Strasbourg, 24/02/2014 (Agence Europe) - What about the system of private copying levies? This will be a virtuous circle for the funding of culture, in the view of MEP Françoise Castex (S&D, France). In the age of MP3, smartphones and portable hard disks, she defends this model in an own-initiative report, which will be adopted by the European Parliament in plenary on Thursday 27 February. She explains the benefits of modernising private copying fees and heads off criticism (interview by MD).
Agence Europe: What is the private copying levy system, and why is this reflection being carried out?
Françoise Castex: The system is in force in 23 member states, it brings in €600 million a year and 80% of this money is collected in three countries: Germany, France and Austria. There is therefore an enormous potential to extend this. It is a virtuous system because it is a consumer contribution towards paying artists and cultural distribution. Consumers who purchase material which can benefit from protection also make up the audience for culture, these are the people who go to concerts, for example. They are contributing to copyright by private copying and this contribution goes to pay for and finance creation and distribution: it is a circle of funding at a time when culture budgets are being cut.
What do you suggest to make the most of this virtuous circle?
I am calling for the member states and the European Commission to take ownership of this project, particularly during the revision on the directive on copyright. We need a common definition, to reflect on what is compensated, to harmonise the levels of fees for private copying. I suggest that 25% of the revenue be reserved to support creation and cultural distribution. This is the minimum rate and is currently applied in France, but more than this is also possible - it is 50% in Austria. We have to ensure that the system works transparently. This generalised transparency throughout the EU will satisfy consumers. They themselves have to be informed about what they are paying for. At the moment, they do not know what amount makes up the private copying levy or how it is used.
Who are the opponents to the system of private copying levies?
There are the importers of material, who are represented by Digital Europe. This private copying levy cuts into their profit margins. They argue that, if we got rid of private copying, the material would be cheaper for the consumer. However, in the United Kingdom and Spain, where private copying does not exist, the prices are the same. There have also been criticisms from consumers, which I have taken into account in my report, as consumers would like there to be harmonisation.
Some people believe that, in the digital era, the system of levies for private copying would not be justified...
This is not true, the option to copy is far more developed: the copies are identical, much quicker and better quality. Having access to music online, through streaming, does not mean that people no longer store it, not counting the fact that copies go beyond the private circle, thanks to filesharing. The act of copying is now such a part of everyday life that we forget that it is always an exception to copyright. In the digital age, we always need this exception, and private copying levies are what we pay for that exception. I believe that we should go even further. I am proposing a reflection on the “cloud” as a public resource for storing works on a virtual hard disk. I am not deciding on this, I am simply calling for the Commission to carry out a study in greater depth.
Why is it better for the private copying levy system to coexist with the licensing system, rather than to replace it?
iTunes has negotiated with producers to make their catalogue available and to have the right to make it available to consumers. The licensing system limits the number of downloads, but does not subsequently prevent copying. Additionally, the money does not go to the same people. Under the licensing system, the artists are paid once and once only in a rights exclusivity contract. Under the private copying system, as the fee is not managed solely by the majors, but by collective management companies, the redistribution happens throughout the entire distribution chain (producer, artist and singer). This is a fairer redistribution of the copyright, which the licensing system does not allow, and that is why I believe that it should be something that comes on top. (MD/transl.fl)