European copyright reform
MEPs approved the European copyright reform and will have, as expected, an impact among artists. However, there are certain parts of the bill, opposed by US based platforms and Internet freedom advocates. Members of the European Parliament adopted the Copyright Directive. It had 348 votes in favor and 274 votes against or abstentions.
“I know there are many fears about what users may or may not do, now we have clear guarantees for freedom of expression and creativity on the internet,” European Commission Vice President Andrus Ansip said.
Previous copyright reform
One of the most controversial reforms back in September ’16, this one introduced by the E.U. commissioner put pressure on those who supported it as well as those who opposed it to become a target of attacks. They both mobilized until the closing day.
The text aims to adapt to the age of digital European copyright law, dating back over 10 years ago, when YouTube did not exist.
“Its aim is to allow the press and artists to receive a share of the revenue generated by the distribution of their productions and works on the Internet,” explained more than 170 celebrities, including DJ David Geta and actress and singer Luan, in an article published on Sunday by the French weekly JDD.
Supporters believe that large American companies shouldn’t benefit from their platform so much. Meanwhile, small time professionals, such as musicians, photographers struggle to generate income when their work appears on these platforms. They think other industries should be paid more fairly for the use of their work.
The supporters of Internet freedom and the Silicon Valley giants feared that the distribution channel would be restricted.
Member States, which must approve this text, have two years to implement it into their national law.
“The directive, if properly incorporated, can help preserve investigative journalistic reporting, which all indications are that it is still the best means of combating misinformation,” said Agence France-Press (AFP) president and CEO Fabrice Friss.
Articles 11 and 13
Article 11 and Article 13 are two of the most controversial parts of the Copyright Directive. No. 13 obliges online platforms to create filters and monitor posted material to make sure there are no copyright infringements. No. 11 obliges companies like Google News to enter into a contract with an individual or company before publishing any content from their website.
The agreement provides on the following:
The tech giants should increase their support of artists and journalists by sharing revenue. The agreement aims to strengthen the ability of copyright holders, such as musicians, performers and screenwriters, as well as news publishers and journalists, to negotiate better contracts for the use of their works appearing online. The goal behind this shift is to make online platforms more accountable for the content posted on them and give news publishers more say in what articles use by connecting with news hubs.
Many measures aim to ensure that the internet remains a space open to freedom of expression.
As long as the application of the Directive excludes news clippings, this practice can continue like in the past. But the Directive includes measures against news broadcasters who abuse this right.
GIFs and memes will continue to be available and shareable on online platforms. The list exempts non-commercial online encyclopaedias, such as Wikipedia, or open source software platforms, such as GitHub. Novel platforms will have less obligations than the well-known ones.
Copyright and Royalties
Creators and performers can claim additional royalties from distributors when the fee initially agreed is much lower than the profits earned by the distributor.
The use of copyrighted material for research use through text and data mining becomes easier. European researchers, thus, will confront the major competitive disadvantage previously faced. Materials used for educational purposes will have no intellectual property restrictions.
To protect cultural heritage, the use of protected content is free. Works that are no longer commercially available can be used freely if they are not licensed.
There is no incentive for companies to sign fair contracts. That is because they don’t have any accountability for the content they host. Companies have an obligation to follow applicable laws when it comes to copyright infringement. When a copyright holder files a complaint, companies must remove infringing content.
But this practice is difficult for copyright holders and fair compensation is not guaranteed. Holding internet companies accountable will make it easier for copyright holders (especially musicians, performers, writers and news publishers) to demand fair contracts and thus fair remuneration.
If you liked this article, then you might also enjoy reading this one.
Author: PC-GR
The World of Technology
