European Union Directive On Copyright

Introduction

The efforts of the European Union (EU) to pass a new copyright law has just received a much-needed push. In a meeting held on Friday[1], ambassadors from a majority of EU member countries have agreed to the draft directive rules. With the final agreement on the draft rules expected to come before the February 14th deadline, we take a look at some of the provisions of this directive that have been the subject of debate recently.

What Is The New EU Directive On Copyright?

Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Copyright in the Digital Single Market or the Directive on Copyright is a proposed draft law in the European Union. The law is aimed at regulating the sharing of copyrighted materials across the internet. As per the draft rules, each member state will be allowed to pass its own copyright laws as long as they are in consonance with the directive. Hence, the draft proposal will bring standardization to copyright law in the EU region.

Object Of The Directive On Copyright

The new draft rules have been proposed with the aim of updating the sound principals of the existing copyright framework in EU with the new uses as well as with the new actors and business structures that have emerged with the development of technology. The directive was introduced after the realization that in the current digital ecosystem, the opportunities for users to access the copyrighted material has exponentially increased. The directive is aimed at enhancing the “cross-border access to copyright-protected content services, facilitate new uses in the fields of research and education, and clarify the role of online services in the distribution of works and other subject-matters.”[2]

The focus area of the directive remains the cross-border use of the copyright material. The Explanatory Memorandum explains that although there are certain exceptions for the use of copyrighted material at the national level in the field of education and research, their cross-border use remains uncertain. The directive will hence provide legal certainty for certain cross-border use of copyrighted material in three main areas. They are: “digital and cross-border uses in the field of education, text, and data mining in the field of scientific research, and preservation of cultural heritage.

Even though the draft rules are aimed at bringing more clarity regarding the cross-border use of copyrighted material, it has faced severe criticism from society. The Directive on Copyright has in total of 5 title chapters and 24 articles. But some of its components have received an unfavorable response due to the uncertainty of meaning and vagueness of implementation. Most prominent examples of this are Article 11 and Article 13.

Protection Of Press Publication Concerning Digital Uses

More commonly referred to as Article 11, this article requires the member states to grant the content creator with exclusive rights regarding the production of their works, performances, phonograms etc.[3] Also dubbed as the “link tax”, this Article would allow press publication to charge money from news aggregator services such as Google News and Bing news for showing snippets of their news. The protection granted by this article has not been extended to the scientific or academic publications and has also excluded “acts of hyperlinking which do not constitute communication to the public.

The main problem is the interpretation of the article. The draft rules don’t explicitly state how much of an article would be exempted from the protection granted under this article. The article also doesn’t explain what will amount to individual and non-commercial use. Many people fear that this can be interpreted and manipulated to suit the big players in the market.

Use Of Protected Content By Information Society Service Providers Storing And Giving Access To Large Amounts Of Works And Other Subject-Matter Uploaded By Their Users

More commonly referred to as Article 13, this article puts the onus of removing content that violates copyright on the Information Society Service Providers (ISSP) such as YouTube and Facebook. As per the current copyright laws, if the use of content online infringes upon the copyright of its creator, it will be for the creator to file a complaint against the infringer. But the current rules propose to shift this duty on the ISSPs and imposes a penalty on them if they fail to take action.

This Article has been a major point of contention for many people across the globe. Fears have been voiced that Article 13 will only benefit the big business houses and will lead to a situation where most of the content online will be controlled by a small number of large companies.[4] Many people have raised censorship concerns as well that entails the application of this article.

Impact Of EU Directive On Copyright In India

To understand the impact of draft rules on India, an analogy needs to be drawn between the copyright directive and the GDPR laws. When GDPR laws were passed by the EU, the tech companies all over the world adopted its guidelines. Facebook and Twitter took GDPR guidelines as the base denominator and applied it worldwide, including in India. This is the reason why people in India received the “We have Updated Our Privacy Policy” email as soon as the EU data protection laws were passed. The same could happen again once draft rules are adopted by the EU.

Conclusion

Although aimed at doing greater good, the Directive on Copyright is far from being a perfect law. It would be easy for the big companies to use the vague language in the directive to their own advantage and hence restricting the free flow of thought and creativity over the internet. If implemented improperly, it would open the floodgates of litigation and will change the way we use our internet today.

Author: Mr. Varun Sharma, Intern at Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorneys. In case of any queries please contact/write back to us at pratistha@iiprd.com.

References:

[1]Mehreen Khan, EU Countries finalise draft rules to update copyright law, Financial Times

[2]Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, 2018, (European Union)

[3]Art. 2, Directive Of The European Parliament And Of The Council On The Harmonisation Of Certain Aspects Of Copyright And Related Rights In The Information Society, 2001, (European Union)

[4]Susan Wojcicki, A Final Update on Our Priorities for 2018, Youtube Creator Blog, https://youtube-creators.googleblog.com/2018/10/a-final-update-on-our-priorities-for.html, (22/10/2018)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

20 − 15 =

Archives

  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • September 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010