Copyright in the EU: droit d'auteur or right to copy?

Abstract

The European Union (EU) began to develop copyright policies as early as the 1980s even though no competence existed in the Treaties. The formulation of EU policies in the area of intellectual property has been the object of heated policy debates between a diverse range of stakeholders, at the heart of which are some fundamentally different conceptions about the nature of intellectual property and its role in the information economy. Thus, EU copyright policy is the complex outcome of the interplay between subnational, national and EU-level policy actors that were all trying to 'frame the policy debate' in order to control policy and policy outcomes. This article explains why certain policy choices were made in the formulation of EU policies, when several policy options were, in principle, available. It argues, essentially, that insofar as the locus of decision-making shifted towards the EU level as a result of European institutions' use of their agenda-setting and judiciary powers, policy outcomes were, in a second stage, more likely to favour liberal policy solutions.

Digital Protest Skills and Online Activism Against Copyright Reform in France and the European Union

“…Rather than “hacktivism,” the identity of such groups fits well with the notion of “market rebellion,” where activists resort not only to questioning the status quo but also to advancing new business models built on innovative distribution systems of knowledge goods, such as free software and open access initiatives (Rao, ; see Dobusch & Quack, ; Dobusch & Schüßler, ). This trend is also observable, to a minor extent, among the consumer rights organizations that have campaigned against copyright expansion initiatives in Europe since the late 1980s (Littoz‐Monnet, ).…”

“…As shown in Table , along with other parallels and discrepancies between our case studies, the EU and especially the European Parliament have proved to be quite open to citizen input, much in contrast to the French policy system. Even though anticircumvention and further enforcement measures were passed at the European level, other initiatives such as software patents (Haunss and Kohlmorgen, , ) and copyright levies (Littoz‐Monnet, ) were rejected at the European level, while being enforced in countries like France and Germany where rights‐holders enjoy higher standards of protection and remuneration than in other Member States. As our comparative study of the DADVSI/HADOPI laws and the Telecom Package Reform shows, the “graduated response” procedure was also deemed unsatisfactory by European decision makers concerned with the preservation of network neutrality, while France and several other countries proceeded to implement it in their national legal frameworks, not without facing substantial opposition from both civil society groups and constitutional courts.…”

Digital consumer and user rights in EU policy

“…[14] [15] The main actors in the process have been mostly insiders, i.e., different member states (represented by civil servants), industry lobbyists, and staff from the Commission. Consumers and their representatives have been mostly absent from the process.…”

Power to the people? Evaluating the European Commission’s engagement efforts in EU copyright policy

“…Copyright policy over the years has thus been marked with fierce debates (e.g . Farrand 2014;Horten 2013;Littoz-Monnet 2006;Meyer 2017;Vetulani-Cęgiel 2014). Free and open software movements and digital rights organisations have successfully politicised the most draconian of policy proposals and mobilised citizens to protest globally (Haunss and Kohlmorgen 2010;Mercea and Funk 2016;Rone 2018).…”