Brussels, 09/12/2015 (Agence Europe) - The first area for building the single digital strategy has been launched: on Wednesday 9 December, the Commission presented a new body of rules on copyright and digital contracts.
These proposals seek to ensure that consumers can travel with content that is legally registered in their country of residence; it also seeks to improve consumer protection when they purchase online products or digital content.
In addition to these legislative proposals, the European Commission also presented its action plan to modernise European copyright law over the next six months.
Nearly all the different stakeholders regretted the fact that these proposals lacked a proposal on geo-blocking, which prevents Internet users accessing online content broadcast in another member state (this complaint was voiced by the EPP and Greens/EFA, for example). The Vice-President for the Single Digital Market, Andrus Ansip, justified this absence by pointing out that “the current copyright system is based on the territoriality system, which allows for the pre-financing of films. It does not facilitate the debate on cross-border access”.
Commission's philosophy. The action plan contains the Commission's intentions with regard to tackling piracy, expanding access to content throughout the Union and creating a fairer market. It also therefore announced the re-examination of the “Satellite and Cable” directive (Directive 93/83/EEC) in order to improve the cross-border distribution of online radio and television programmes, in respect of the territoriality principle. It is also committed to expanding copyright exceptions, which in certain circumstances allow for protected works to be used without preliminary authorisation from the rights holders. Currently, Union law only includes two exceptions: one focuses on certain temporary reproductive acts and the other on orphan works (Directive 2012/28/EU). The Commission' s exploratory work focuses on the extension of exemptions to the scrutiny of texts and data for scientific research purposes, the conservation of cultural heritage, to certain content kept in university libraries and photos of buildings and works of art permanently located in public areas (the “freedom of panorama” clause). The Commission also announced its intention to examine opportunities for specific measures for certifying information, “including that on rights”. In other words, it could envisage a “Google tax” if German and Spanish examples, which have both introduced this tax in their respective national legislation, prove conclusive. Ansip said that “certain new products are not neutral intermediaries but active sales agents”.
Online purchasing and access. In addition to these projects the Commission presented three concrete legislative proposals, as outlined in our previous edition (see EUROPE 11448). The first text involves portability of content, which will ensure that subscribers to online content services can continue using them while temporarily present in another member state. The two other texts, two directives, focus on online purchasing: the first involves the provision of digital content (for example, music streaming on YouTube) and the second, online sales of tangible products (such as the online purchasing of clothes). These proposals concur for the first time on consumer rights when purchasing second-hand products online from a professional. The proposal on tangible products sold online extends the burden of proof to two years, instead of the current six months.
Mixed response. The European Consumers Bureau (BEUC) welcomed the proposal on digital content very positively. On the other hand, it was broadly critical of the one on purchasing tangible products online because it thought this text would lead to market fragmentation, confusion for consumers and a watering down of their rights in several European countries. BusinessEurope represents private employers at a European level and supports idea of comprehensive harmonisation but only if this is targeted on online purchases. It also expressed misgivings about including free content in the scope of the draft directive on digital products. Evelyne Gebhardt MEP (S&D, Germany) regretted that the Commission had separated digital content from tangible goods sold online.
With regard to the broader question of copyright, the creative industries meeting up within the Creativity Works! platform was concerned by the extremely large number of exceptions. Anne Bergman-Tahon, from the European Publishers Federation said that the solutions should come from the market. Yvon Thiec, the delegate general from Eurocinéma, regretted the lack of a clear time limit for the draft regulation on portability. In response to this criticism, one Community source explained “the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice defines the place of residency as the place where the person resides or where their centre of interest is located… The service provider can check the details to avoid abuse being committed”. (Original version in French by Sophie Petitjean)