EU's New Copyright Directive Could Mean Big Changes for Google, YouTube and Other Web Platforms
New copyright rules, the first update of copyright law in 20 years, would require platforms such as Google and YouTube to give content rights-holders a greater share of the revenue they earn from that content.
March 04, 2019 at 04:11 PM
4 minute read
The European Union has approved new copyright rules that will give content rights-holders a greater share of revenue from platforms such as YouTube, Google and Facebook hosting their content.
Representatives of the EU's 28 national governments and lawmakers from the European Parliament reached an agreement on new rules late last month after two and a half years of negotiations and an intense lobbying campaign that pitted tech giants such as Google and Facebook against film and music companies and digital rights campaigners.
The main change to EU copyright rules, if officially approved, would introduce a requirement for platforms such as YouTube to negotiate licences with film producers, record companies, collecting societies and other rights-holders to host content on their sites, while Google News would have to buy licences to host newspaper articles. Small excerpts, or snippets, will be permitted without licensing, however. And hyperlinks are not covered by the rules.
The aim of the copyright directive is to redress what rights-holders call the "value gap" between what platforms earn by hosting others' content and what rights-holders themselves are paid.
The EU's Council of Ministers and the European Parliament still have to formally sign off on the new copyright directive – a move expected to occur later this month.
Julia Reda, a German lawmaker from the digital freedom Pirate Party who is fiercely opposed to the deal, has organised a campaign to block approval of the agreement. But that opposition campaign is not expected to succeed.
Helen Smith, executive chair of independent record companies association Impala, welcomed the agreement. "Impala has been one of the longstanding porters of the legislation," she said. "It's a huge step forward in how platforms deal with rights-holders."
Record companies managed to insert into the final agreement the principle of "appropriate and proportionate remuneration", meaning rights-holders should be paid an amount based on the revenue generated by their material when it is used, rather than a flat fee.
Platforms will also be responsible for content illegally uploaded to their sites.
Critics of the final compromise argued that it would harm freedom of expression on the internet, because vast amounts of content would be blocked by automated filters designed to weed out unlicensed content.
"This deal is a threat to small publishers, authors and internet users alike and risks putting the internet as we know it solely in the hands of the tech and media giants," the opposition's Reda said.
She said the algorithms of upload filters would not be able to tell the difference between copyright infringement and legal parody.
"Even the most sophisticated upload filters routinely block perfectly legal content. Requiring platforms to use upload filters would not just lead to more frequent blocking of legal uploads, it would also make life difficult for smaller platforms that cannot afford filtering software," she said.
Impala's Smith said claims that internet memes would be banned are "completely exaggerated" and that the directive has been carefully drafted to provide for exemptions, such as parody or quotation. "It's one of the most complicated pieces of legislation" the EU has produced, she said.
Mark Jansen, spokesperson for Google in northern Europe, said copyright reform needs to benefit everyone, including European creators and consumers, small publishers and platforms.
"We'll be studying the final text of the EU copyright directive and it will take some time to determine next steps," he said. "The details will matter, so we welcome the chance to continue conversations across Europe."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAshurst Beijing Chief Representative Leaves for New York Boutique Sterlington
Baker McKenzie, Norton Rose & Other Top Litigators Foresee Rise in AI, Data & ESG Disputes
Axiom-Ince: SFO Charges Five, Including Former Head, Following Investigation
3 minute readSDT Upholds SLAPP Claim Against Osborne Clarke Partner Advising Nadhim Zahawi
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Volunteers Unreimbursed Expenses — Tax Incentives For Itemizers
- 2Carter Mario Achieves $225,000 Settlement in Motor Vehicle Case
- 3Legal Departments Gripe About Outside Counsel but Rarely Talk to Them
- 4'Further Investment in Power' Will Drive Big Law Business—But What About Clean Energy Projects?
- 5SEC Penalizes Wells Fargo, LPL Financial $900,000 Each for Inaccurate Trading Data
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250