Advertisement

ERA Forum

pp 1–18 | Cite as

From Soulier to the EU copyright law reform: what future for non-voluntary collective management schemes?

  • Caterina Sganga
Article
  • 38 Downloads

Abstract

The entry into force of Directive 2014/26/EU represented a shared hope that the field of collective management of copyright would experience more harmonised and consistent development. Yet, the gaps and ambiguities in the text, coupled with the unsystematic construction of EU copyright law, have inevitably led to short-circuits and controversial results. The decision of the European Court of Justice in Soulier and Doke is an eloquent case in point. This article analyses its statements and silences, its potential dangerous systematic effects, and the pending response of the EU legislator to the threats it poses to non-voluntary collective management schemes and the overall copyright balance.

Keywords

Mandatory collective management Extended collective licenses Soulier and Doke Collective Management Directive Proposal for a Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market 

References

  1. 1.
    Bruguière, J-M.: Œuvres indisponible: Régime du livre indisponible (second partie). Propr. Intellect. 4, 411–429 (2012) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bulayenko, O.: Permissibility of non-voluntary collective management of copyright under EU law. The case of the French law on out-of-commerce books. JIPITEC 1, 52–68 (2016) Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Derieux, E.: Exploitation numérique des livres indisponibles: déclaration de conformité à la Constitution des dispositions des articles L. 134-1 à L. 134-9 du Code de la propriété intellectuelle. RLDI 103–133 (2014) Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Derieux, E.: Le régime juridique de l’exploitation numérique des libres indisponibles du XXe siècle: Cheval de Troie de Google? RLDI 87, 64–72 (2012) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Drexl, J., Nérisson, S., Trumpke, F., Hilty, R.: Comments of the Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights and Multi-Territorial Licensing of Rights in Musical Works for Online Uses in the Internal Market COM (2012) 372 (16 January 2013). Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property & Competition Law Research Paper No. 13-04. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2208971
  6. 6.
    Emile-Zola-Place, E.: L’exploitation numérique des livres indisponibles du XXe siècle: une gestion collective d’un genre nouveau. Légipresse 295, 355–363 (2012) Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Favale, M., Homberg, F., Kretschmer, M., et al.: Copyright, and the Regulation of Orphan Works: a Comparative Review of Seven Jurisdictions and a Rights Clearance Simulation. Report for the IP Office of the UK (2013/31) Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ficsor, M.: Collective management of copyright and related rights from the viewpoint of international norms and the acquis communautaire. In: Gervais, D. (ed.) Collective Management of Copyright and Relater Rights, 2nd edn. Kluwer, Alphen aan den Rijn (2010) Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gaymard, V.H.: Rapport n. 4189. Ass. Nat. (2012) Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ginsburg, J.: Fair use for free, or permitted-but-paid. Berkeley Technol. Law J. 29, 1382–1446 (2014) Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guibault, L.: Cultural heritage online? Settle it in the country of origin of the work. JIPITEC 6, 173–191 (2015) Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Koskinen-Olsson, T.: Collective management in the Nordic countries. In: Gervais, D. (ed.) Collective Management of Copyright and Relater Rights, 2nd edn. Kluwer, Alphen aan den Rijn (2010) Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leclerc, M-C., Orloff, N.: La gestion collective en matière d’écrit. In: Tafforeau, P. (ed.) Pratique de la propriété littéraire et artistique. Lexis, Paris (2012) Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lucas, A., et al.: Traité de la propriété littéraire et artistique, 4th edn. Lexis, Paris (2012) Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Macrez, F.: L’exploitation numérique des livres indisponibles: que reste-t-il du droit d’auteur? Recl. Dalloz 12, 75–85 (2012) Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Matulionyte, R.: 10 years for Google Books and Europeana: copyright law lessons that the EU could learn from the USA. Int. J. Law Inf. Technol. 1, 44–71 (2016) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mendis, D., Stobo, V.: Extended collective licensing in the UK—one year on: a review of the law and a look ahead to the future. Eur. Intellect. Prop. Rev. 38, 208–220 (2016) Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nérisson, S.: La gestion collective des droits numériques des «livres indisponibles du XXe siècle» renvoyée à la CJEU, le Conseil d’Etat face aux fondamentaux du droit d’auteur. Recl. Dalloz 24, 1427–1431 (2015) Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Piriou, F-M.: Nouvelle querelle des anciens et des modernes: la loi du 1er mars 2012. Commun. Commer. Electron. 10, étude 17 (2012) Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Riis, T., Rognstad, O.A., Schovsbo, J.: Collective agreements for the clearance of copyrights—the case of collective management and extended collective licenses. In: Riis, T. (ed.) User Generated Law. Reconstructing Intellectual Property Law in a Knowledge Society. Edward Elgar, Cheltenam (2016) Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Samuelson, P.: Extended collective licensing to enable mass digitization: a critique of the U.S. copyright office proposal. Eur. Intellect. Prop. Rev. 38, 75–82 (2016) Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sganga, C.: The eloquent silence of soulier and doke and its critical implications for EU copyright law. J. Intellect. Prop. Law Pract. 12(4), 321–330 (2017) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Strowel, A.: The European “Extended Collective Licensing” model. Columbia J. Law Arts 34, 665–669 (2011) Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Verronen, V.: Extended collective license in Finland: a legal instrument for balancing the rights of the author with the interests of the user. J. Copyr. Soc. U.S.A. 49, 1143–1159 (2002) Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    von Lewinsky, S.: Mandatory Collective Administration of Exclusive Rights. A Case study on Its Compatibility with International and EC Copyright Law. UNESCO e-Copyright Bullettin, January–March (2004) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ERA 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.BudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations