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).

The impact of Medicare, Medicaid and Schip Extension Act of 2007 (MMSEA) on the long term acute care hospitals

The Long Term Acute Care Hospitals (LTACH), which serve medically complex patients, have grown tremendously in recent years, by expanding the number of Medicare patient admissions and thus increasing Medicare expenditures (Stark 2004). In an attempt to mitigate the rapid growth of the LTACHs and reduce related Medicare expenditures, Congress enacted Section 114 of P.L. 110-173 (§114) of the Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act (MMSEA) in December 29, 2007 to regulate the LTCAHs industry. MMSEA increased the medical necessity reviews for Medicare admissions, imposed a moratorium on new LTCAHs, and allowed the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to recoup Medicare overpayments for unnecessary admissions. ^ This study examines whether MMSEA impacted LTACH admissions, operating margins and efficiency. These objectives were analyzed by comparing LTACH data for 2008 (post MMSEA) and data for 2006-2007 (pre-MMSEA). Secondary data were utilized from the American Hospital Association (AHA) database and the American Hospital Directory (AHD).^ This is a longitudinal retrospective study with a total sample of 55 LTACHs, selected from 396 LTACHs facilities that were fully operational during the study period of 2006-2008. The results of the research found no statistically significant change in total Medicare admissions; instead there was a small but not statistically significant reduction of 5% in Medicare admissions for 2008 in comparison to those for 2006. A statistically significant decrease in mean operating margins was confirmed between the years 2006 and 2008. The LTACHs' Technical Efficiency (TE), as computed by Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), showed significant decrease in efficiency over the same period. Thirteen of the 55 LTACHs in the sample (24%) in 2006 were calculated as “efficient” utilizing the DEA analysis. This dropped to 13% (7/55) in 2008. Longitudinally, the decrease in efficiency using the DEA extension technique (Malmquist Index or MI) indicated a deterioration of 10% in efficiency over the same period. Interestingly, however, when the sample was stratified into high efficient versus low efficient subgroups (approximately 25% in each group), a comparison of the MIs suggested a significant improvement in Efficiency Change (EC) for the least efficient (MI 0.92022) and reduction in efficiency for the most efficient LTACHs (MI = 1.38761) over same period. While a reduction in efficiency for the most efficient is unexpected, it is not particularly surprising, since efficiency measure can vary over time. An improvement in efficiency, however, for the least efficient should be expected as those LTACHs begin to manage expenses (and controllable resources) more carefully to offset the payment/reimbursement pressures on their margins from MMSEA.^

Commentary on International Copyright Act 1838

Legislation providing that the British monarch could, by Order in Council, grant copyright protection, within Britain and its Dominions, to the authors of literary works first published abroad for a period specified within the Order but not exceeding the domestic copyright term. The Act provided the first occasion on which the British legislature offered the possibility of copyright protection for the work of foreign authors. Its timing is indicative of the widespread attention which the issue of international copyright had begun to attract in Britain, on the continent, and in the United States. The commentary describes the background to the legislation in relation to British attitudes to the importation of foreign works throughout the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and in the context of early nineteenth century debates before the courts as to whether the work of foreign authors was in any event protected under existing legislative measures (see also: uk_1854). The commentary also explores the reasons for the failure of the British government to successfully negotiate any bilateral agreements under the legislation, but nevertheless suggests that the 1838 Act provided an important platform upon which to build a subsequent and more successful regime of international copyright protection (see also: uk_1844; uk_1852; uk_1886).

The Renegotiation extension act of 1979 : hearing before the Subcommittee on General Oversight and Renegotiation of the Committee on Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs, House of Representatives, Ninety-sixth Congress, first session, on H.R. 2002 ... March 22, 1979.

"Serial 96-19."

Cantaloups; report on escape-clause investigation no. 7-98, under the provisions of section 7 of the Trade agreements extension act of 1951, as amended.

Mode of access: Internet.

Violins and violas; report to the President on escape-clause investigation no. 55 under the provisions of section 7 of the Trade agreements extension act of 1951, as amended.

Mode of access: Internet.

Guidelines for prevention of transmission of human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis B virus to health-care and public-safety workers : a response to P.L. 100-607, The Health Omnibus Programs Extension Act of 1988.

Item 499-F-3.

The renewable resources extension act /

Mode of access: Internet.

Patent term extension and pharmaceutical innovation [microform] : hearing before the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight of the Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, Ninety-seventh Congress, second session, February 4, 1982.

"No. 155."

Glendo Unit of the Missouri River Basin Project Contract Extension Act of 2005 : report (to accompany S. 592).

"October 27, 2005."

Trade agreements extension act of 1951. Hearings before the Committee on Finance, United States Senate, Eighty-second Congress, first session, on H. R. 1612, an act to extend the authority of the President to enter into trade agreements under section 350 of the Tariff act of 1930, as amended, and for other purposes.

Hearings held Feb. 22-Apr. 6, 1951.

Background information concerning the Emergency health insurance extension act of 1975 : background information /

At head of title: 94th Congress, 1st session. Committee print.

Fact sheet : Health professions educational assistance act of 1976 (PL 94-484): amended by Health services extension act of 1977 (PL 95-83, Title III) and Health professions education amendments of l977 (PL 95-215).

Mode of access: Internet.

The Life of an Author: Samuel Egerton Brydges and the Copyright Act 1814

The history of literary copyright in nineteenth century Britain is dominated - understandably perhaps - by a preoccupation with the passing and impact of the Copyright Amendment Act 1842, so ably lobbied for by Sir Thomas Noon Talfourd. This article, however, draws attention away from the 1842 Act towards the Copyright Act 1814, the first legislative provision within British copyright law to introduce a lifetime term of protection for the author. Why and on what basis did the legislature do so?
In bringing a renewed attention to this often overlooked legislative measure, we consider the context and logic that underpinned to grant of a copyright term that was tethered to the life of the author. In doing so, we might also find a useful prism through which to look afresh at current copyright debates concerning the appropriate nature and scope of copyright protection in the 21st century.

Commentary on Copyright Act 1814

Legislation replacing the Statute of Anne 1710 (uk_1710) and providing that copyright in a literary work would last for twenty-eight years from the time of publication, but that ‘if the author shall be living' at the end of that period then the work was to be protected ‘for the residue of his natural life'.
The commentary explores the background to the legislation, and in particular the controversy over the library deposit provision in the wake of the decision in Beckford v. Hood (1798) (uk_1798a). The commentary suggests that the introduction of the reversionary lifetime copyright term had more to do with the opportunistic and timely intervention of one Member of Parliament (Samuel Egerton Brydges) than with any principled or considered position adopted on the part of the legislature.