The document discusses a legal case between Copiepresse, SAJ/JAM, Assucopie and Google Inc. regarding Google News and Google Search. It analyzes whether Google violated copyright by reproducing and making available news content and articles without authorization. It also examines the interests at stake of authors, publishers, the public and intermediaries. Current policy developments aim to increase availability of creative content online through new business models and legal offers while combating piracy.

1. Evi Werkers (ICRI) and Sari Depreeuw (LSTS)‏ “ Innovation Journalism: Copyright and the Use of Creative Commons”-Conference European Journalism Centre & Stanford Center for Innovations in Learning Maastricht (NL) - 13 November 2008 Publish or perish. Is the publishers' indignation selective?

2. Agenda Introduction to FLEET Publishers in dubio The Belgian “Google”-case What’s at stake? Current developments

3. Introduction New ways to access and influence creative content available on the worldwide network Digital convergence urges publishers to seek new business models Several legal issues arise: - copyright protection v. rights of users - media law implications - liability issues etc.

4. Multidisciplinary Research Consortium LSTS - VUB: Drs. S. Depreeuw, Prof. Dr. F. Brison, Prof. Dr. S. Guthwirth ; ICRI - KULeuven: Drs. E. Werkers, Prof. Dr. P. Valcke ; IBBT/SMIT-VUB: Drs. I. Picone, Prof. Dr. C. Pauwels ; CEMESO - VUB: Drs. D. Geens, Prof. Dr. K. Vanden Brande, Econ/MOFI - VUB: Drs. V.A. Bleyen, Prof. Dr. L. Van Hove, CUO - KULeuven: Drs. J. De Boever, Prof. Dr. D. De Grooff, MICT - Ugent: Dr. S. Paulussen, Prof. Dr. K. Raeymaekers Infonomics ECDC: Drs. J. Bierhoff, drs. S. Spek TNO ICT, subcontractor to IBBT SMIT, L. Pennings & M. Leendertse

5. FLEET Research FLEmish E-publishing Trends IWT (Institute for Science and technology)‏ Project with social relevance (SB0), 4 years Legal, economic, sociological aspects Research objectives Production / publishing perspective Content generating perspective User perspective Transversal issues

6. FLEET Research Legal Research: Copyright implications Media law and liability implications Valorisation: Trendflagging document SOTA e-publisher, e-journalist and e-user (soon publicly available)‏ Legal vademecums for three target groups (following in-depth interviews)‏ Publications & Papers More information: http://www. fleetproject .be

7. Agenda Introduction to FLEET Publishers in dubio The Belgian “Google”-case What’s at stake? Current developments

8. Publishers in dubio Newspapers: Full, free access E.g. New York Times E.g. Guardian Online - full articles via RSS E.g. De Redactie (VRT)‏ Restricted access, with controlled sharing features E.g. The Economist E.g. De Standaard

9. Some want to share

10. Some want to share

11. Some want to share some

12. Some want to share some ??? 

13. Some don’t

14. Agenda Introduction to FLEET Publishers in dubio The Belgian “Google”-case What’s at stake? Current developments

15. The Belgian Google-case Parties Copiepresse, SAJ/JAM, Assucopie Google Inc. (USA)‏ Claims/problems? Google News: title, snippet, link, photo, classification in themes Google Search: cache

16. Google News: the look Photo Title Snippet Deeplinks Other sources

17. A mere application of the existing legal framework European Copyright? Copyright protected works Infringed economic rights No exceptions applicable Infringed moral rights No authorisation from copyrightholders

18. “ European” copyright? International treaties European instruments Member States’ copyright legislation

19. International treaties Main instruments: Berne Convention (BC) 1886 (1971)‏ [and Rome Convention 1961] WIPO Copyright Treaty, WCT 1996 [and WIPO Performers and Phonograms Treaty, WPPT 1996] GATT TRIPS 1994 (WTO)‏

20. European Framework Computer Program Directive 91/250 Rental and Lending and Related Rights Directive 92/100 repealed by Directive 2006/115 Satellite and Cable Directive 93/83 Term Directive 93/98 – repealed by Directive 2006/116 Database Directive 96/9 Information Society Directive 2001/29 Resale Directive 2001/84 Enforcement Directive 2004/48 Customs Regulation 1383/2003

21. A mere application of the existing legal framework European Copyright? Copyright protected works Infringed economic rights No exceptions applicable Infringed moral rights No authorisation from copyrightholders

22. Protected “Works” Scope of application Work of “literature or art”, including scientific works Conditions for protection: Formal expression Originality (size doesn’t matter, as a rule…)‏ E.g.: Scientific and press articles Titles (some descriptive, some original, cfr. slogans)‏ Photos, graphics, logo,... Lay-out,…

24. A mere application of the existing legal framework Copyright protected works Infringed economic rights No exceptions applicable Infringed moral rights No authorisation from copyrightholders

25. Economic rights Exclusive rights Art. 2-4 Dir. 2001/29 Reproduction Communication to the public, incl. making available to the public Distribution

26. Infringed economic rights Reproduction Art. 2 Dir. 2001/29: “to authorise or prohibit direct or indirect, temporary or permanent reproduction by any means and in any form, in whole or in part” Applied to Google News Titles, snippets Hyperlinking? (was not challenged before Brussels court)‏

27. Infringed economic rights Communication to the public Art. 3 Dir. 2001/29: “authorise or prohibit any communication to the public of their works, by wire or wireless means, including the making available to the public of their works in such a way that members of the public may access them from a place and at a time individually chosen by them Applied to Google News: Titles, snippets, pictures readily accessible No access to articles in cache [only hyperlink to original webpage]

28. A mere application of the existing legal framework Copyright protected works Infringed economic rights No exceptions applicable Infringed moral rights No authorisation from copyright holders

29. Exceptions Statutory exceptions Closed list > InfoSoc Dir Restrictive interpretation Subject to “3 steps”-test Not applicable in case at hand Temporary acts of reproduction Quotations Reporting on current events

30. Temporary acts of reproduction Conditions Transient or incidental Integral and essential part of a technological process With the sole purpose to enable: Transmission in a network between 3rd parties by an intermediary or Lawful use No independent economic significance Applied to Google News Integral part of technological process (yes)‏ But other purpose : search service + news aggregation service (no)‏

31. Quotation Conditions Work lawfully made available Excerpt Well-defined purposes: criticism, debate, review, education, science In line with fair business practices Mention of source and author Applied to Google News No analysis, no opinion, no reasoning, no comment, no comparison, no review,... (no)‏ Automated processing - no human intervention Only classification in themes Reproduction > accessory

32. Reporting on current events Conditions Work lawfully made available Excerpt Information of the public In a report on current events Mention of source and author Applied to Google News Information of the public (yes)‏ But no reporting on current events No comment, no analysis Reproduction > accessory And <=> ratio legis

33. “ External” limitations Freedom of expression Already built-in in exceptions Abuse of rights Legitimate exercise of copyright Not compared to acquisition of consent But compared to cease infringement

34. A mere application of the existing legal framework Copyright protected works Infringed economic rights No exceptions applicable Infringed moral rights No authorisation from copyright holders

35. Moral rights Moral rights No European harmonisation Art. 6bis BC Right to claim authorship Right to integrity Distortion, mutilation or modification Prejudice to honour or reputation Belgian copyright law Divulgation Paternity Integrity

36. Moral rights in Google News - (Other/without) editorial / philosophical line Author Snippet

37. Divulgation right Right to make available to the public First publication, then exhaustion Applied to Google News Prior publication => no infringement

38. Paternity right Author can Claim authorship Anonymity, pseudonym Applied to Google News Mention of source But no mention of author’s name

39. Integrity right Right of respect for the protected work Oppose any modification Work Context Even if no prejudice to honour or reputation Applied to Google News Snippets Selection and classification by theme Irrespective of source of articles Possible change of editorial or philosophical context

40. A mere application of the existing legal framework Copyright protected works Infringed economic rights No exceptions applicable Infringed moral rights No authorisation from copyright holders

41. No authorisation from copyright holders Copyright = exclusive right Not merely right to oppose Right to refuse Prior authorisation required No opt-out, no reservation of rights Notwithstanding existence of technical parameters robots.txt, meta tags No obligation for copyright holder

42. Agenda Introduction to FLEET Publishers in dubio The Belgian “Google”-case What’s at stake? Current developments

43. Interests at stake Authors and derived © holders (publishers) => control over works (and revenues)‏ Public => access to information Intermediaries Search engines Content aggregators => new business models

44. Works at stake Bern Convention: no protection for “ news of the day or to miscellaneous facts having the character of mere items of press information” (art. 2.8)‏ Particular character of subject matter Information? News? Article? Title? Keywords? Synopsis? <=> Ideas? Originality?

45. Exploitation rights at stake Broad - too broad? Also partial reproduction; no quantitative criterion Regardless of commercial purpose E.g. non-commercial blog Regardless of nature of activity Competing activity?

46. Exceptions at stake Limitative list in Act - no “fair use” - too restrictive? Art. 14 Belgian Act 1886: a newspaper article may be used by another newspaper if the source is indicated and if such use is not expressly forbidden. Not maintained in Copyright Act 1994! Art. 5.3 (c) Dir. 2001/29: reproduction by the press , communication to the public or making available of published articles on current economic, political or religious topics or of broadcast works or other subject-matter of the same character, in cases where such use is not expressly reserved, and as long as the source, including the author's name, is indicated. Not implemented in Belgian law in 2005!

47. On line use at stake Automated processing: identification of protected content? Cascade of authorisations: overlap reproduction/communication to the public? Distinction portal/search engine? Hyperlinking subject to copyright? Deeplink? Inline link? Other protection? Expression of consent Opt-out rule? Robots.txt, meta tags, ACAP

48. Agenda Introduction to FLEET Publishers in dubio The Belgian “Google”-case What’s at stake? Current developments

49. Current developments Drop opt-out ACAP Nieuws .be 24.be

50. European Policy Study on “Interactive Content and Convergence: Implications for the information Society” -> Although the market is growing steadily, legal, economic and technological challenges need to be addressed for Europe to have faster market uptake Communication European Commission on Creative Content Online in the Single Market (03/01/2008)‏ Communication on future networks and the Internet. Early challenges regarding the “Internet of things” (29/09/2008)(+ public consultation)‏

51. Communication CCO Four horizontal challenges Increase availability of creative content Multi-territory licensing for creative content Interoperability and transparency of Digital Rights Management systems (DRMs) Legal offers and piracy + content online platform

52. The Internet of Things”: web 3.0. Web 3.0.= seamless, anytime, anywhere business, entertainment and social networking over fast, reliable and secure networks Remedies: Self-/co-regulatory agreements promote digital business models enforce legal certainty rights and obligations promotion legal offers online reinforcement consumers’ rights fight against online piracy (Speech V. Reding, “Seizing the opportunities of the global Internet economy, OECD Ministerial Meeting “Future of the Internet economy”, Seoul, Korea, 17-18 June 2008

53. Conclusion Traditional versus innovative offer Solution: Digital business models Legal offers online (licence + technology)‏ Restore balance publishers – users = the way forward