The Digital Single Market Strategy: too many (strategic?) omissions

As expected, following the leak of a full draft version [here], yesterday the EU Commission unveiled its Digital Single Market Strategy (DSMS). As EU Commission President, Jean-Claude Juncker, explained last year, this would include what "ambitious legislative steps" may be taken "towards a connected digital single market" so "to generate up to  EUR 250 billion of additional growth in Europe in the course of the mandate of the [present] Commission [= 5 years], thereby creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs, notably for younger job-seekers, and a vibrant knowledge-based society."

Following a bunch of statements [possibly copied and pasted from previous Commission documents, probably from the early 1990s] about how [in case you had not noticed yet] "[t]he Internet and digital technologies are transforming the lives we lead, the way we work – as individuals, in business, and in our communities as they become more integrated across all sectors", this document bullet-points the pillars on which the DSMS is to be bult, ie

(1) Better access for consumers and businesses to online goods and services across Europe: this requires the rapid removal of key differences between the online and offline worlds to break down barriers to cross-border online activity [from a copyright law and related business perspective, one would have expected this to include a discussion of whether - for instance - markets for second-hand digital works, eg ebook, audio- and video- files, videogames, etc, may and should be actually considered legitimate under EU law... Yet, regrettably in this Kat's opinion, the Strategy does not tackle the issue of digital exhaustion at all];

(2) Creating the right conditions for digital networks and services to flourish: this requires high-speed, secure and trustworthy infrastructures and content services, supported by the right regulatory conditions for innovation, investment, fair competition and a level playing field;

(3) Maximising the growth potential of our European digital economy: this requires investment in ICT infrastructures and technologies such as cloud computing and big data, and research and innovation to boost industrial competiveness as well as better public services, inclusiveness and skills.

Besides e-commerce and telecom rules, cross-border sales, interoperability and standardisation, proposed reforms include copyright and the role of internet service providers (ISPs).

Following the ambitious draft report by MEP Julia Reda on the implementation of the InfoSoc Directive [several amendments have been presented; following a vote in the Legal Committee of the European Parliament, there will be a final vote in plenary in early July] and earlier statements by individual EU Commissioners alike, the DSMS focus is (just) on 3 main issues: (1) (lack of) cross-border access to content and its portability; (2) text and data mining for non-commercial and commercial purposes alike; and (3) civil enforcement and the role of ISPs.

Unlike the leaked draft version of the DSMS, the actual DSMS is fairly vague as to how reform (if any) will be undertaken in these areas, the sole exception probably being a swift mention that the Cable and Satellite Directive may be reviewed to enlarge its scope to broadcasters' online transmissions. The only substantial information is the following:

An example of the vagueness of the DSMS wth regard to possible initiatives is civil enforcement:

The road to perdition
copyright reform?
"An effective and balanced civil enforcement system against commercial scale infringements of copyright is central to investment in innovation and job creation [this is a fairly standard, substance-free, statement]. In addition the rules applicable to activities of online intermediaries in relation to copyright protected works require clarification, given in particular the growing involvement of these intermediaries in content distribution [what does this mean? Is a revision of Ecommerce Directive safe harbours needed? If so, how should it be done to ensure that the enforcement system is "effective and balanced"? Not much concrete information is provided, if not that "the Commission will analyse the need for new measures to tackle illegal content on the Internet, with due regard to their impact on the fundamental right to freedom of expression and information, such as rigorous procedures for removing illegal content while avoiding the take down of legal content, and whether to require intermediaries to exercise greater responsibility and due diligence in the way they manage their networks and systems – a duty of care"]. Measures to safeguard fair remuneration of creators also need to be considered in order to encourage the future generation of content [what has this to do with enforcement? Isn't it rather a more contractual issue?]." 

All in all, the much-awaited DSMS does not give away much information about what actual measures will be proposed and in what form. Perhaps this is part of the Strategy itself, but only if one of the goals of the Commission was indeed not to create too many expectations (or fears) in relevant stakeholders ... 
The Digital Single Market Strategy: too many (strategic?) omissions The Digital Single Market Strategy: too many (strategic?) omissions Reviewed by Eleonora Rosati on Thursday, May 07, 2015 Rating: 5


  1. I thought that when an organisation which had outlived or (in this case) never lived its usefulness then those inside it, fearful of losing their jobs, made up work to do so as to look like they were doing something useful.

    It would be nice if "they" identified the problem to be solved and (this is never going to happen) the evidence for its existence.

    Perhaps you can understand that, but for the fact that I forgot to vote yesterday, I would have been within my rights to vote UKIP (I wouldn't, but it is things like things which tempt me to exercise my democratic vote in favour of those who want out of all of this).


  2. Oettinger had been clear he was going to do a few specific things on copyright, not go for a big bang. This fits with Timmermans' approach. Ansip had nowhere to go. Still, once you reopen a directive...
    On enforcement this screams "return of notice and action" - a phrase Ansip used in his press conference in March.

    It shows a degree of maturity that they recognise something isn't quite working with the safe harbours and are willing to look at this again, not just run for cover because it relates to the internet.

    The impact on physical goods and the trademark questions that the geoblocking section identifies will have major consequences though. We kept national marks in the TM reform but consumers will in the future be able to access offers across borders online and without being discriminated against based on location.

    It could also mark a completion of the single market sufficient to need a change subsidiary financing and bonus structures as sales targets and promotions budgets will no longer fit nationally.


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:

Powered by Blogger.