When a TV programme is transmitted via direct injection, who makes the act of communication to the public?

Not to worry:
a direct injection
of copyright cases
is already in sight
With the summer break close to an end, new copyright adventures are just about to happen at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for the joy of aficionados everywhere in the EU and beyond.

While the first copyright decision will be that in Case C-201/13 Deckmyn (notion of parody under Article 5(3)(k) of the InfoSoc Directive[herehere and here] on 3 September, last Friday the UK Intellectual Property Office circulated notice of a new case that has made its way to everybody's favourite court.

It is Case C-325/14 SBS Belgium, a reference from ... Belgium, seeking clarification as to the following:

Does a broadcasting organisation which transmits its programmes exclusively via the technique of direct injection [...] make a communication to the public within the meaning of Article 3 of [the InfoSoc Directive]?

First of all, what does "direct injection" mean?

Direct injection refers to the situation where the broadcasting company connects to the network of one or more cable companies directly. The programme in question is not first broadcast via ether or satellite and then retransmitted via cable as usually is the case, but is broadcast for the first time via cable.

So the question referred to the CJEU is not about whether there is an act of communication to the public, but rather who makes it: is it the broadcaster, even if it does not broadcast directly to the public? Is it the subject (different from the broadcaster) who broadcasts it for the first time via cable? Is it both?

Who knows.

A thorough explanation of the background to this case can be found on helpful EU resource EU Law Radarwhere - quite interestingly - this reference made its first appearance on 9 July last.

Why is that interesting? Because the UK IPO circulated its notice only two days ago. This would not be too bad, if not for the fact that those who wish to comment on this case must hurry up: the deadline for emailing your thoughts to policy@ipo.gov.uk is in fact 4th September 2014.
When a TV programme is transmitted via direct injection, who makes the act of communication to the public? When a TV programme is transmitted via direct injection, who makes the act of communication to the public? Reviewed by Eleonora Rosati on Sunday, August 24, 2014 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.