Directive 2011/77/EU: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
(20 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Directive 2011/77/EU on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights''' amended [[Directive 2006/116/EC]] and extended copyright terms of recordings from 50 to 70 years. It was passed by the [[Council of the European Union]] on 12 September 2011<ref>[http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/term-protection/index_en.htm#maincontentSec1 Directive 2011/77/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2011 amending Directive 2006/116/EC on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights].</ref><ref> |
'''Directive 2011/77/EU on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights''' amended [[Directive 2006/116/EC]] and extended copyright terms of recordings from 50 to 70 years. It was passed by the [[Council of the European Union]] on 12 September 2011<ref>[http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/term-protection/index_en.htm#maincontentSec1 Directive 2011/77/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2011 amending Directive 2006/116/EC on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights].</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title = European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press release - Brussels, 12 September 2011 New rules on term of protection of music recordings|url = http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=PRES/11/303&type=HTML|website = europa.eu|access-date = 2016-02-20}}</ref> after the [[European Parliament]] passed it on 23 April 2009 establishing a term of 70 years,<ref>[http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/627&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en EUROPA – Press Releases – Commission welcomes Parliament vote on copyright term<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> lower than the 95 years the [[European Commission]] had proposed on 16 July 2008.<ref>[http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/08/1156&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=fr EUROPA - Press Releases - Intellectual Property: Commission adopts forward-looking package<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> |
||
== Purpose of the extension == |
== Purpose of the extension == |
||
The stated purpose of the extension of the recording [[copyright term]] is to "bring performers' protection more in line with that already given to authors - 70 years after their death." The term in Directive 2006/116/EC<ref> |
The stated purpose of the extension of the recording [[copyright term]] is to "bring performers' protection more in line with that already given to authors - 70 years after their death." The term in Directive 2006/116/EC<ref>{{CELEX|32006L0116|format=HTML|text=Directive 2006/116/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights}}, article 3.1 (Duration of related rights)</ref> is 50 years after publishing the performance, or 50 years after the performance if it is not published. |
||
== Argument for |
== Argument for and against== |
||
The Impact of Copyright Extension for Sound Recordings in the UK (cited by the European Commission)<ref>[http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/08/508&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en EUROPA - Press Releases - Commission Proposal on a Directive for Term Extension – Frequently Asked Questions (see , IP/08/1156)<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> suggested that the extension to 95 years would increase revenue by £2.2 million to £34.9 |
The Impact of Copyright Extension for Sound Recordings in the UK (cited by the European Commission)<ref>[http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/08/508&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en EUROPA - Press Releases - Commission Proposal on a Directive for Term Extension – Frequently Asked Questions (see , IP/08/1156)<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> suggested that the extension to 95 years would increase revenue by £2.2 million to £34.9 |
||
million in present value terms over the next ten |
million in present value terms over the next ten years. It also suggested that the "prices of in-copyright and out-of-copyright sound recordings are not significantly different" so that consumers would not be impacted. |
||
<ref>{{cite |
<ref>{{cite journal|url=http://www.ipo.gov.uk/report-termextension.pdf |author=Price Waterhouse |title=The Impact of Copyright Extension for Sound Recordings in the UK |journal=(report Commissioned by the BPI) |year=2006 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20111006232205/http://www.ipo.gov.uk/report-termextension.pdf |archivedate=2011-10-06 }}</ref> |
||
The Gowers review of Intellectual Property stated that "is not clear that extension of term would benefit musicians and performers very much in practice."<ref>[[Gowers Review of Intellectual Property]] {{cite web |url=http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/gowers_review_index.htm |title=Archived copy |accessdate=2010-04-07 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100407181602/http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/gowers_review_index.htm |archivedate=2010-04-07 }} Andrew Gowers The Gowers Review of Intellectual Property pg 50 section 4.29</ref> An article written by Dutch academics and published in the European Intellectual Property Review, ''Never Forever: Why Extending the Term of Protection for Sound Recording is a Bad Idea'', concluded that the arguments for copyright extension were not convincing.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ivir.nl/publications/helberger/EIPR_2008_5.pdf |title=Never Forever: Why Extending the Term of Protection for Sound Recording is a Bad Idea |first1=Natali |last1=Helberger |first2=Nicole |last2=Dufft |first3=Stef |last3=Van Gompel |first4=Bernt |last4=Hugenholtz |publisher=Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam |access-date=2009-12-31 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090725152841/http://www.ivir.nl/publications/helberger/EIPR_2008_5.pdf |archive-date=2009-07-25 |url-status=dead }}</ref> |
|||
== Argument against the proposal == |
|||
The Gowers review of Intellectual Property stated that "is not clear that extension of term would benefit musicians and performers very much in practice."<ref>[[Gowers Review of Intellectual Property]] [http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/gowers_review_index.htm] Andrew Gowers The Gowers Review of Intellectual Property pg 50 section 4.29</ref> |
|||
A report commissioned by the European Commission, ''Never Forever: Why Extending the Term of Protection for Sound Recording is a Bad Idea'', concluded that the arguments for copyright extension were not convincing.<ref>{{cite paper |url=http://www.ivir.nl/publications/helberger/EIPR_2008_5.pdf |title=Never Forever: Why Extending the Term of Protection for Sound Recording is a Bad Idea |first=Natali |last=Helberger |first2=Nicole |last2=Dufft |first3=Stef |last3=Van Gompel |first4=Bernt |last4=HugenHoltz |publisher=Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam }}</ref> |
|||
== See also == |
== See also == |
||
Line 20: | Line 16: | ||
== References == |
== References == |
||
<references /> |
|||
{{reflist}} |
|||
== External links == |
== External links == |
||
* [http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/term-protection/index_en.htm#maincontentSec1 EC Term of Protection Page] |
* [http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/term-protection/index_en.htm#maincontentSec1 EC Term of Protection Page] |
||
* [http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:265:0001:0005:EN:PDF Directive 2011/77/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2011 amending Directive 2006/116/EC on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights] |
* [http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:265:0001:0005:EN:PDF Directive 2011/77/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2011 amending Directive 2006/116/EC on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights] |
||
* [http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P6-TA-2009-0282+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN] |
* [http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P6-TA-2009-0282+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN Procedure : 2008/0157(COD)] |
||
* [http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+IM-PRESS+20090422IPR54191+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN] |
* [http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+IM-PRESS+20090422IPR54191+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN Music copyright to be extended to 70 years for performers] |
||
* News |
|||
Directive in the news: |
|||
* [http://www.bpi.co.uk/our-work/policy-and-lobbying/article/about-us-child-child.aspx British Recorded Music Industry statement] |
|||
* [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7244928.stm] [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3547788.stm] BBC News articles on proposed extension. |
|||
* [http://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/08/02/14/1626228/EU-Commissioner-Proposes-95-year-Copyright Slashdot Article] |
|||
* [https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/04/eu-extends-musical-copyrights-by-20-years-eyes-movies-next.ars Arstechnica Article] |
|||
** [http://www.out-law.com/page-9269] |
|||
* [http://www.out-law.com/page-9269 Out-law.com: Special Reports Sign in to my account Topics Intellectual Property European Commission proposes copyright extension Directive] |
|||
* http://kluwercopyrightblog.com/2011/04/06/o-no-not-again-term-extension/ |
|||
[[Category:Copyright law of the European Union]] |
[[Category:Copyright law of the European Union]] |
Latest revision as of 15:28, 21 October 2023
Directive 2011/77/EU on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights amended Directive 2006/116/EC and extended copyright terms of recordings from 50 to 70 years. It was passed by the Council of the European Union on 12 September 2011[1][2] after the European Parliament passed it on 23 April 2009 establishing a term of 70 years,[3] lower than the 95 years the European Commission had proposed on 16 July 2008.[4]
Purpose of the extension
[edit]The stated purpose of the extension of the recording copyright term is to "bring performers' protection more in line with that already given to authors - 70 years after their death." The term in Directive 2006/116/EC[5] is 50 years after publishing the performance, or 50 years after the performance if it is not published.
Argument for and against
[edit]The Impact of Copyright Extension for Sound Recordings in the UK (cited by the European Commission)[6] suggested that the extension to 95 years would increase revenue by £2.2 million to £34.9 million in present value terms over the next ten years. It also suggested that the "prices of in-copyright and out-of-copyright sound recordings are not significantly different" so that consumers would not be impacted. [7]
The Gowers review of Intellectual Property stated that "is not clear that extension of term would benefit musicians and performers very much in practice."[8] An article written by Dutch academics and published in the European Intellectual Property Review, Never Forever: Why Extending the Term of Protection for Sound Recording is a Bad Idea, concluded that the arguments for copyright extension were not convincing.[9]
See also
[edit]- Copyright Term Extension Act (United States)
References
[edit]- ^ Directive 2011/77/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2011 amending Directive 2006/116/EC on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights.
- ^ "European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press release - Brussels, 12 September 2011 New rules on term of protection of music recordings". europa.eu. Retrieved 2016-02-20.
- ^ EUROPA – Press Releases – Commission welcomes Parliament vote on copyright term
- ^ EUROPA - Press Releases - Intellectual Property: Commission adopts forward-looking package
- ^ Directive 2006/116/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights, article 3.1 (Duration of related rights)
- ^ EUROPA - Press Releases - Commission Proposal on a Directive for Term Extension – Frequently Asked Questions (see , IP/08/1156)
- ^ Price Waterhouse (2006). "The Impact of Copyright Extension for Sound Recordings in the UK" (PDF). (report Commissioned by the BPI). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-10-06.
- ^ Gowers Review of Intellectual Property "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2010-04-07. Retrieved 2010-04-07.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link) Andrew Gowers The Gowers Review of Intellectual Property pg 50 section 4.29 - ^ Helberger, Natali; Dufft, Nicole; Van Gompel, Stef; Hugenholtz, Bernt. "Never Forever: Why Extending the Term of Protection for Sound Recording is a Bad Idea" (PDF). Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-07-25. Retrieved 2009-12-31.
External links
[edit]- EC Term of Protection Page
- Directive 2011/77/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2011 amending Directive 2006/116/EC on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights
- Procedure : 2008/0157(COD)
- Music copyright to be extended to 70 years for performers
Directive in the news:
- British Recorded Music Industry statement
- [1] [2] BBC News articles on proposed extension.
- Slashdot Article
- Arstechnica Article
- Out-law.com: Special Reports Sign in to my account Topics Intellectual Property European Commission proposes copyright extension Directive
- http://kluwercopyrightblog.com/2011/04/06/o-no-not-again-term-extension/