[1] BALKIN, Jack. Digital speech and democratic culture: A theory of freedom of expression

for the information society. New York University Law Review. 2004, roč. 79, s. 1–58.
[2] BURGESS, Jean a Joshua GREEN. YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture. 2. vyd. Polity Press, 2018. ISBN 978-0-7456-6019-6.

[3] ELKIN-KOREN, Niva. Fair Use by Design. UCLA Law Review [online]. 2017, roč. 64, č. 22 [cit. 24.09.2020]. Dostupné z: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3217839

[4] ENGSTROM, Evan a Nick FEAMSTER. The Limits of Filtering [online]. Engine, 2017 [cit. 28.05.2020]. Dostupné z: https://www.engine.is/the-limits-of-filtering

[5] ERICKSON, Kristofer a M KRETSCHMER. „This Video is Unavailable": Analyzing Copyright Takedown of User-Generated Content on YouTube. JIPITEC : Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law. 2018, roč. 9

[6] GEIGER, Christophe a Elena IZYUMENKO. Copyright on the Human Rights’ Trial: Redefi- ning the Boundaries of Exclusivity Through Freedom of Expression. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law. 2014, roč.45, s. 316–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-014-0181-3

[7] HUSOVEC, Martin a João QUINTAIS. How to License Article 17? Exploring the Imple- mentation Options for the New EU Rules on Content-Sharing Platforms. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2019, s. 1–27. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3463011

[8] JOHNSON, Eric. Full Q&A: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki talks about child safety, the Go- ogle walkout, and AI on Recode Decode [online]. 2019 [cit. 27.09.2020]. Dostupné z: https://www.vox.com/podcasts/2019/3/11/18259303/youtube-susan-wojcicki-child-com- ments-videos-google-walkout-kara-swisher-decode-podcast-interview

[9] KELLER, Paul. Article 17 stakeholder dialogue: What we have learned so far – Part 1 - Kluwer Copyright Blog. In: Kluwer Copyright Blog [online]. 2020 [cit. 28.05.2020]. Dostupné z: http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/01/13/article-17-stakeholder-dialogue-what- we-have-learned-so-far-part-1/?doing_wp_cron=1590693562.1587688922882080078125

[10] LEE, Yin Harn. Copyright and Freedom of Expression: A Literature Review [online]. CREA- Te, 2015 [cit. 24.09.2020]. Dostupné z: DOI:10.5281/zenodo.18132

[11] OECD, Graham VICKERY a Sacha WUNSCH-VINCENT. Participative Web and User-Created Content [online]. 2007 [cit. 26.09.2020]. Dostupné z: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/ content/publication/9789264037472-en

[12] QUINTAIS, João. Copyright in the Age of Online Access: Alternative Compensation Systems in

EU Law. Wolters Kluwer, 2017. ISBN 978-90-411-8667-6.

[13] SENFTLEBEN, Martin. Bermuda Triangle – Licensing , Filtering and Privileging User- Generated Content Under the New Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market “. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2018, s. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3367219

[14] TÓTH, Andrea. Algorithmic Copyright Enforcement and AI: Issues and Potential Soluti- ons through the Lens of Text and Data Mining. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Techno- logy. 2019, roč. 13, s. 361. https://doi.org/10.5817/MUJLT2019-2-9

[15] URBAN, Jennifer M., Joe KARAGANIS a Brianna L. SCHOFIELD. Notice and takedown: Online service provider and rightsholder accounts of everyday practice. Journal of the Copyright Society of the USA. 2017, roč. 64, č. 3, s. 317–410. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/hp9fz

[16] WONG, Mary W. S. „Transformative" User-Generated Content in Copyright Law: Infrin- ging Derivative Works or Fair Use? Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law. 2009, roč. 11, č. 4, s. s. 1075-1139.

[17] Art. 17 DSMCD: a class of its own? How to implement Art. 17 into the existing national copyright acts, including a comment on the recent German Discussion Draft - Part 1. In: Kluwer Copyright Blog [online]. 16. 7. 2020 [cit. 25.09.2020]. Dostupné z: http://copyright- blog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/07/16/art-17-dsmcd-a-class-of-its-own-how-to-implement-art-17- into-the-existing-national-copyright-acts-including-a-comment-on-the-recent-german-discus- sion-draft-part-1/

[18] Entwurf eines Zweiten Gesetzes zur Anpassung des Urheberrechts an die Erfordernisse des digi- talen Binnenmarktes [online]. 2020. s. 34. [cit. 23.09.2020]. Dostupné z: https:// www.bmjv.de/SharedDocs/Gesetzgebungsverfahren/Dokumente/DiskE_II_Anpassung %20Urheberrecht_digitaler_Binnenmarkt.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2

[19] How Google Fights Piracy [online]. 2018 [cit. 24.09.2020]. Dostupné z: https:// www.blog.google/documents/27/How_Google_Fights_Piracy_2018.pdf

[20] Öffentliche Konsultation zur Umsetzung der EU-Richtlinie im Urheberrecht (DSM-RL (EU) 2019/790) [online]. Google a YouTube, 2019 [cit. 23.09.2020]. Dostupné z: https:// www.bmjv.de/SharedDocs/Gesetzgebungsverfahren/DE/Konsultation_Umsetzung_EU_Richtli- nien_Urheberrecht.html?nn=6712350

[21] Targeted consultation addressed to the participants to the stakeholder dialogue on Article 17 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market [online]. Evropská komise, [cit. 24.09.2020]. Dostupné z: https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/runner/4fd43123-6008-a214- f572-4ecd331b9e0e

JUDIKATURA

[21] Rozsudek SDEU (čvrtého senátu) ze dne 16. 7. 2009 ve věci C-5/08, Infopaq, ECLI:EU:C:2009:465.

[22] Rozsudek SDEU (třetího senátu) ze dne 21. 10. 2010 ve věci C-467/08, Padawan, ECLI:EU:C:2010:620.

[23] Rozsudek SDEU (třetího senátu) ze dne 26. 4. 2012 ve věci C 510/10, DR a TV 2 Denmark, ECLI:EU:C:2012:244.

[24] Rozsudek SDEU (čtvrtého senátu) ze dne 10. 4. 2014 ve věci C 435/12, ACI Adam, ECLI:EU:C:2014:254.

[25] Rozsudek SDEU (třetího senátu) ze dne 24. 11. 2011 ve věci C-70/10, Scarlet Extended, ECLI:EU:C:2011:771.

[26] Rozsudek SDEU (čtvrtého senátu) ze dne 27. 3. 2014 ve věci C-314/12, UPC Telekabel, ECLI:EU:C:2014:192.

[27] Rozsudek SDEU (třetího senátu) ze dne 16. 2. 2012 ve věci C-360/10, SABAM, ECLI: EU:C:2012:8.

[28] Rozsudek ESLP ze dne 10. 1. 2013 ve věci Ashby Donald a další proti Francii, stížnost č. 36769/08.

[29] Rozsudek ESLP ze dne 19. 2. 2013 ve věci Neij a Sunde Kolmisoppi proti Švédsku, stížnost č. 40397/12.