Press "Enter" to skip to content

Month: May 2015

Reforming of copyright in EU and considered policy options: Option 3 – Legislative intervention (Territoriality and absolute territorial restrictions in licensing)

Territoriality and absolute territorial restrictions in licensing

Sub-option a

This option would entail the creation of a new legal act (internal market legal basis) which sets out absolute territorial restriction in copyright licence contracts (or in contracts on the transfer or the assignment of rights) may be null and void because of its effect on the free movement of services.

Comments closed

White paper – Providing a legally sound space for user-generated content

Copyright law is relevant for UGC both because UGC creators are themselves potential holders of rights in a new work and because UGC can result from the re-use of pre-existing works protected by copyright. It should be noted that, while no precise definition of UGC has yet been established, the mere sharing of existing copyright protected content (“file-sharing”) does not constitute the creation of a new work. Nor does it imply a transformative use. UGC creators should be able to claim and exercise their rights as creators if they wish to, and they should understand the rules that apply to works that include parts of works that are the fruit of others’ creativity and investment. Right holders in pre-existing works should also be able to exercise their rights, as for any other use of their work.

Comments closed

What proposed Russian internet tax can cause?

As reported, working group evaluated consequences of internet tax. After implementation of this tax within three months 80% of movie theatres will be closed.

Comments closed

Padawan case: European court’s decision – third, fourth and fifth questions

Background, and first two questions were earlier

The third and fourth questions

It is appropriate to examine third and fourth questions together. It must be held from the outset that a system for financing fair compensation such as that described in relevant part of this judgment is compatible with the requirements of a ‘fair balance’ only if the digital reproduction equipment, devices and media concerned are liable to be used for private copying and, therefore, are likely to cause harm to the author of the protected work. There is therefore, having regard to those requirements, a necessary link between the application of the private copying levy to the digital reproduction equipment, devices and media and their use for private copying. Consequently, the indiscriminate application of the private copying levy to all types of digital reproduction equipment, devices and media, including in the case expressly mentioned by the national court in which they are acquired by persons other than natural persons for purposes clearly unrelated to private copying, does not comply with Article 5(2) of Directive 2001/29.

Comments closed

Reforming of copyright in EU and considered policy options – options 1 and 2

Option 1 – Status quo

No policy intervention. This option would consist in relying on the market to improve the availability of content online, on Member States to take full advantage of the total policy space available under the InfoSoc and other Directives, and on the courts, and notably the CJEU, to clarify provisions of the Directives relevant to the development of new uses and services.

Comments closed