display
If it were up to the federal government, it would quickly put an end to the ongoing debate about reforming copyright law that has been dragging on for years.
And wave through the now completed draft law from the Ministry of Justice, which will go into the first reading in the Bundestag at the end of March.
If it does so - and since there are also a few designated media politicians in the Bundestag who still have or want to see through the jungle of copyright law, there are some arguments in favor of it - the government would have to expect constitutional lawsuits from the creative industry.
Florian Drücke, Managing Director of the Bundesverband Musikindustrie (BVMI), announced such a step in a press conference on Thursday.
Parts of the bill violate constitutional law.
His protest is also and above all directed against a so-called trivial rule, according to which audio and video clips of up to 15 seconds in length may be uploaded to digital platforms in the future.
Such clippings then fell into a “minor use” category.
However, such an exception, which would also apply to text lengths of up to 160 characters, is not provided for in the EU directive on which the German reform is based.
What appears to be minor to the authors of the draft in the Ministry of Justice is, in the experience of rights holders and exploiters, a big thing.
In the music industry, for example, it is the TikTok platform that reaches more than 100 million people a month in Europe alone with very short videos with music that users upload there.
display
Another example: The constitutional lawyer Christoph Möllers, who dealt with the draft law, refers to goal scenes from soccer games, which usually last no longer than 15 seconds.
These scenes can only be used for a very short time, so they can be monetized for rights holders who pay a lot of money for sports licenses.
Just one week after a game, ownership of a shot on goal is almost worthless.
Möllers said he had "tough constitutional objections" to the bill.
Mark Chung, who represents the Association of Independent Music Entrepreneurs (VUT), mentioned another serious argument.
The law forces the rights holders into a "forced collectivization", said Chung, who was bassist and manager of the Einstürzende Neubauten in the 90s.
He pointed out that rights to music titles would in future no longer be exercised by rights holders - including not only music labels, but also many artists who exploit their rights on their own - but only by collecting societies.
This regulation is "unworldly", because it deprives artists of the possibility of freely negotiating with the digital platforms.
It is not to be expected that more money will flow to artists through the exclusive channels of collecting societies.
Florian Drücke spoke of a “damage to the license architecture” in this context.
He expects the Bundestag to correct the weaknesses in the draft or the Bundesrat to intervene later.
Martin Moszkowicz, CEO of Constantin Film AG, expressed similar criticism of an “half-baked” draft on behalf of the producer alliance.
And Claus Grewenig from Mediengruppe RTL Deutschland on behalf of the private broadcasters organized in the Vaunet association.
display
Grewenig called the business model for the distribution of news and sports videos, for example, at risk;
Fundamental concepts of property for a democracy would be overridden.
Functioning standards against the prevention of film piracy would be “watered down” by the draft, added Moszkowicz, and a complicated complaint procedure would not help either.
He fears a “bureaucratic monster” that even benefits platforms like YouTube in the end.
The sobering conclusion of VUT boss Mark Chung: "Network politicians of the SPD and the Ministry of Justice have managed to turn the European directive around to the advantage of the platforms."