comment
A rippling sound in the year 2019 is right at the beginning of the draft of the future Copyright Directive: "The rapid technological developments are leading to a constant change in the way in which works and other objects of protection are created, produced, distributed and exploited New business models are constantly being created and new players are emerging. "
348 MPs have apparently interpreted this as a warning with change and new actors. So they agreed to a reform that seeks to protect old, established actors in particular: media houses and rights holders.
For example, with Article 15, formerly Article 11: an ancillary copyright for press publishers, which even in its milder German version since 2013 makes start-ups difficult without benefiting the publishers.
Civil society protest remains unsuccessful
Or also with Article 16, formerly Article 12: an option for Member States to condemn originators to share income from, say, the VG Wort with their publishers. The Federal Court of Justice had declared that 2016 unlawful, after a science author had sued for years against the forced participation.
And with Article 17, formerly Article 13: the obligation for commercial online platform operators with user-generated content to obtain a general permission from all rightholders to use their content and prevent un-licensed uploads from the outset.
More than a hundred thousand people took to the streets in Germany alone against the latter article. More than 200 scientists from the field of copyright as well as various other legal experts, consumer advocates and computer scientists had warned of the consequences of the regulation: It was anti-innovation and will harm especially small platforms that do not fit into the extremely narrow definition of exceptional cases.
348 MPs understand digital policy primarily as a defense against change.
On May 26, at the next European elections, it will now be seen how many people understand their voice as a defense against this decree.