EU Copyright Law, Lobbying and Transparency of Policy-Making: The cases of sound recordings term extension and orphan works provisions

The objective of this paper is to discuss EU lobbying in the area of copyright. Legislation needs to regulate the legal position of various different stakeholders in a balanced manner. However, a number of EU copyright provisions brought into effect over recent years were highly controversial and have led to suggestions that powerful lobbying forces may have had some influence. This article investigates the effects of lobbying on copyright law-making in Europe. A specific comparative and multi-faceted analysis is provided of the legislative process for two recently adopted directives: 2011/77/EU which extends the term of protection of sound recordings and 2012/28/EU which introduces certain permitted uses of orphan works (some references are also made to the ACTA case). Firstly, a short presentation is given of the legal bases for the EU consultation process and lobbying. Next, an analysis is provided of the two cases, taking into consideration the policy-making procedures (with special focus on how the consultation process was handled), the legal solutions proposed and adopted and the various stakeholders’ claims. Lastly, it asks why some interest groups were successful and some others failed (the analysis identifies two types of factor for the effectiveness of lobbying: those resulting from stakeholders’ actions and those connected with the consultation process).

Why Cherry-Picking Never Leads to Harmonisation: The Case of the Limitations on Copyright under Directive 2001/29/EC

The article examines whether the norms laid down in the Directive in relation to the exceptions and limitations on copyright and related rights can be conducive to a sensible degree of harmonisation across the European Union. Before discussing the degree of harmonisation achieved so far by the Directive, the first part gives a short overview of the main characteristics of the list of exceptions and limitations contained in Article 5 of the Directive. A comprehensive review of the implementation of each limitation by the Member States is beyond the scope of this article. The following section takes a closer look at three examples of limitations that have led to legislative changes at the Member State level as express measures towards the implementation of the Information Society Directive, that is, the limitations for the benefit of libraries, for teaching and research, and for persons with a disability. These exceptions and limitations were later on also identified by the European Commission as key elements in the deployment of a digital knowledge economy. The analysis will show that the implementation of the provisions on limitations in the Information Society Directive did not, and probably cannot, yield the expected level of harmonisation across the European Union and that, as a consequence, there still exists a significant degree of uncertainty for the stakeholders regarding the extent of permissible acts with respect to copyright protected works.

UsedSoft and the Big Bang Theory: Is the e-Exhaustion Meteor about to Strike?

Since the UsedSoft ruling of the CJEU in 2012, there has been the distinct feeling that – like the big bang - UsedSoft signals the start of a new beginning. As we enter this brave new world, the Copyright Directive will be read anew: misalignments in the treatment of physical and digital content will be resolved; accessibility and affordability for consumers will be heightened; and lock-in will be reduced as e-exhaustion takes hold. With UsedSoft as a precedent, the Court can do nothing but keep expanding its own ruling. For big bang theorists, it is only a matter of time until the digital first sale meteor strikes non-software downloads also. This paper looks at whether the UsedSoft ruling could indeed be the beginning of a wider doctrine of e-exhaustion, or if it is simply a one-shot comet restrained by provisions of the Computer Program Directive on which it was based. Fighting the latter corner, we have the strict word of the law; in the UsedSoft ruling, the Court appears to willingly bypass the international legal framework of the WCT. As far as expansion goes, the Copyright Directive was conceived specifically to implement the WCT, thus the legislative intent is clear. The Court would not, surely, invoke its modicum of creativity there also... With perhaps undue haste in a digital market of many unknowns, it seems this might well be the case. Provoking the big bang theory of e-exhaustion, the UsedSoft ruling can be read as distinctly purposive, but rather than having copyright norms in mind, the standard for the Court is the same free movement rules that underpin the exhaustion doctrine in the physical world. With an endowed sense of principled equivalence, the Court clearly wishes the tangible and intangible rules to be aligned. Against the backdrop of the European internal market, perhaps few legislative instruments would staunchly stand in its way. With firm objectives in mind, the UsedSoft ruling could be a rather disruptive meteor indeed.