EU-Style Fair Use - Eleonora Rosati

1,639 views

Published on

Can EU introduce an open norm into its system of copyright exceptions and limitations?

Published in: Law
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,639
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
51
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
32
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

EU-Style Fair Use - Eleonora Rosati

  1. 1. Dr Eleonora Rosati EU-style fair use? EU copyright and the introduction of an open norm European Parliament, Brussels 3 March 2015 Towards a new legislation on intellectual property in the digital single market Proposal for a new framework under INFOSOC and IPRED directives
  2. 2. Contents • Article 5 of the InfoSoc Directive: structure and aim • Article 5 in recent CJEU case law • National implementations: the case of the UK • Reforming Article 5: is it possible to introduce an open norm? Is it desirable?
  3. 3. Article 5 of the InfoSoc Directive: structure and aim • Optional exceptions/limitations, and three-step test (aimed at whom?) • Recital 32 • List takes due account of the different legal traditions in Member States (including ‘grandfather clause’), while, at the same time, aiming to ensure a functioning internal market • Member States should arrive at a coherent application of these exceptions and limitations
  4. 4. How precise is Article 5 “shopping list”? • Just “categorically worded prototypes” (Hugenholtz-Senftleben)? • In practice diverging national implementations • Just think of private copying • But also parody • New s30A CDPA: fair dealing • Article L 122-5(4) French IP Code: compliance with “lois du genre” • All this despite: • Recital 31 (“Existing differences in the exceptions and limitations … have direct negative effects on the functioning of the internal market”) • Recital 32 (“Member States should arrive at a coherent application of these exceptions and limitations”)
  5. 5. Any change? Article 5 in recent CJEU case law • From flexibility … • AG Trstenjak in Padawan (“considerable flexibility”) • Confirmed in Painer • AG Sharpston in VG Wort (“certain freedom of action”) • … To inflexibility • CJEU in Padawan [36], TV2 Danmark [36], ACI Adam [33]-[34], and Deckmyn • In past year alone CJEU has quashed number of national copyright laws • (Svensson,) OSA, ACI Adam • Misunderstanding, internal market or both?
  6. 6. National implementations: the case of the UK • Took limited advantage of possibilities under Article 5 • Notable omissions: private copying and parody • The Gowers and Hargreaves Reviews • Post-Hargreaves implementation • Is UK move compatible with UK law? • Personal copies for private use without a levy system • Parody within fair dealing
  7. 7. Reforming Article 5: is it possible to introduce an open norm? Is it desirable? • Reda’s draft Report “open norm introducing flexibility in the interpretation of exceptions and limitations in certain special cases that do not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author or rightholder” • Wittem Group’s European Copyright Code Art. 5.5 – Further limitations: “Any other use that is comparable to the uses enumerated in art. 5.1 to 5.4(1) is permitted provided that the corresponding requirements of the relevant limitation are met and the use does not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author or rightholder, taking account of the legitimate interests of third parties.” → relying upon/taking advantage of the language of the three-step test in Article 5(5) InfoSoc Directive
  8. 8. Does Article 5 cover uses protected as fair use in the US?
  9. 9. EU-style fair use? • Is US fair use compliant with three-step test, notably “special cases”? • WTO Panel 2000 decision regarding Article 13 TRIPS: “an exception or limitation must be limited in its field of application or exceptional in its scope. In other words, an exception or limitation should be narrow in quantitative as well as a qualitative sense.” • Is fair use unpredictable? • Classic argument: flexibility at the expenses of certainty • Beebe, ‘An empirical study of U.S. copyright fair use opinions, 1978-2005’ (2008) 156(3) Univ Pa Law Rev 549, 574-575 • Legal obstacles possibly exaggerated
  10. 10. Is it desirable? • Flexibility = no need for legislative updates • But: • Litigation culture and doctrine of precedent • Role of CJEU • Territoriality of copyright laws
  11. 11. In conclusion • Has Article 5 actually harmonised exceptions and limitations? • Have Member States found it easy to rely on Article 5? • An open norm: might work … but would it work well even without full copyright harmonisation at EU level?
  12. 12. Thanks for your attention! e.rosati@soton.ac.uk @eLAWnora

×