EU Copyright Consultation Report
 Share
The version of the browser you are using is no longer supported. Please upgrade to a supported browser.Dismiss

 
View only
 
 
Still loading...
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
1
Consultation report document:
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2013/copyright-rules/docs/contributions/consultation-report_en.pdf
2
3
Legend:Reform/change needed*No reform/changes neededUnclear/non-copyright related
4
5
*reform proposals may be contradictory
6
7
End users and ConsumersInstitutional UsersService Providers and IntermediariesAuthors and PerformersCollective Management OrganisationPublishers, Producers and Broadcasters
8
Cross-border access to online content (Questions 1 to 7)"vast majority […] report facing problems" (p. 6); "call for a ‘common copyright’" (p. 7)""further measures are needed to increase the cross-border availability" (p. 7)"vast majority of service providers believe that further measures are needed" (p. 11)"measures should be taken in areas such as consumer protection, payment measures and VAT and not in the area of copyright" (p. 8)"CMOs do not see any need to intervene on copyright although many see the need for action in other areas, such as taxation" (p.10)"no legal obstacles" (p. 9); "current EU copyright rules should not be changed" (p. 10)
9
The rights relevant for digital transmissions: the ‘making available’ and the ‘reproduction’ rights (Questions 8 to 10)"a large majority finds the scope of the making available right unclear" (p. 12)"vast majority of those consider that the scope of the making available right is not clear" (p. 12)"As to the clarity of the definition of the making available right, this category of respondent is divided" (p. 14)"Authors and performers are divided as to whether the scope of the making available right is sufficiently clear." (p. 13)"no need to intervene on the definition of rights" (p. 14)"the making available right is sufficiently clear"; "do not see a need for action at EU level" (p. 13)
10
Linking and browsing (Questions 11 and 12)"too much legal uncertainty for those providing the links" (p. 16)"Commission should clarify that hyperlinks fall outside the scope of copyright" (p. 16)"linking should not be subject to the authorisation of a rightholder" (p. 19)"browsing websites should be subject – at least in some cases - to the right holder’s authorisation" (p. 17)"the rightholder's authorisation should be required whenever the provision of a hyperlink leads to a work" (p. 17)"hyperlinks should be subject to the rightholders’ authorisation"; "each case ought to be analysed in court" (p. 18)
11
Download to own digital content (Questions 13 and 14)"problems mentioned include not being able to resell eBooks, digital music or video game files" (p. 20)"generally consider that it should be possible to resell digital content" (p. 21)"Service providers are divided on this issue." (p. 22)"a legal framework which would enable the resale of digital content would have serious negative consequences" (p. 21)"similar views and arguments compared to those of authors and performers" (p. 21)"generally against any legislative intervention in this area" (p. 21)
12
Registration of works and other subject matters (Questions 15 to 18)"support the creation of a registration system at EU level" (p. 22)"big majority of institutional users support the idea of an EU registration system" (p. 23)"an EU-wide registration system may be generally useful" (p. 24)"A large majority of authors and performers are against the idea of registration" (p. 23)"EU registration system would be unnecessary, complex and an administrative burden" (p. 23)"views on this subject similar to those of CMOs" (p. 24)
13
Use and interoperability of identifiers (Question 19)"encourage the EU to support the development of rights ownership information" (p. 25)"encourage the development of identifiers and databases" (p. 25)"favourable to the adoption of identifiers and the use of databases" (p. 26)"see a positive aspect in the adoption and use of identifiers and databases" (p. 26)"EU should promote and support existing identification systems and frameworks" (p. 26)"encourage the EU to support projects relating to the development of databases " (p. 26)
14
Terms of protection (Question 20)"current terms of copyright protection are inappropriate" (p. 27)"current terms are inappropriate and should be shortened" (p. 27)"term of protection is too long." (p. 28)"appropriate and should not be shortened" (p. 28)"CMOs have similar views to authors and performers." (p. 28)"current term of protection is adequate and […] should not be shortened" (p. 28)
15
The current legal framework for exceptions and limitations (Questions 21 to 23)"optional nature of the list of exceptions creates legal uncertainty" (p. 29); "exceptions should be transformed into ‘user rights’" (p. 30)"further harmonising them is needed" (p. 30); "in favour of an open-ended norm to complement the list of exceptions" (p. 31)"more harmonisation and legal certainty in the area of exceptions" (p. 32)"exceptions have a damaging effect on cultural production. They see no need to change the current list of exceptions […] generally against including new exceptions in EU copyright law." (p. 31)
16
Flexibility of exceptions (Questions 24 and 25)"more flexibility is needed" (p. 33)"solution in the introduction of a ‘fair use’ type of open norm" (p. 34)"A significant number […] current regime of exceptions is fit […] Others argue […] closed list of exceptions creates problems" (p. 35)"respondents from these stakeholder groups generally agree that the EU legal framework provides for sufficient flexibility as far as exceptions are concerned" (p. 34)
17
Territoriality of exceptions (Questions 26 and 27)"territoriality of limitations and exceptions constitute a problem" (p. 36)"need for coordinated rules" (p. 37)"Intermediaries, distributors and service providers have divergent views." (p. 38)"do not encounter problems regarding the territoriality" (p. 37)"territoriality of exceptions does not constitute a problem" (p. 37)"do not encounter any problem in this area" (p. 37)
18
Access to content in libraries and archives: reservation and archiving (Questions 28 to 31)"suggest broadening the scope of this exception" (p. 40)"institutional users consider that licences are not a sustainable solution for the digital preservation of content in the long run" (p. 40)"answers vary, in particular on whether problems with this exception exist" (p. 42)"Licensing, both individual and collective, is generally considered to be the solution" (p. 41)"a general preference for market-based solutions" (p. 41)"have not experienced major problems" (p. 41)
19
Off-premises access to library collections (Questions 32 to 35)"current exception […] is outdated or unjustified, and not in line with today's user expectations." (p. 43)"current consultation exception to be too narrow and not in line with technology and with people’s expectations." (p. 43)"Some of them refer to […] market-based solutions […] In some other cases […] similar to those of institutional users" (p. 45)"online remote access is to be dealt with by way of licensing via collective management organisations." (p. 44)"mostly favour market-based solutions or stakeholder dialogues" (p. 44)"licences are generally a more flexible tool than an exception" (p. 44)
20
E-lending (Questions 36 to 39)"current rules applicable to e-lending are not clear" (p. 46)"significant problems in relation to e-lending licensing agreements" (p. 46) "concern that e-lending could unduly interfere with the market" (p. 48)"e-lending should be based on licences" (p. 47)"CMOs generally support licensing over legislative changes in this area." (p. 47)"against the introduction of an exception on e-lending." (p. 48)
21
Mass digitisation (Questions 40 and 41)"an exception is necessary to allow cultural heritage institutions to make their collections available online." (p. 49)"legislation allowing cross-border use of the digitised works is necessary" (p. 50)"did not express specific opinions" (p. 52)"mechanisms in place at national level are sufficient" (p. 50)"mixed views on the need to enact legislation" (p. 51)"no need for further legislation" (p. 52)
22
Teaching (Questions 42 to 46)"call for a broad exception for non-commercial use of protected works in educational contexts" (p. 54)"nearly unanimously call for a broad mandatory teaching exception" (p. 54)"no need for new legislation" (p. 57)"the use of works for illustration for teaching does not raise specific problems"; "strong preference for licensing mechanisms" (p. 55)"no need to make the exception mandatory, to extend it or to introduce new exceptions." (p. 56)"do not mention particular problems" (p. 56); " no need to modify the teaching exception" (p. 57)
23
Research (Questions 47 to 49)"researchers, are generally unsatisfied with the current situation" (p. 59)"respondents consider that a mandatory and technology-neutral research exception should be adopted at EU level" (p. 60)"did not express specific opinions" (p. 61)"generally no problems with access to content for research purposes and with current research exception" (p. 60)"current research exception does not pose specific problems" (p. 60)"current exception works well" (p. 60)
24
Disabilities (Questions 50 to 52)"highlight problems with respect to the implementation of the disabilities exception" (p. 61)"underline the importance of equal access to creative content for persons with a disability" (p. 63)"generally consider that there are no problems arising from the implementation of the disabilities exception in the EU" (p. 62)
25
Text and data mining (Questions 53 to 57)"a legislative change is needed to introduce a specific mandatory exception for text and data mining in EU copyright law" (p. 64)"With regard to the possible way forward, opinions diverge." (p. 67)"licensing solutions are being developed and are the preferred way forward" (p. 65)"publishers generally oppose the introduction of a text and data mining exception" (p. 66)
26
User-generated content (Questions 58 to 63)"respondents in this category often favour a legislative intervention." (p. 68)"call for legislative change, including the introduction of a UGC-specific exception and fair use provisions." (p. 69)"Solutions like the introduction of limitations for certain types of re-use, or full new exceptions and the clarification of existing exceptions" (p. 71)"no evidence that legislative intervention in this area would be needed" (p. 69)"object to the idea of legislative interventions, particularly the introduction of new exceptions" (p. 69)"no major problem has been identified in this area that would warrant legislative intervention." (p. 70)
27
Private copying and reprography (Questions 64-71)"scope and application of the private copying and reprography exceptions should be clarified at EU level" (p. 72)"wide range of different opinions on private copying and reprography" (p. 73)"generally against the current situation […] levy systems are out-dated" (p. 75)"different opinions on whether the current system need to be changed, and, if so, how" (p. 74)"EU rules on private copying and reprography are sufficiently clear and that no intervention is warranted" (p. 74)
28
Fair remuneration of authors and performers (Questions 72-74)"here is a need for EU intervention in this area in order to ensure adequate remuneration for authors/performers" (p. 78)"there is a need for the EU to act in this area" (p. 78)"generally can see no reason to act at EU level" (p. 82)"see a need for EU intervention in this area" (p. 79)"a majority see a need for intervention at EU level" (p. 81)"authors and performers are appropriately remunerated thanks to existing law and practice in all sectors of the creative industries" (p. 80)
29
Respect for rights (Questions 75-77)"no enforcement should be encouraged as long as rightholders do not provide an adequate legal offer" (p. 83)"fear that any legislative change that is intended to regulate others, could adversely impact on them (e.g. libraries)" (p. 84)"diversity of opinions reflects the diversity of interests of stakeholders" (p. 88)"many respondents stress that the current enforcement system is failing to provide the protection necessary in the modern digital environment" (p. 84)"problem for the time being is that ISPs have no liability under the safe harbour regime" (p. 85)"the case-law of the CJEU has given all the necessary guidance for national courts to apply the proportionality test" (p. 87)
30
A single EU copyright title (Questions 78-79)"vast majority of end users/consumers consider that the EU should pursue the idea of a single EU copyright title" (p. 89)"generally in favour of the idea of a single EU copyright title" (p. 90)"vast majority of these respondents do not see the need for a single copyright title" (p. 91)"While a significant number of authors/performers consider that the EU should pursue the establishment of an EU single title, others are against" (p. 90)"generally against working further towards an EU title" (p. 90)"vast majority of respondents in this category do not support the idea of a single EU copyright title" (p. 90)
31
Other issues raised in the responses (80)"need to increase legal certainty with regards to sharing copyright protected content through ‘peer-to-peer’ (P2P) networks" (p. 92)"current rules on technological protection measures are problematic" (p. 92)"fighting abuses of dominant positions in the media sector" (p. 93)"copyright should not be seen as an obstacle" (p. 92)"call for an unwaivable right to remuneration for authors and performers" (p. 92)"suggest the introduction of a system of tax credits" (p. 92)
32
33
Reform/change needed*23228451
34
No reform/change needed114141620
35
Unclear/non-copyright related0112633
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
Loading...
 
 
 
copyright-reformer
copyright-reformer-pic
Participation numbers