Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Individual Licensing Models and Consumer Protection

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Remuneration of Copyright Owners

Part of the book series: MPI Studies on Intellectual Property and Competition Law ((MSIP,volume 27))

Abstract

Copyright law is not primarily directed at consumers. Their interests are therefore only marginally accounted for, as the copyright rules exempt specific uses of works from the right holder’s control. This chapter examines the impact of digital technology on the position of consumers of licensed copyrighted content. While ownership of the physical embodiment of a work does not entail the ownership of the rights in the work, how does copyright law deal with ‘disembodied’ works? How does digital technology affect the consumers' reasonable expectations in terms of workability and functionality of digital content? Do consumers have any recourse under consumer protection law for 'defective' content, for example for the impossibility to make a copy for private purposes, the lack of interoperability between devices, and the geo-blocking of their account? Does consumer protection law treat physical embodiments of works, digital downloads and streaming differently?

Lucie Guibault is Associate Professor of Intellectual Property Law at the Institute for Information Law, Universiteit van Amsterdam.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    IFPI Digital Music Report—Charting the path to sustainable growth, www.ifpi.org/downloads/Digital-Music-Report-2015.pdf.

  2. 2.

    R.M. Hilty (2015).

  3. 3.

    N. Fried (2015).

  4. 4.

    N. Helberger / L. Guibault / M. Loos / C. Mak / L. Pessers / B. van der Sloot (2012).

  5. 5.

    S. Arnerstål (2015), 750-758; N. Helberger / L. Guibault (2012); N. Helberger / L. Guibault / M. Loos / C. Mak / L. Pessers / B. van der Sloot (2012); J. Schovsbo (2008), 393-408; T. Kreutzer (2011); G. Mazziotti (2007).

  6. 6.

    J. Malcom (2015).

  7. 7.

    Brussels Court of Appeal, 9 September 2005 (Test Achats v. EMI Recorded Music Belgium et al.); Cour de cassation, (1st chamber, civil section), 28 February 2006, (Studio Canal, Universal Pictures Video France and SEV / S. Perquin and UFC Que Choisir); Tribunal de Grande Instance de Nanterre, 6th chamber, Judgment of 24 June 2003, Association CLCV / EMI Muisc France; Tribunal de Grande Instance de Nanterre, 6th chamber, Judgment of 2 September 2003, Francoise M. / EMI Music France, Auchan France; Tribunal de Grand Instance de Paris, 3rd chamber, 2e section, Stéphane P., UFC Que Choisir/Société Films Alain Sarde et, Judgment of 30 April 2004.

  8. 8.

    Directive 2011/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on Consumer Rights, L 304/64, O.J.E.U. 22 November 2011, Article 2(1).

  9. 9.

    Europe Economics / L. Guibault / O. Salamanca / S. van Gompel (2015); C. Cooke (2015).

  10. 10.

    Europe Economics / L. Guibault / O. Salamanca / S. van Gompel (2015).

  11. 11.

    Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, OJ 2001 L167/10.

  12. 12.

    N. Helberger / L. Guibault / M. Loos / C. Mak / L. Pessers / B. van der Sloot (2012); M. van Eechoud / P.B. Hugenholtz / S. van Gompel / L. Guibault / N. Helberger (2009).

  13. 13.

    R.M. Hilty (2015), 3.

  14. 14.

    Information Society Directive, Article 4(1); Case C-479/04, Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 12 September 2006, (Laserdisken v/ Kultuministeriet).

  15. 15.

    S. Dusollier (2010), 26.

  16. 16.

    R.M. Hilty (2015), 4.

  17. 17.

    L. Guibault (2002), 299.

  18. 18.

    Copyright Directive, Article 3(3); cf. also, Case 62/79 Judgment of the Court of 18 March 1980, ECR 1980, p. 881 (Coditel v. Ciné Vog Films et al.).

  19. 19.

    See the review of jurisprudence in E. Linklater (2014).

  20. 20.

    Court of Appeal Dusseldorf, Decision of 29.06.2009 I-20 U 247/08; see also German Supreme Court, (OEM case), decision of 06.07.2000 I ZR 244/97; District Court Berlin, decision of 14.07.2009, 6 O 67/08.

  21. 21.

    T. Kreutzer (2011), 14-15.

  22. 22.

    Case C-128/11, Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 3 July 2012 (UsedSoft GmbH v. Oracle International Corp.).

  23. 23.

    Id., para. 88.

  24. 24.

    R.M. Hilty (2015), 9.

  25. 25.

    B. Batchelor / L. Montani (2015), 591; P. Mezei (2015); M. Savič (2015); S. Karapapa (2014).

  26. 26.

    Case C-174/15, Request for preliminary ruling by the Court of Justice lodged on 17 April 2015 (Vereniging Openbare Bibliotheken v Stichting Leenrecht; interveners: Nederlands Uitgeversverbond and Others).

  27. 27.

    Merriam-Webster Dictionary, available at: www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/streaming.

  28. 28.

    S. Karapapa (2014).

  29. 29.

    R.M. Hilty (2015), 3.

  30. 30.

    A.-É Credeville / J.-P. Dardayrol / J. Martin (2012), 11.

  31. 31.

    Referring to a seminal quote from R. Gomulkiewicz (1998).

  32. 32.

    N. Helberger / L. Guibault (2012).

  33. 33.

    See M. Schmidt-Kessel (2011).

  34. 34.

    Directive 2011/83 on Consumer Rights, OJ L304/64–88 (2011).

  35. 35.

    M. Loos / N. Helberger / L. Guibault / C. Mak / L. Pessers / K.J. Cseres / B. van der Sloot / R. Tigner (2011), 99-102.

  36. 36.

    Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, OJ L 95, 21.4.1993, p. 29-34, art. 4(2): “2. Assessment of the unfair nature of the terms shall relate neither to the definition of the main subject matter of the contract nor to the adequacy of the price and remuneration, on the one hand, as against the services or goods supplies in exchange, on the other, in so far as these terms are in plain intelligible language”.

  37. 37.

    Id., 35.

  38. 38.

    Case C-463/12, Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 5 March 2015, (Copydan Båndkopi v. Nokia Danmark A/S.).

  39. 39.

    See Information Society Directive, Article 6(4) para. (2): “A Member State may also take such measures in respect of a beneficiary of an exception or limitation provided for in accordance with Article 5(2)(b), unless reproduction for private use has already been made possible by rightholders to the extent necessary to benefit from the exception or limitation concerned and in accordance with the provisions of Article 5(2)(b) and (5), without preventing rightholders from adopting adequate measures regarding the number of reproductions in accordance with these provisions”. Guibault (2008), p. 3; Dusollier (2005).

  40. 40.

    Case C-463/12, Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 5 March 2015, (Copydan Båndkopi v. Nokia Danmark A/S.).

  41. 41.

    BGH 22.4.2009 (Videorecorder); Court of Appeal of Paris, 1st ch. 14 December 2011 (Wizzgo/Metropole Television and others).

  42. 42.

    A.-É. Crédeville / J.-P. Dardayrol / J. Martin (2012), 15.

  43. 43.

    Europe Economics (2011), 57.

  44. 44.

    Brussels Court of Appeal, 9 September 2005 (Test Achats v. EMI Recorded Music Belgium et al.); Cour de cassation, (1st chamber, civil section), 28 February 2006, (Studio Canal, Universal Pictures Video France and SEV / S. Perquin and UFC Que Choisir); Tribunal de Grande Instance de Nanterre, 6th chamber, Judgment of 24 June 2003, Association CLCV / EMI Muisc France; Tribunal de Grande Instance de Nanterre, 6th chamber, Judgment of 2 September 2003, Francoise M. / EMI Music France, Auchan France; Tribunal de Grand Instance de Paris, 3rd chamber, 2e section, Stéphane P., UFC Que Choisir/Société Films Alain Sarde et, Judgment of 30 April 2004.

  45. 45.

    CSECL, IViR and ACLE (2011), 51.

  46. 46.

    N. Helberger (2007), 472.

  47. 47.

    Case C-403/08 en C-429/08, decision of European Court of Justice of 4 October 2011 (Premier League).

  48. 48.

    M. van Eechoud / P.B. Hugenholtz / S. van Gompel / L. Guibault / N. Helberger (2009), 309.

  49. 49.

    Case 62/79, decision of European Court of Justice of 18 March 1980 (Coditel I), EC.R. 1980, 881, para. 15, 16. See also: Case C-192/04, decision of the European Court of Justice of 14 July 2005, (Lagardère Active Broadcast), E.C.R. 2005, 7199.

  50. 50.

    Case C-403/08 en C-429/08, decision of European Court of Justice of 4 October 2011 (Football Association Premier League), para. 115.

  51. 51.

    See: European Commission, Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the regions, Second report on the implementation of Directive 98/84/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 1998 on the legal protection of services based on, or consisting of, conditional access, Brussels, 30 September 2008, COM(2008) 593 final.

  52. 52.

    Wiebe (2010), p. 321.

  53. 53.

    Brussels, 9 December 2015, COM(2015) 627 final.

References

  • Arnerstål, S. (2015), Licensing digital content in a sale of goods context, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 10 (10), 750-758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batchelor, B. / Montani, L. (2015), Exhaustion, essential subject matter and other CJEU judicial tools to update copyright for an online economy, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 10 (8), 591-600

    Google Scholar 

  • CSECL, IViR, and ACLE (2011), Analysis of the applicable legal frameworks and suggestions for the contours of a model system of consumer protection in relation to digital content contracts, University of Amsterdam, final report, study commissioned by the European Commission

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, C. (2015), Dissecting the digital dollar – How streaming services are licensed and the challenges artists now face, Music Managers Forum

    Google Scholar 

  • Crédeville, A.-É. / Dardayrol, J.-P. / Martin, J. (2012), Rapport de la commission spécialisée ‘Informatique dans les nuages’, Conseil supérieur de la propriété littéraire et artistique

    Google Scholar 

  • Dusollier, S. (2005), Droit d’auteur et protection des oeuvres dans l’univers numérique: droits et exceptions à la lumière des dispositifs de verrouillage des oeuvres, Larcier

    Google Scholar 

  • Dusollier, S. (2010), The Relations Between Copyright Law And Consumers’ Rights From A European Perspective, European Parliament, DG for Internal Policies, Policies Department: Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eechoud, M. / Hugenholtz, P.B. / van Gompel, S. / Guibault, L. / Helberger, N. (2009), Harmonizing European Copyright Law: The Challenges of Better Lawmaking, Information Law Series 19, Kluwer Law International

    Google Scholar 

  • Europe Economics (2011), Digital Content Services for Consumers: Assessment of Problems Experienced by Consumers – LOT 1, Report 4: Final Report, prepared for the European Commission, available at: ec.europa.eu/justice/consumer-marketing/files/empirical_report_final_-_2011-06-15.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Europe Economics, Guibault, L. / Salamanca, O. / van Gompel, S. (2015), Study on the remuneration of authors and performers for use of their works and fixations of their performances, report commissioned by the European Commission, DG Communications Networks, Content & Technology, Document Nr. MARKT/2013/080/D

    Google Scholar 

  • Fried, N. (2015), We shouldn’t get in the way of streaming video innovation, available at: www.mpaa.org/we-shouldnt-get-in-the-way-of-streaming-video-innovation/#.ViYIACtIlIg

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomulkiewicz, R. (1998), The License is the Product: Comments on the Promise of Article 2B for Software and Information Licensing, 13 Berkeley Technology Law Journal 891

    Google Scholar 

  • Guibault, L. (2002), Copyright Limitations and Contracts: An Analysis of the Contractual Overridability of Limitations on Copyright, Kluwer Law International

    Google Scholar 

  • Guibault, L. (2008), Accommodating the Needs of iConsumers: Making Sure They Get Their Money’s Worth of Digital Entertainment, Journal of Consumer Policy, 2008-4, 409

    Google Scholar 

  • Helberger, N. (2007),”Access denied”: How some e-commerce businesses re-errect national borders for online consumers, and what European law has to say about this, European Journal of Consumer Law, vol. 4, 472-506

    Google Scholar 

  • Helberger, N. / Guibault, L. (2012), Clash of cultures – integrating copyright and consumer law, Info, 2012-6, 23-33

    Google Scholar 

  • Helberger, N. / Guibault, L. / Loos, M. / Mak, C. / Pessers, L. / van der Sloot, B. (2012), Digital Consumers and the Law – Towards a Cohesive European Framework, Kluwer Law International

    Google Scholar 

  • Helberger, N. / Hugenholtz, P.B. (2007), No place like home for making a copy: private copying in European copyright law and consumer Law, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, vol. 22, 1061-1098

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilty, R.M. (2015), Exhaustion in the Digital Age, Forthcoming in: I. Calboli / E. Lee (Eds.), Research Handbook on Intellectual Property Exhaustion and Parallel Imports, 2016, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 15-09, Edward Elgar

    Google Scholar 

  • Karapapa, S. (2014), Reconstructing copyright exhaustion in the online world, Intellectual Property Quarterly vol. 4, 307-325

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreutzer, T. (2011), Verbraucherschutz im Urheberrecht, Studie im Auftrag des Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverbands

    Google Scholar 

  • Linklater, E. (2014), UsedSoft and the Big Bang Theory: Is the e-Exhaustion Meteor about to Strike?, JIPITEC, vol. 5 no. 1

    Google Scholar 

  • Loos, M. / Helberger, N. / Guibault, L. / Mak, C. / Pessers, L. / Cseres, K. J. / van der Sloot, B. / Tigner, R. (2011), Analysis of the applicable legal frameworks and suggestions for the contours of a model system of consumer protection in relation to digital content contracts, final report prepared for the European Commission, University of Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Malcom, J. (2015), Consumers Deserve Protection Against the Scourge of DRM — Will the UN Help?, Electronic Frontier Foundation, 8 January 2015, available at: www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/01/tell-un-consumers-deserve-protection-against-scourge-drm

  • Mazziotti, G. (2007), EU Digital Copyright Law and the End-User, 2008, Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Mezei, P. (2015), Digital First Sale Doctrine Ante Portas – Exhaustion in the Online Environment, JIPITEC, vol. 6 no. 1

    Google Scholar 

  • Savič, M. (2015), The legality of resale of digital content after UsedSoft in subsequent German and CJEU case law, E.I.P.R., 37(7), 414-429

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt-Kessel, M., The application of the Consumer Rights Directive of digital content (January 2011), DG Internal Policies, Policy Department A, Economic and Scientific Policy, IP/A/IMCO/NT/2010-17, PE 451.491, p. 5

    Google Scholar 

  • Schovsbo, J. (2008), Integrating Consumer Rights into Copyright Law: From a European Perspective, Journal of Consumer Policy 2008-31, no. 4, 393-408

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiebe, A. (2010), The economic perspective: exhaustion in the digital age, in: L. Bently / U. Suthersanen / P. Torremans (Eds.), Global Copyright Three Hundred Years Since the Statute of Anne, From 1709 to Cyberspace, 321, Edward Edgar

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Lucie Guibault

Authors
  1. Lucie Guibault
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucie Guibault .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Singapore Management University , Singapore, Singapore

    Kung-Chung Liu

  2. Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich, Germany

    Reto M. Hilty

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Guibault, L. (2017). Individual Licensing Models and Consumer Protection. In: Liu, KC., Hilty, R. (eds) Remuneration of Copyright Owners. MPI Studies on Intellectual Property and Competition Law, vol 27. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53809-8_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53809-8_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-53808-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-53809-8

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation