BREAKING: Politico publishes (part of) draft copyright report by MEP Comodini Cachia

MEP Therese
Comodini Cachia
Politico Europe (PRO version) has just published part [so far only the odd pages] of the text of the draft report that MEP Comodini Cachia is preparing on the European Commission's copyright package - including the proposal for a directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market [Katposts here] - at the request of the European Parliament. 

The IPKat has been able to access this part of the text of the draft report, and here are some of the most interesting proposals included therein.

Press publishers' right to disappear and be replaced by a presumption of representation

MEP Comodini Cachia appears willing to suggest that this proposed new sui generis right should be dumped subject to a significant re-thinking. 

In particular, the draft report proposes to re-write Article 11(1) of the proposed directive as follows:

"Member States shall provide publishers of press publications with a presumption of representation of authors of literary works contained therein and the legal capacity to sue in their own name when defending the rights of such authors for the digital use of their press publications."

The future of the
proposed
press publishers' right?
Together with a re-writing of Article 11(1) comes also the deletion of Article 11(4). This paragraph, in the Commission's original proposal, would have made the new press publishers' right subject to a 20-year duration.

Value gap proposal to be clarified

In relation to the so called value gap proposal in Article 13, in her draft report MEP Comodini Cachia notes how the liability regime envisaged therein is complementary to the one already established in the E-commerce Directive, to the extent that Article 13 seeks to ensure the effective implementation of agreements concluded between online service providers and rightholders for the use of works.

In this sense, Article 13 should provide clarity as to which online service providers it refers to, and should use the same classification employed in the E-Commerce.

According to MEP Comodini Cachia, the implementation of agreements between online service providers and rightholders may be carried through technological measures, but these must be respectful of the copyright acquis in its entirety, including relevant exceptions and limitations.

I have only seen part of the newly worded Recital 38, but MEP Comodini Cachia proposes to clarify that the obligation of online service providers to conlcude licensing agreements with rightholders only arises when they are "actively and directly involved in the making available of user uploaded content to the content and where this activity is not of a mere technical, automatic and passive nature".

***


Further details on the draft report will be provided as soon as they become available: stay tuned!
[Originally published on The IPKat on 8 March 2017]

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

AG Szpunar advises CJEU not to extend direct liability for trade mark infringement to operators of online marketplaces

Image
Is the operator of an online marketplace (more specifically: a hybrid marketplace, which also provides logistics assistance to third-party sellers through a fulfilment programme) using third-party trade marks itself, in accordance with Article 9(2)   EUTMR , when it displays, on its marketplace, advertisements of independent sellers’ goods that infringe such trade mark rights, which it also delivers to end customers? Is the perception of a reasonably well informed and reasonably observant internet user relevant when undertaking such an assessment? Gigi was also awaiting her delivery ... These are the key issues on which the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has been requested to provide guidance.  Joined cases  Louboutin/Amazon , C-148/21 and C-184/21  are referrals for a preliminary ruling made in the context of highly similar proceedings pending before, respectively, Luxembourg’s Tribunal d’arrondissement (C-148/21) and Belgium’s Tribunal de l’entreprise francophone de Br
Read more

The Louboutin/Amazon cases (C-148/21 and C-184/21) and primary liability under EU trade mark law

Image
Merpel will be also spending the weekend shopping for (stiletto heel) shoes   Last year The IPKat   reported   on a new referral to the Court of Justice of European Union (CJEU) from Luxembourg’s Tribunal d’arrondissement, asking whether the operator of a hybrid marketplace could be considered directly liable for trade mark infringement due to the presence of third-party listings of infringing goods on its platform. That referral ( C-148/21 ) has now been joined to another one ( C-184/21 ) made in separate but highly similar proceedings pending between the same parties (Louboutin and Amazon) before the Tribunal de l’entreprise francophone de Bruxelles. In a nutshell, these joined cases are asking the CJEU to determine whether and, if so, at what conditions the operator of an online marketplace may be found liable under Article 9(2) of the  EU Trade Mark Regulation 2017/1001  (EUTMR) for the display of advertisements and the delivery of infringing goods that are offered for sale and pla
Read more

Image rights and the unauthorized use of one's own portrait on cigarette packs

Image
Plescia's image and the warning that "Smoking causes strokes and disability" Can someone's own image be used without permission? This question may have different answers, depending on both the context in which the relevant image is used and the legal system considered. With particular regard to the latter, in countries that envisage 'image rights' (or publicity rights), the availability of protection may be even irrespective of the context in which one's own image is being used. Italian law This is for instance the case of Italy which, similarly to other continental European jurisdictions, has a long-standing history of protecting image rights.  The relevant provision in the Italian Civil Code, ie  Article 10 , states that if one's own image is displayed or published outside the cases in which the display or publication is allowed by law, or in situations which are prejudicial to the honour or reputation of the person, a court may
Read more