Flexibility Grave – Partial Reproduction Focus and Closed System Fetishism in CJEU, Pelham

IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law - Tập 51 Số 6 - Trang 751-769 - 2020
Martin Senftleben1
1Ph.D, Professor of Intellectual Property Law, Institute for Information Law (IViR), University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Tóm tắt

Abstract

In the ongoing discussion about the impact of fundamental rights on EU copyright law, thePelhamjudgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has received much attention. However, the decision also raises important legal-doctrinal issues. The CJEU employs the harmonized right of reproduction as a vehicle to regulate adaptations of pre-existing source material. Moreover, the Court insists on a balancing of interests within the EU matrix of exclusive rights and limitations. The closed list of limitations in EU copyright law, however, can hardly be expected to offer sufficient breathing space for adaptation scenarios. As the Information Society Directive did not harmonize the right of adaptation, there was no need to include indispensable free adaptation rules that have evolved at the national level, such as the German “free use” doctrine. Instead of embracing national rules of equity and fairness to fill the gap, the CJEU is reluctant to borrow from the legal traditions of EU Member States and misses an important opportunity to provide guidance for the regulation of adaptations outside the sound sampling arena. After an introduction to the German “Metall auf Metall” saga that led to thePelhamdecision, the following analysis sheds light on these developments in EU copyright law and discusses problems arising from the approach taken by the CJEU.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Alberdingk Thijm CA (1998a) Fair use: het auteursrechtelijk evenwicht hersteld. Tijdschrift voor auteurs-, media- en informatierecht 1998:145

Alberdingk Thijm CA (1998b) Fair use – in weiter Ferne, so nah. Tijdschrift voor auteurs-, media- en informatirecht 1998:176

Aplin T, Bently L (2020) Displacing the dominance of the three-step test: the role of global, mandatory fair use. In: Ng L, Sun H, Balganesh S (eds) Comparative aspects of limitations and exceptions in copyright law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Bently L, Dusollier S, Geiger C et al (2019) Sound sampling, a permitted use under EU copyright law? Opinion of the European Copyright Society in relation to the pending reference before the CJEU in case C-476/17, Pelham GmbH v. Hütter. Int Rev Intell Prop Compet Law 50:467

Cohen Jehoram H (1998) Fair use – die ferne Geliebte. Tijdschrift voor auteurs-, media- en informatierecht 1998:174

Cohen Jehoram H (2005a) Nu de gevolgen van trouw en ontrouw aan de Auteursrechtrichtlijn voor fair use, tijdelijke reproductie en driestappentoets. Tijdschrift voor auteurs-, media- en informatierecht 2005:153

Cohen Jehoram H (2005b) Restrictions on copyright and their abuse. Eur Intell Prop Rev 2005:359

de Zwaan M (2012) Ruimte in het citaatrecht in Europa? Zoekmachine vindt niets bij “search naar flexibilities”. Tijdschrift voor auteurs-, media- en informatierecht 2012:141

Dreier T (2001) Balancing proprietary and public domain interests: inside or outside of proprietary rights? In: Dreyfuss RC, Leenheer-Zimmerman D, First H (eds) Expanding the boundaries of intellectual property. Innovation policy for the knowledge economy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 295

Dreier T, Schulze G (2018) Urheberrechtsgesetz, 6th edn. C.H. Beck, Munich

Duhanic I (2016) Copy this sound! The cultural importance of sampling for hip hop music in copyright law – a copyright law analysis of the sampling decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court. Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht – Internationaler Teil 2016:1007

Förster A (2008) Fair use. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

Geiger C, Izyumenko E (2014) Copyright on the human rights’ trial: redefining the boundaries of exclusivity through freedom of expression. Int Rev Intell Prop Compet Law 45:316

Geiger C, Izyumenko E (2019) Freedom of expression as an external limitation to copyright law in the EU: the Advocate General of the CJEU shows the way. Eur Intell Prop Rev 41:131

Geiger C, Izyumenko E (2020) The constitutionalization of intellectual property law in the EU and the Funke Medien, Pelham and Spiegel Online decisions of the CJEU: progress, but still some way to go! Int Rev Intell Prop Compet Law 51 (forthcoming)

Geller PE (2010) A German approach to fair use: test cases for TRIPs criteria for copyright limitations? J Copyright Soc USA 57:901

Gervais D, Derclaye E (2012) The scope of computer program protection after SAS: are we closer to answers? Eur Intell Prop Rev 2012:570

Griffiths J (2014) The role of the Court of Justice in the development of European Union copyright law. In: Stamatoudi A, Torremans P (eds) EU copyright law. A commentary. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, p 1106

Griffiths J (2019) European Union copyright law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights – Advocate General Szpunar’s opinions in (C-469/17) Funke Medien, (C-476/17) Pelham GmbH and (C-516/17) Spiegel Online. ERA Forum 2019:35

Hugenholtz PB (1989) Auteursrecht op informatie. Kluwer, Deventer

Hugenholtz PB (2013) Comment on the judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union, 15 March 2012, case C-135/10. SCF/Marco del Corso. Nederlandse Jurisprudentie 2013:197

Hugenholtz PB, Senftleben MRF (2011) Fair use in Europe. In search of flexibilities. IViR/VU Centre for Law and Governance, Amsterdam

Kulk S, Teunissen P (2019a) Naar een nieuw fundament – hoe het Handvest het auteursrecht hervormt (deel 1). Tijdschrift voor auteurs-, media- en informatierecht 2019:121

Kulk S, Teunissen P (2019b) Naar een nieuw fundament – hoe het Handvest het auteursrecht hervormt (deel 2). Tijdschrift voor auteurs-, media- en informatierecht 2019:149

Kur A (2014) Trademarks function, don’t they? Int Rev Intell Prop Compet Law 45:434

Leistner M (2019) Ende gut, alles gut … oder “Vorhang zu und alle Fragen offen”? Das salomonische Urteil des EuGH in Sachen “Pelham” [Metall auf Metall]. Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht 2019:1008

Morrison DM (2008) Bridgeport redux: digital sampling and audience recoding. Fordham Intell Prop Med Entertain Law J 19:75

Ohly A (2017) Hip Hop und die Zukunft der “freien Benutzung” im EU-Urheberrecht – Anmerkungen zum Vorlagebeschluss des BGH “Metall auf Metall III”. Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht 2017:964

Podszun R (2016) Postmoderne Kreativität im Konflikt mit dem Urheberrechtsgesetz und die Annäherung an “fair use”. Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht 2016:606

Ricketson S, Ginsburg JC (2006) International copyright and neighbouring rights, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Schipper BHM (2014) Het chilling effect van Kraftwerk I/II op sound sampling. Tijdschrift voor auteurs-, media- en informatierecht 2014:105

Schipper BHM (2019) De kunst van het samplen na Pelham. Tijdschrift voor auteurs-, media- en informatierecht 2019:162

Senftleben MRF (2010) The international three-step test – a model provision for EC fair use legislation. J Intell Prop Inf Technol E-Commer Law 2010:67

Senftleben MRF (2012) Quotations, parody and fair use. In: Hugenholtz PB, Quaedvlieg AA, Visser DJG (eds) A century of Dutch copyright law – Auteurswet 1912–2012. DeLex, Amstelveen, p 359

Senftleben MRF (2013a) Comparative approaches to fair use: an important impulse for reforms in EU copyright law. In: Dinwoodie GB (ed) Methods and perspectives in intellectual property. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, p 30

Senftleben MRF (2013b) Internet search results – a permissible quotation? Revue internationale du droit d’auteur 2013:3

Senftleben MRF (2016) Trademark transactions in EU law: refining the approach to selective distribution networks and national unfair competition law. In: de Werra J, Calboli I (eds) The law and practice of trademark transactions – a global and local outlook. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, p 327

Snijders T, van Deursen S (2019) The road not taken – the CJEU sheds light on the role of fundamental rights in the European copyright framework – a case note on the Pelham, Spiegel Online and Funke Medien decisions. Int Rev Intell Prop Compet Law 50:1176

Spoor JH, Verkade DWF, Visser DJG (2019) Auteursrecht, 4th edn. Wolters Kluwer, Deventer

van Eechoud MMM (2011) Comment on the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union, 1 December 2011, case C-145/10, Painer. Tijdschrift voor auteurs-, media en informatierecht 2011:6

Visser DJG (2013) Openbaar maken met ketchup. Tijdschrift voor auteurs-, media- en informatierecht 2013:41

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law

Tập 51 Số 6

751-769

Thông tin tác giả