 |
| Commissioner Oettinger was very active on Twitter this morning ... |
This morning the plenary of
the European Parliament voted on the draft Report on the implementation of the InfoSoc
Directive, as originally drafted [here] by MEP and Pirate Party member Julia
Reda and as approved (with
amendments) [here] by the Legal Committee a few days ago.
By 445 votes to 65 (with 32 abstentions), the Parliament
adopted a non-binding resolution [UPDATE on 10/7/2015 at 11:14 am GMT: the text of the resolution is available here] which assesses the implementation of
the key aspects of this EU directive ahead of upcoming Commission plans [here] to update
the relevant legislative framework in the area of copyright.
Whilst the consolidated version of the Report as passed by the
Parliament is yet to be made available, it would appear that this morning's
vote was mostly remarkable for two distinct aspects.
Freedom of panorama not to be restricted
First, the plenary removed the proposal by MEP Jean-Marie
Cavada to restrict the scope
of freedom of panorama [here and here], as
currently envisaged in Article 5(3)(h) of the InfoSoc Directive.
This provision allows Member States to
introduce into their own national copyright laws an exception to the rights of
reproduction, communication/making available to the public and distribution to
allow "use of works, such as works of architecture or sculpture, made
to be located permanently in public places".
 |
| ... Tweeting about freedom of panorama |
In her original draft Report, Ms Reda had proposed that this
optional exception [Member
States like Italy and France do not currently envisage it] be
made mandatory for Member States to have into their own legal regimes.
The version passed by the Legal Committee however contained a
recommendation that "the commercial use of photographs, video footage or other
images of works which are permanently located in physical public places should always be subject to prior
authorisation from the authors or any proxy acting for them".
This morning the Parliament removed such proposal
to restrict freedom of panorama. Moreover EU Commissioner Günther Oettinger clarified that the EU would not limit freedom of
panorama, so that "[p]eople can take pictures of whatever they see in public places." Wait a second: does
this mean that the Commission intends to table proposals to amend the InfoSoc
Directive, particularly its optional system of exceptions and limitations in
Article 5 thereof? Who knows ...
No EU-wide ancillary right over news content
The second major news of the morning was that the Parliament also rejected proposals from a number of German MEPs
to introduce an EU-wide ancillary right over news
content.
Whilst readers may remember that not long time ago this idea
appeared to meet the favour of Commissioner Goettinger himself [here and here],
they will also remember that initiatives of this kind have been adopted in
Germany [here, here,and here] and Spain [here, here,
and here].
 |
| ... And forthcoming EU copyright reform (details of how yet to be defined though) |
Now it would appear that the idea of creative an EU-wide right
over news content may not be that likely to happen in the immediate future,
possibly also on consideration of the criticisms expressed even by the beneficiaries of the relevant levies at the German and
Spanish levels.
And now?
As mentioned, the resolution adopted by the Parliament is not a
binding one.
Arguably the ball is now back [but had it ever left it,
wonders Merpel] in
the Commission's court. This means that we have probably just to wait and
see whether and how the Commission intends to
reform copyright.
When will
this be? Again, who knows. But possibly sometime after the summer break.
EU Parliament rejects restrictions on freedom of panorama and ancillary right over news content
Reviewed by Eleonora Rosati
on
Thursday, July 09, 2015
Rating:
Reviewed by Eleonora Rosati
on
Thursday, July 09, 2015
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] Thou shalt not discriminate the Lego block over any other kind of product – GRUR speaks out on C-211/24](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWJYQUJNvYydrZcjwSHPuxd14xX3_48aBusHKBogY-Wg1BPSJSABbFFjmGiUV3aqG2npP9xYaIl1vtWK5AsqGOQPgRD2TWFLhyyc4xGm1fHDD-tt9kHcrSSgAyju2P9wSKz0VW6h7D5MD4Hxd9vREyxKYzlMRNXxxtxc3DiNsXppfVaxgSxAMV/s72-c/21742619125_7c9e53cd39_o.png)
![[Guest post] Comparison of wine and gin: the EUIPO’s unquestionable Similarity Tool](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNfTEBXiPVS0XjZi4mNE1OtXLxXiEp1PUgcUK7MMMXlfyTkO5SMXv-VCMXXNdS_F1XdMMxYca1VbBTGvvDeTVpo5x-5YwR7atQJmK3x32T8LACpf4308kht3nEtaxPwEPcGGrB0s5xjGktmQPOiVwPVLRO5JbW19qupc7xUtiVutvaWHow0OpBkA/s72-c/Picture%201.jpg)
![[Guest post] Muddying the waters of copyright – a rapid reaction to today’s IPEC decision which sees the sinking of the WaterRower’s claims for copyright protection](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7chFANC7ppmZl4_nlR6_hZEcg6cOhVEJNVXqki4p82BoVlcLFotuOXzHWYD5lKLiiK_kRoWeXmJjjaV2DpoKsAWq8U3LFioO5W_841a9gcfDIFjvZWcGqfnr0jWJNtyXptIYR_8bxCssaDkJ9KMokuSqy1g65Il7p2hPwo4MfRCEGoUPQJesvbg/s72-w400-c-h189/Screenshot%202024-11-11%20at%2018.20.45.png)
Posts
Oettinger's comments on freedom of panorama seem to suggest he thinks the provision has been implemented by all member states. In today's debate he said something like: "We (i.e. the Commission) think the principle should be that a free Europe should also involve the freedom to take photographs of monuments and buildings. This should not be limited. I just want to calm you down on that subject, there is no plan here." So he thinks everyone should have the freedom to take photographs of monuments and buildings, while in fact this is not currently the case in Belgium, France and Italy. Yet at the same time he mentions there is no plan. No plan to limit existing freedom of panorama provisions, or no plan whatsoever? The latter would seem to suggest either that the Commission is not currently striving to achieve said goal of everyone having the right to take pictures of works in the public domain, or that Oettinger thinks this ideal has already been realized (which would mean he's been thoroughly misinformed on the subject).
ReplyDeleteOettinger very clearly said he doesn't want to restrict freedom of panorama, so there will be no proposal to weaken 5(3)(h).
ReplyDeleteAs for expanding FOP, he was subtler in the debate (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/debate-details.html?date=20150709&detailBy=date#section0-4):
1) first he redefined "freedom of panorama", saying FOP is about *taking* pictures not *publishing* them (he said the EP debate was never about FOP);
2) then he said that cameras are just an extension of the eye, so taking a picture of something you see is as free as seeing it in the first place;
3) finally he concludes that there is freedom of panorama everywhere.
Too bad all of that is wrong.
1) True, the copyright directive is about the "making available" of copyrighted works, but people who ask freedom of panorama really are interested about the *publishing* (even to a small circle of friends), not just about the shooting.
2) Moreover, in some countries (especially Italy), even taking a photo is prohibited, by a quasi-copyright restriction on all cultural heritage: the camera is not at all a mere extension of the eye, in such countries. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Italian_cultural_heritage_on_the_Wikimedia_projects So, if he believes that, he should pass a directive to prohibit such quasi-copyright laws.
3) In conclusion, yes the EP proposal affected the freedom of panorama and yes we need a reform to extend freedom of panorama, even in the weakest definition proposed by the Commissioner.
He says the "save FOP" campaign was a marketing move, but his rhetorical tricks aren't any less annoying. I hope he did understand that half a million citizens were not just fooled by propaganda: they may have overreacted, but that only proves how much they cared and how only clear answers from the EU can reconcile the people with the copyright law.
Federico,
ReplyDelete(love the moniker, by the way)
At least here in the States, the notion of copyright does not mirror exactly the power of exclusivity that may be found in the patent world.
To wit: copyright does not exclude even an exact creation of the exact same thing by another.
I go somewhere and take a picture and publish that picture. I do have copyright in my published picture.
You step into the exact same place I was standing and you take your own picture - it looks exactly the same. You have every bit the full scope of copyright protection in your picture as I do in mine. NEITHER of us have a right though to stop the other from publishing their own work - even if the content of the work is exactly the same. Copyright just does NOT have that sense of exclusivity - it is not that "deep" of a right.
Leastwise, this is how it works here in the U.S. I do provide for the possibility that your sovereign has a different setup.
This is a fine exegesis of Günther Oettinger's utterances, which is far more than they would ever deserve if he weren't in a position of influence.
ReplyDeleteThe former premier of Baden-Württemberg is the fellow who transformed in an eulogy a certified nazi judge with blood on the robe into some sort of resistance fighter. He is also "renowned" for his foreign language abilities. As to his previous legislative record as EU-Energy-Commissioner or in BaWü, the less said, the better.
That Mrs. Merkel fomented the exile to Brussels of this embarrassment of a bloke is very telling of politics in general, and German ones in particular. Did she really feel threatened by him?