Abstract
This international report examines the increasingly complex balance between the interests of copyright owners, on one hand, and the interests of users of their work, on the other. In particular, it considers how the current laws and the court decisions of those countries that have prepared national reports strike that balance. In this regard, it reflects the critical comments that have been expressed by the national rapporteurs vis-à-vis the current system, identifies issues where there is scope for progress and seeks to open up new avenues to manage diverging interests.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The author is very grateful for the national reports which have been submitted from the following jurisdictions: Austria (Valerie Eder); Belgium (Manon Knockaert); Brazil (Felipe Barros Oquendo); Czech Republic (Radka MacGregor Pelikánová); France (Martina Isola and Guillaume Couet); Germany (Thomas Hoeren); Hungary (Zsófia Lendvai); Italy (Marco Francetti); Poland (Maria Obara-Piszewska and Filina Sztandera); Romania (Paul-George Buta); Switzerland (Sevan Antreasyan); UK (Eleonora Rosati).
- 2.
COM(2016) 593 final. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/1-2016-593-EN-F1-1.PDF. Accessed 29 October 2017.
- 3.
Article 13 of the TRIPs Agreement, see above; Article 10 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty, see above.
- 4.
See in particular Article 9 with respect to the right of reproduction.
- 5.
Article 5, para 5, of the Directive 2001/29 reads as follows: ‘The exceptions and limitations provided for in paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 shall only be applied in certain special cases which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work or other subject-matter and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rightholder.’
- 6.
CJEU, case C-201/13, Johan Deckmyn et Vrijheidsfonds VZW contre Helena Vandersteen e.a., ECLI:EU:C:2014:2132.
- 7.
CJEU, case C-70/10, Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM), ECLI:EU:C:2011:771.
- 8.
CJEU, case C-360/10, Belgische Vereniging van Auteurs, Componisten en Uitgevers CVBA (SABAM) v Netlog NV, ECLI:EU:C:2012:85.
- 9.
CJEU, case C-201/13, Johan Deckmyn et Vrijheidsfonds VZW contre Helena Vandersteen e.a., ECLI:EU:C:2014:2132.
- 10.
CJEU, case C-527/15, Stichting Brein v Jack Frederik Wullems, ECLI:EU:C:2017:300.
- 11.
CJEU, case C-128/11, UsedSoft GmbH v Oracle International Corp., ECLI:EU:C:2012:407.
- 12.
CJEU, case C-572/13, Hewlett-Packard Belgium SPRL v Reprobel SCRL, ECLI:EU:C:2015:750.
- 13.
CJEU, case C-435/12, ACI Adam BV and Others v Stichting de Thuiskopie and Stichting Onderhandelingen Thuiskopie vergoeding, ECLI:EU:C:2014:254.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Michaux, B. (2018). International Report. In: Kilpatrick, B., Kobel, P., Këllezi, P. (eds) Antitrust Analysis of Online Sales Platforms & Copyright Limitations and Exceptions. LIDC Contributions on Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71419-6_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71419-6_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-71418-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-71419-6
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)