

    Google Scholar 

  • CJEU. (2012). 1 March 2012—C-604/10, ECLI:EU:C:2012:115—Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Yahoo! UK Ltd and Others.

    Google Scholar 

  • Court of Appeal. (2013). EWCA Civ 281—Your Response Ltd v Datateam Business Media Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Determann, L. (2018). No one owns data. UC Hastings Research Paper, 265, Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3123957.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorner, M. (2014). Big Data und "Dateneigentum". CR, 9, 617–628.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreier, T. (2018). In T. Dreier & G. Schulze (Eds.). Urheberrechtsgesetz (5th ed.). Munich: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drexl, J. (2017a). Designing competitive markets for industrial data—between propertisation and access. JIPITEC, 8, 257–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drexl, J. (2017b). Ein Plädoyer für einen wettbewerbspolitischen Ansatz—Teil 1. NZKart, 7, 339–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ensthaler, J. (2016). Industrie 4.0 und die Berechtigung an Daten. NJW, 48, 3473–3478.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2015). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, “A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe”, 6 May 2015, COM(2015) 192 final.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2017a). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, “Building a European data Economy”, 10 January 2017, COM(2017) 9 final.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2017b). Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a framework for the free flow of non-personal data in the European Union, COM(2017) 495 final.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2017c). Staff Working Document on the free flow of data and emerging issues of the European data, 10 January 2017, SWD(2017) 2 final.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (Ed.). (2017d). Study on emerging issues of data ownership, interoperability, (re-)usability and access to data, and liability. Luxembourg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grützmacher, M. (2016). Dateneigentum—ein Flickenteppich. CR, 8, 485–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heger, M. (2018). In K. Lackner & K. Kühl (Eds.). Strafgesetzbuch: Kommentar (29th ed.). Munich: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heerma, J.-D. (2014). In A.-A. Wandtke & W. Bullinger (Eds.). Praxiskommentar zum Urheberrecht: UrhR (4th ed.). Munich: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilgendorf, E. (1996). Grundfälle zum Computerstrafrecht. JuS, 890–894.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoeren, T. (2013). Dateneigentum—Versuch einer Anwendung von § 303a StGB im Zivilrecht. MMR, 8, 486–491.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoeren, T., & Völkel, J. (2014). In T. Hoeren (Ed.). Big Data und Recht. Munich: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hugenholtz, P. B. (2018). Against "data property". In H. Ullrich, et. al. (Eds.). Kritika: Essays on Intellectual Property, 3, 48–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO/IEC. (2015). 2121272. In ISO/IEC 2382:2015(en).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jülicher, T. (2015a). Die Aussonderung von (Cloud-)Daten nach § 47 InsO. ZIP, 43, 2063–2066.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jülicher, T. (2015b). Daten in der Cloud im Insolvenzfall—ein internationaler Überblick. K&R, 7, 448–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerber, W. (2016). A new (Intellectual) property right for non-personal data? An economic analysis. GRUR Int., 11, 989–998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladeur, K.-H. (2000). Persönlichkeitsschutz und “Comedy”—Das Beispiel der Fälle SAT 1/Stahnke und RTL 2/Schröder. NJW, 28, 1977–1981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulze, G. (2018). In T. Dreier & G. Schulze (Eds.). Urheberrechtsgesetz (5th ed.). Munich: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, P. M. (2004). Property, privacy and personal data. Harvard Law Review, 117, 2055–2128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Specht, L. (2017). Das Verhältnis zwischen Datenrechten und Datenschutz. GRUR Int., 12, 1040–1047.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spindler, G. (2016). Digitale Wirtschaft—analoges Recht: Braucht das BGB ein Update? JZ, 17, 805–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stree, W., & Hecker, B. (2014). In A. Schönke & H. Schröder (Eds.). Strafgesetzbuch: Kommentar (29th ed.). Munich: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stresemann, C. (2015). In F. J. Säcker, et al. (Eds.). Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch Band 1 (7th. ed.). Munich: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G. (2017). In F. J. Säcker, et al. (Eds.). Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch Band 6 (7th ed.). Munich: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welp, J. (1988). Datenveränderung (§303a StGB)—Teil 1. IuR, 443–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiebe, A. (2015). In G. Spindler & F. Schuster (Eds.). Recht der elektronischen Medien: Kommentar (3rd ed.). Munich: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiebe, A., & Schur, N. (2017). Ein Recht an industriellen Daten im verfassungsrechtlichen Spannungsverhältnis zwischen Eigentumsschutz, Wettbewerbs- und Informationsfreiheit. ZUM, 6, 461–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zech, H. (2015a). Daten als Wirtschaftsgut—Überlegungen zu einem “Recht des Datenerzeugers”. CR, 3, 137–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zech, H. (2015b). “Industrie 4.0”—Rechtsrahmen für eine Datenwirtschaft im digitalen Binnenmarkt. GRUR, 12,1151–1160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zieger, C., & Smirra, N. (2013). Fallstricke bei Big Data-Anwendungen—Rechtliche Gesichtspunkte bei der Analyse fremder Datenbestände. MMR, 7, 418–421.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Münster, Münster, Germany

    Thomas Hoeren & Philip Bitter

Authors
  1. Thomas Hoeren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Philip Bitter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Hoeren .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Systems, University of Münster, Münster, Germany

    Katrin Bergener

  2. Department of Information Systems, University of Münster, Münster, Germany

    Michael Räckers

  3. Department of Information Systems, University of Münster, Münster, Germany

    Armin Stein

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hoeren, T., Bitter, P. (2019). (Re)Structuring Data Law: Approaches to Data Property. In: Bergener, K., Räckers, M., Stein, A. (eds) The Art of Structuring. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06234-7_28

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation