This book represents the product of intensive research by experts of intellectual property law, who employ rigorous interpretative methodologies while keeping an eye on comparative law and on the effects of new technologies on law. The idea for this book sprang from often heated debates among intellectual property scholars on the possibilities and the limits of copyright. The book draws on the research path started in a seminar held at the Faculty of Law of the University of Trento on December 6, 2013, titled “Copyright, technological evolution, and balance of rights”, a path that continued during the following months. The goal of the research, concretely reached through this book, was to discuss the balancing of rights in controversies where one of the conflicting rights is copyright, in light of the revolutionary mutation that digital technologies brought with them. Examples of these troublesome conflicts are the clash of fundamental rights, intensified by the so-called propertization of copyright; the contrast between users’ access to works of authorship and the principle of exhaustion of the distribution right; the situation of conflict that exists when the protection of privacy and personal data need to be partially or totally constricted to obtain an effective enforcement of copyright; and the need for a balance between users’ access to scientific literature and exclusive control of publishers. Copyright law has been broadening its scope for decades. International treaties are often at the origin of this enlargement, which is therefore a pervasive phenomenon. This increasing wideness implies that copyright often faces other rights (frequently, fundamental rights), creating the issue of deciding what right prevails. Decision makers need to take into account these recurring conflicts and to try to solve them. This need shows both at the lawmaking level and at the concrete case level. Sometimes the latter situation is a consequence of the former: when lawmakers do not consider the problem of balancing copyright with other rights, judges need to find a correct solution for the specific case.