Performers have a right to equitable remuneration for the public performance and broadcast of their recordings.
Yes, e-lending can land itself a spot under the public lending right. That is what the European Court of Justice held in its preliminary ruling in the case between Vereniging Openbare Bibliotheken v. Stichting Leenrecht (10 November 2016, case C‑174/15). The decision clarifies the Rental and Lending Rights Directive’s scope of application. It is an…
The prior express consent of the author is necessary to use a copyright work under EU law; the statutory presumption of collective management of copyright doesn’t comply with the need for express prior consent, even with an opt-out possibility and for a legitimate objective, Advocate General Wathelet said in his opinion on the pending request…
On June 16, Advocate General (AG) Spuznar delivered his opinion in Case C‑174/15 Vereniging Openbare Bibliotheken v Stichting Leenrecht. The case emerged from a dispute between VOB, the association of Dutch public libraries, and a foundation entrusted with collecting the remuneration for lending which is due to authors. In VOB’s view, the lending of electronic…
In response to a reference from the Spanish Supreme Court, the CJEU held that Article 5(2)(b) of Directive 2001/29/EC must be interpreted as precluding a scheme for fair compensation for private copying like the Spanish system, which is financed from the General State Budget in such a way that it is not possible to ensure that…
In a judgment of 17 March 2016, the Cour de cassation, the French Supreme Court, ruled that the judicial courts are required to assess and award the remuneration for private copying in situations where one of the decisions of the Commission in charge of setting the fair compensation has been annulled. A full summary of…
In this decision, the CJEU tackled an international jurisdiction issue, since what was essentially under debate in the main proceedings was the applicability of Article 5(3) of Regulation 44/2001 on jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters, which enables, in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict, persons domiciled in one Member State to be sued…
1 Background, facts and questions On 9 June 2016 the CJEU ruled on Case C-470/14 – EGEDA and Others (‘EGEDA’). This marks the tenth occasion on which the Court has ruled on the private copying exception or limitation in Article 5(2)(b) of Directive 2001/29/EC (the ‘InfoSoc Directive’) after Padawan, Stichting de Thuiskopie, Luksan, VG Wort,…
In a judgment of 17 March 2016, the Cour de cassation, the French Supreme Court, ruled that the judicial courts are required to assess and award compensation for private copying in situations where a decision of the Commission in charge of setting the fair compensation has been annulled. This judgment seems to mean that the…
The question referred to the CJEU in the Austro-Mechana case (C-572/14) was whether a claim for payment of fair compensation for private copying, as per Article 5(2)(b) of Directive 2001/29, can be considered to be a matter relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict and, therefore, whether Article 5(3) of Regulation 44/2001 on jurisdiction in civil…
The Supreme Court validated the method used by the French collecting society Sacem to determine how the proceeds relating to the exploitation of musical works in clubs and discotheques should be redistributed to the rightholders. A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law
