"Joaquín Almunia, the EU competition commissioner, last year sanctioned a “fact finding” effort in light of the (Murphy) ruling to see whether barriers to cross-border access merited antitrust scrutiny and possible enforcement action.
Some investigators are now poised to step up their inquiries into whether “absolute territorial protection clauses” break competition law. These stop licensees from selling to other countries or accepting unsolicited demands from overseas customers to pay to access the content.
Maurits Dolmans, a partner at Cleary Gottlieb, said the 2011 Premier League case concerned satellite sports broadcasting and the court left open whether it could be applied at all to other distribution channels and other forms of content.
“The Commission will have to take into account different economic factors,” he said. “Forcing EU-wide licensing may be attractive for consumers in richer countries, who may pay less, but not necessarily for con…
B. Hugenholtz, Flexing Authors’ Rights, Peter Jaszi Distinguished Lecture on Intellectual Property, Video here (from 1:14:16).
"It's not always fun to live in an authors' rights country" at 1:23:38.
Highly recommended, in the following some notes I took:
Who could be against "fair" use in Europe and elsewhere?
A number of historic reasons:
- civil law tradition: the law should be made by the people, the judge should be no more than "la bouche de la loi" (mouthpiece of the law)
- authors' rights: different rationale, constitutions at national level hardly ever mention intellectual property: there to protect authors as a matter of natural justice; exceptions narrowly interpreted. As part of that, the moral rights' tradition.
- affecting legal certainty
- opening the floodgates to piracy
- fear of US legal imperialism ("fair US to us")
- fair use in conflict with the Berne Convention, with TRIPS
"Maria Martín Prat suggested that new EU copyright legislation proposed sometime in 2014 could incorporate the Marrakesh Treaty and that this might be needed before ratification to harmonize EU member state laws on exceptions to copyright. This proposal that would mean a number years of delay in the ratification of the treaty was criticized by a number of MEPs present. Martin Prat gave as an example of why a new law would be needed the presence of “dyslexic persons” in the Treaty which is not covered by EU copyright exceptions legislation."
Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society Art.5(3) (b) uses, for the benefit of people with a disability, which are directly related to the disability and of a non-commercial nature, to the extent required by the specific disability;
Dyslexia not included?!?
Alessandra Tonazzi, Italian Competition Authority
Mor Bakhoum, Max Planck Institute, Munich November 15, 2013 - 10.30 am
Trento University Department of Economics and Management
Room 3C Via Inama, 5—Trento
P. 43: "Action: Following the technical review of the published draft legislation, the government will bring into force secondary legislation to enable text and data mining for non-commercial purposes in 2014."
"The objective of the study is to provide an assessment of different national approaches and mechanisms to ensure remuneration for authors and performers for the exploitation of their works and performances and to determine whether, and to what extent, the differences that exist among the Member States affect levels of remuneration and the functioning of the internal market."