The committee on the internal market (IMCO) has taken a position in favour of a neighbouring right for press publishers, contrary to the opinion of the reporter, Catherine Stihler (S&D, UK). This vote, which took place on 8 June, is only an opinion, as the committee competent on the substance is the legal affairs committee (JURI).
Readers may recall that in September 2016, the European Commission proposed a revision of the Community rules on copyright to respond to the current legal uncertainty facing copyright holders and users (see EUROPE 11624). Amongst other things, it suggested adapting the exemptions to copyright to the digital and cross-border environment, improving licensing practices to respond to the problem of the pay gap and bringing in a new neighbouring right for press publishers.
The committee on the internal market and consumer protection held a tight vote, with many amendments abandoned due to a lack of equality. The MEPs ultimately decided not to oppose the Commission's proposal to create a new neighbouring right for press publishers. In her draft report, Stihler relied on three arguments to justify her opposition to this proposal: (1) publishers are perfectly entitled to leave the system at any time; (2) adding this right would further increase the complexity of licensing agreements; (3) there is no guarantee that increasing the remuneration of publishers would benefit authors.
The main amendments to the initial proposal concern exemptions to copyright. The MEPs recommend creating a 'panorama exception' to copyright that would, for instance, allow the dissemination of photographs of works and buildings visible from public places. At the moment, with the exception of Italy and Luxembourg, all member states already apply specific provisions in this area. Another change is that the committee wishes to bring in an exception for the use of non-commercial works (that are no longer on the market or never have been) by institutions responsible for the management of cultural heritage, unless there are extended collective licensing solutions already in place.
As regards article 13 on the value gap, the MEPs recommend cooperation between rights holders and service-providers of the IT company. They stress that licensing agreements should not impose any general obligation on these providers to check the information they transmit or store. For the remainder, the MEPs are also retaining the idea of a bestseller clause, whereby artists may claim additional, equitable and appropriate remuneration when the remuneration originally agreed is disproportionately low compared to the unanticipated subsequent relevant revenues and benefits derived from the exploitation of the works or performances.
The committee on legal affairs, which is competent for this, will take a position on 13 July. (Original version in French by Sophie Petitjean)