BREAKING: Commission unveils new copyright package

Image result for breaking newsFurther to the proposal for a regulation on cross-border portability of online content services in late 2015, the European Commission has just unveiled its new set of proposals to ameliorate EU copyright and achieve a fully functioning digital single market.

These - among other things - include proposals for a new directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market and a regulation on certain online transmissions of broadcasting organisations and retransmissions. Both instruments, if adopted in their current form, will have a deep impact on the EU copyright framework, particularly with regard to online uses of copyright works, responsibilities of hosting providers, users’ freedoms, and authors’ contracts.
A more detailed analysis of relevant documents will be provided soon: stay tuned!

But here's an immediate question: Is the new package different from the leaked versions [here and here]? Well, yes, to some extent.

Taking the proposed directive, for instance, it appears that:

(1) in relation to the so called 'value gap' [Recitals 38 and 39, and Article 13], the overall tone appears more stringent than the one used in the version that this very blog leaked a few days ago. 

In particular, Recital 38 of the actual proposal requires any hosting providers that give access to large amounts [what's the threshold?] of copyright works to "take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure protection of works or other subject-matter, such as implementing effective technologies [read: filtering technologies]. This obligation should also apply when the information society service providers are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC." 

Commissioners Ansip and Oettinger 
How can this be achieved without also reforming Article 15 of said directive is unclear in my opinion. Yet, regrettably the proposed directive fails to address what relationship it has with Directive 2000/31 ...

(2) in relation to the new press publishers' right [Article 11], while the version leaked a few days ago spoke of 'news publications', the actual proposal prefers the [apparently broader] term 'press publications'. 

In addition, Recital 34 in the proposal states that the right granted to press publishers "should have the same scope as the rights of reproduction and making available to the public provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC, insofar as digital uses are concerned. They should also be subject to the same provisions on exceptions and limitations as those applicable to the rights provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC including the exception on quotation for purposes such as criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive" 

All in all, while this Recital appears possibly aimed at being GS Media-proof, it appears odd that reference is made to the making available right, instead of the broader communication to the public right, of which the making available right is part. In addition, GS Media was about the right of communication to the public right, not the making available right.

Follow the official presentation

You can follow the presentation of the content of this new copyright package by Commissioners Ansip and Oettinger this afternoon at 15:15 CET by using this GS Media-approved link.

Wish to discuss all this?

I am organising two new events to review and discuss all these recent developments, including the feasibility (and desirability as such) of proposed Commission action.

  • The first event will take place on 5 October 2016 at the beautiful Tower Bridge offices of RPC. Places are limited (with some tickets available for full time students), to provide everybody with the opportunity to discuss fully the present and future of EU copyright. You can find further details and register here.
  • The second event will be streamed on YouTube on 6 October 2016: participants can decide to follow it live or watch it at any later time of their choice. This second option is for those who are unable to attend the event on 5 October 2016, eg because based outside London. You can find further details and register here.
[Originally published on The IPKat on 14 September 2016]

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Filmspeler, the right of communication to the public, and unlawful streams: a landmark decision

Image
Yesterday this blog  reported  that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has issued yet another long-awaited judgment, this being the  decision in  Filmspeler , C-527/15 . At the time of writing, the text of the ruling was not yet available. Now that it is and having had a chance to read it, it seems to me that – despite its highly specific factual background (sale of multimedia players enabling free access to audiovisual works protected by copyright without the consent of the rightholders) - Filmspeler is a MAJOR copyright decision. The reason is essentially two-fold: ·         First, because the Court relaxed the notion of what amounts to an ‘indispensable intervention  [the judgment does not even contain a reference to the intervention being ‘indispensable’]  for the sake of the right of communication to the public within Article 3(1) of the  InfoSoc Directive . This means – as I also s...
Read more

Italian court finds Google and YouTube liable for failing to remove unlicensed content (but confirms eligibility for safe harbour protection)

Image
Topazio, one of the soap operas produced by Delta TV Is YouTube an active host and, if so, ineligible for the safe harbour protection within Article 14 of the  E-commerce Directive ? As readers with an interest in intermediary liability know, this is not a novel question: indeed, it has been already raised a number of times before national courts. A few weeks ago, in a  decision available on Marchi & Brevetti  (sentenza 7 April 2017 No 1928, RG 38113/2013,  Delta TV v Google and YouTube  – judge rapporteur: Guglielmo Rende), the Tribunale di Torino (Turin Court of First Instance) revisited this issue, and provided an interesting response. Readers might recall that this decision follows other interim rulings commented on this blog  here  and  here . Background Back in 2013 Delta TV, which produces and owns the copyright to a number of South-American soap operas (including audiovisual works for the Italian, Monaco, Swis...
Read more

Brands and online ecommerce platforms: a tainted relationship?

Image
What has happened to online ecommerce platforms? Over the past few months news reports have multiplied – or, perhaps, their underlying issues have acquired greater visibility – that brand owners have been increasingly voicing criticisms against, sued, or discontinued sales on ecommerce sites. In particular, after the  criticisms  made against Alibaba, it seems that Amazon is now making the headlines. Let’s have a quick look at what has happened over the past few months. Court actions First, there have been legal proceedings being brought by trade mark owners, claiming a direct responsibility of Amazon in the sale of counterfeits or invoking a right to prevent sales on such platform. An example of the former is the  lawsuit  filed by Daimler against Amazon in late 2017 in the US District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle. The well-known  German car manufacturer argues that Amazon is directly responsible for the “ offer fo...
Read more