The United Kingdom will not transpose the DSM Directive

The IPKat has just learned that, currently, UK Government has no plans to transpose the recently adopted Digital Single Market Directive 2019/790 [Katposts here] into its own legal system.

As it can be read on, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Chris Skidmore, has stated:
The deadline for implementing the EU Copyright Directive is 7 June 2021. The United Kingdom will leave the European Union on 31 January 2020 and the Implementation Period will end on 31 December 2020. The Government has committed not to extend the Implementation Period. Therefore, the United Kingdom will not be required to implement the Directive, and the Government has no plans to do so. Any future changes to the UK copyright framework will be considered as part of the usual domestic policy process.
Hence, the transposition of provisions like Articles 15 and 17 of that directive will not be part of the UK copyright debate ... at least for the time being.

The IPKat thanks John Shaw for bringing this news to the blog's attention.
The United Kingdom will not transpose the DSM Directive The United Kingdom will not transpose the DSM Directive Reviewed by Eleonora Rosati on Thursday, January 23, 2020 Rating: 5


  1. Brexit is starting to show its effect.

    And there are still people thinking that UK might be participating in the UPC. Time to give up this dream.....

  2. Ironical... If the UK had not voted in favour of the DSM directive in the Council, the proposal would have been rejected and noone would have had to transpose it...


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.