(3) Rapid technological developments continue to transform the way works and other subject matter are created, produced, distributed and exploited.
New business models and new actors continue to emerge.
Relevant legislation needs to be future-proof so as not to restrict technological development.
The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework remain sound.
However, legal uncertainty remains, for both rightholders and users, as regards certain uses, including cross-border uses, of works and other subject matter in the digital environment.
As stated in the Commission Communication of 9 December 2015 entitled ‘Towards a modern, more European copyright framework’, in some areas it is necessary to adapt and supplement the existing Union copyright framework, while keeping a high level of protection of copyright and related rights. This Directive provides for rules to adapt certain exceptions and limitations to copyright and related rights to digital and cross-border environments, as well as for measures to facilitate certain licensing practices, in particular, but not only, as regards the dissemination of out-of-commerce works and other subject matter and the online availability of audiovisual works on video-on-demand platforms, with a view to ensuring wider access to content.
It also contains rules to facilitate the use of content in the public domain.
In order to achieve a well-functioning and fair marketplace for copyright, there should also be rules on rights in publications, on the use of works or other subject matter by online service providers storing and giving access to user-uploaded content, on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts, on authors' and performers' remuneration, as well as a mechanism for the revocation of rights that authors and performers have transferred on an exclusive basis.
- = -
(7) The protection of technological measures established in Directive 2001/29/EC remains essential to ensure the protection and the effective exercise of the rights granted to authors and to other rightholders under Union law.
Such protection should be maintained while ensuring that the use of technological measures does not prevent the enjoyment of the exceptions and limitations provided for in this Directive.
Rightholders should have the opportunity to ensure that through voluntary measures. They should remain free to choose the appropriate means of enabling the beneficiaries of the exceptions and limitations provided for in this Directive to benefit from them.
In the absence of voluntary measures, Member States should take appropriate measures in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 6(4) of Directive 2001/29/EC, including where works and other subject matter are made available to the public through on-demand services.
- = -
(8) New technologies enable the automated computational analysis of information in digital form, such as text, sounds, images or data, generally known as title='definition'>text_and_data_mining.
Text and data mining makes the processing of large amounts of information with a view to gaining new knowledge and discovering new trends possible.
Text and data mining technologies are prevalent across the digital economy; however, there is widespread acknowledgment that title='definition'>text_and_data_mining can, in particular, benefit the research community and, in so doing, support innovation.
Such technologies benefit universities and other title='definition'>research_organisations, as well as title='definition'>cultural_heritage_institutions since they could also carry out research in the context of their main activities. However, in the Union, such organisations and institutions are confronted with legal uncertainty as to the extent to which they can perform title='definition'>text_and_data_mining of content.
In certain instances, title='definition'>text_and_data_mining can involve acts protected by copyright, by the sui generis database right or by both, in particular, the reproduction of works or other subject matter, the extraction of contents from a database or both which occur for example when the data are normalised in the process of title='definition'>text_and_data_mining.
Where no exception or limitation applies, an authorisation to undertake such acts is required from rightholders.
- = -
(15) Research organisations and title='definition'>cultural_heritage_institutions could in certain cases, for example for subsequent verification of scientific research results, need to retain copies made under the exception for the purposes of carrying out title='definition'>text_and_data_mining.
In such cases, the copies should be stored in a secure environment.
Member States should be free to decide, at national level and after discussions with relevant stakeholders, on further specific arrangements for retaining the copies, including the ability to appoint trusted bodies for the purpose of storing such copies. In order not to unduly restrict the application of the exception, such arrangements should be proportionate and limited to what is needed for retaining the copies in a safe manner and preventing unauthorised use.
Uses for the purpose of scientific research, other than title='definition'>text_and_data_mining, such as scientific peer review and joint research, should remain covered, where applicable, by the exception or limitation provided for in Article 5(3)(a) of Directive 2001/29/EC.
- = -
(16) In view of a potentially high number of access requests to, and downloads of, their works or other subject matter, rightholders should be allowed to apply measures when there is a risk that the security and integrity of their systems or databases could be jeopardised.
Such measures could, for example, be used to ensure that only persons having lawful access to their data can access them, including through IP address validation or user authentication.
Those measures should remain proportionate to the risks involved, and should not exceed what is necessary to pursue the objective of ensuring the security and integrity of the system and should not undermine the effective application of the exception.
- = -
(18) In addition to their significance in the context of scientific research, title='definition'>text_and_data_mining techniques are widely used both by private and public entities to analyse large amounts of data in different areas of life and for various purposes, including for government services, complex business decisions and the development of new applications or technologies. Rightholders should remain able to license the uses of their works or other subject matter falling outside the scope of the mandatory exception provided for in this Directive for title='definition'>text_and_data_mining for the purposes of scientific research and of the existing exceptions and limitations provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC.
At the same time, consideration should be given to the fact that users of title='definition'>text_and_data_mining could be faced with legal uncertainty as to whether reproductions and extractions made for the purposes of title='definition'>text_and_data_mining can be carried out on lawfully accessed works or other subject matter, in particular when the reproductions or extractions made for the purposes of the technical process do not fulfil all the conditions of the existing exception for temporary acts of reproduction provided for in Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC.
In order to provide for more legal certainty in such cases and to encourage innovation also in the private sector, this Directive should provide, under certain conditions, for an exception or limitation for reproductions and extractions of works or other subject matter, for the purposes of title='definition'>text_and_data_mining, and allow the copies made to be retained for as long as is necessary for those title='definition'>text_and_data_mining purposes.
- = -
(21) The exception or limitation provided for in this Directive for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching should be understood as covering digital uses of works or other subject matter to support, enrich or complement the teaching, including learning activities. The distribution of software allowed under that exception or limitation should be limited to digital transmission of software.
In most cases, the concept of illustration would, therefore, imply the use only of parts or extracts of works, which should not substitute for the purchase of materials primarily intended for the educational market.
When implementing the exception or limitation, Member States should remain free to specify, for the different types of works or other subject matter, in a balanced manner, the proportion of a work or other subject matter that can be used for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching.
Uses allowed under the exception or limitation should be understood to cover the specific accessibility needs of persons with a disability in the context of illustration for teaching.
- = -
(23) Different arrangements, based on the implementation of the exception or limitation provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC or on licensing agreements covering further uses, are in place in a number of Member States in order to facilitate educational uses of works and other subject matter.
Such arrangements have usually been developed taking account of the needs of educational establishments and of different levels of education.
While it is essential to harmonise the scope of the new mandatory exception or limitation in relation to digital uses and cross-border teaching activities, the arrangements for implementation can vary from one Member State to another, to the extent that they do not hamper the effective application of the exception or limitation or cross-border uses. Member States should, for example, remain free to require that the use of works or other subject matter respect the moral rights of authors and performers. This should allow Member States to build on the existing arrangements concluded at national level.
In particular, Member States could decide to subject the application of the exception or limitation, fully or partially, to the availability of suitable licences, covering at least the same uses as those allowed under the exception or limitation.
Member States should ensure that where licences cover only partially the uses allowed under the exception or limitation, all the other uses remain subject to the exception or limitation.
- = -
(24) Member States should remain free to provide that rightholders receive fair compensation for the digital uses of their works or other subject matter under the exception or limitation provided for in this Directive for illustration for teaching.
In setting the level of fair compensation, due account should be taken, inter alia, of Member States' educational objectives and of the harm to rightholders. Member States that decide to provide for fair compensation should encourage the use of systems that do not create an administrative burden for educational establishments.
- = -
(27) Member States should, therefore, be required to provide for an exception to permit title='definition'>cultural_heritage_institutions to reproduce works and other subject matter permanently in their collections for preservation purposes, for example to address technological obsolescence or the degradation of original supports or to insure such works and other subject matter.
Such an exception should allow the making of copies by the appropriate preservation tool, means or technology, in any format or medium, in the required number, at any point in the life of a work or other subject matter and to the extent required for preservation purposes. Acts of reproduction undertaken by title='definition'>cultural_heritage_institutions for purposes other than the preservation of works and other subject matter in their permanent collections should remain subject to the authorisation of rightholders, unless permitted by other exceptions or limitations provided for in Union law.
- = -
(40) Contracting title='definition'>cultural_heritage_institutions and collective management organisations should remain free to agree on the territorial scope of licences, including the option of covering all Member States, the licence fee and the uses allowed.
Uses covered by such licences should not be for profit-making purposes, including where copies are distributed by the title='definition'>cultural_heritage_institution, such as in the case of promotional material about an exhibition.
At the same time, given that the digitisation of the collections of title='definition'>cultural_heritage_institutions can entail significant investments, any licences granted under the mechanism provided for in this Directive should not prevent title='definition'>cultural_heritage_institutions from covering the costs of the licence and the costs of digitising and disseminating the works or other subject matter covered by the licence.
- = -
(46) Given the increasing importance of the ability to offer flexible licensing schemes in the digital age, and the increasing use of such schemes, Member States should be able to provide for licensing mechanisms which permit collective management organisations to conclude licences, on a voluntary basis, irrespective of whether all rightholders have authorised the organisation concerned to do so. Member States should have the ability to maintain and introduce such mechanisms in accordance with their national traditions, practices or circumstances, subject to the safeguards provided for in this Directive and in compliance with Union law and the international obligations of the Union.
Such mechanisms should only have effect in the territory of the Member State concerned, unless otherwise provided for in Union law.
Member States should have flexibility in choosing the specific type of mechanism allowing licences for works or other subject matter to extend to the rights of rightholders that have not authorised the organisation that concludes the agreement, provided that such mechanism is in compliance with Union law, including with the rules on collective management of rights provided for in Directive 2014/26/EU.
In particular, such mechanisms should also ensure that Article 7 of Directive 2014/26/EU applies to rightholders that are not members of the organisation that concludes the agreement.
Such mechanisms could include extended collective licensing, legal mandates and presumptions of representation.
The provisions of this Directive concerning collective licensing should not affect the existing ability of Member States to apply mandatory collective management of rights or other collective licensing mechanisms with an extended effect, such as that included in Article 3 of Council Directive 93/83/EEC (12).
- = -
(51) Video-on-demand services have the potential to play a decisive role in the dissemination of audiovisual works across the Union.
However, the availability of such works, in particular European works, on video-on-demand services remains limited.
Agreements on the online exploitation of such works can be difficult to conclude due to issues related to the licensing of rights. Such issues could, for instance, arise when the holder of the rights for a given territory has a low economic incentive to exploit a work online and does not license or holds back the online rights, which can lead to audiovisual works being unavailable on video-on-demand services. Other issues could relate to windows of exploitation.
- = -
(52) To facilitate the licensing of rights in audiovisual works to video-on-demand services, Member States should be required to provide for a negotiation mechanism allowing parties willing to conclude an agreement to rely on the assistance of an impartial body or of one or more mediators. For that purpose, Member States should be allowed either to establish a new body or rely on an existing one that fulfils the conditions established by this Directive.
Member States should be able to designate one or more competent bodies or mediators. The body or the mediators should meet with the parties and help with the negotiations by providing professional, impartial and external advice.
Where a negotiation involves parties from different Member States and where those parties decide to rely on the negotiation mechanism, the parties should agree beforehand on the competent Member State.
The body or the mediators could meet with the parties to facilitate the start of negotiations or in the course of the negotiations to facilitate the conclusion of an agreement.
Participation in that negotiation mechanism and the subsequent conclusion of agreements should be voluntary and should not affect the parties' contractual freedom.
Member States should be free to decide on the specific functioning of the negotiation mechanism, including the timing and duration of the assistance to negotiations and the bearing of the costs. Member States should ensure that administrative and financial burdens remain proportionate to guarantee the efficiency of the negotiation mechanism.
Without it being an obligation for them, Member States should encourage dialogue between representative organisations.
- = -
(53) The expiry of the term of protection of a work entails the entry of that work into the public domain and the expiry of the rights that Union copyright law provides in relation to that work.
In the field of visual arts, the circulation of faithful reproductions of works in the public domain contributes to the access to and promotion of culture, and the access to cultural heritage.
In the digital environment, the protection of such reproductions through copyright or related rights is inconsistent with the expiry of the copyright protection of works. In addition, differences between the national copyright laws governing the protection of such reproductions give rise to legal uncertainty and affect the cross-border dissemination of works of visual arts in the public domain.
Certain reproductions of works of visual arts in the public domain should, therefore, not be protected by copyright or related rights. All of that should not prevent title='definition'>cultural_heritage_institutions from selling reproductions, such as postcards.
- = -
(60) Publishers, including those of title='definition'>press_publications, books or scientific publications and music publications, often operate on the basis of the transfer of authors' rights by means of contractual agreements or statutory provisions. In that context, publishers make an investment with a view to the exploitation of the works contained in their publications and can in some instances be deprived of revenues where such works are used under exceptions or limitations such as those for private copying and reprography, including the corresponding existing national schemes for reprography in the Member States, or under public lending schemes. In several Member States, compensation for uses under those exceptions or limitations is shared between authors and publishers. In order to take account of this situation and to improve legal certainty for all parties concerned, this Directive allows Member States that have existing schemes for the sharing of compensation between authors and publishers to maintain them.
That is particularly important for Member States that had such compensation-sharing mechanisms before 12 November 2015, although in other Member States compensation is not shared and is due solely to authors in accordance with national cultural policies. While this Directive should apply in a non-discriminatory way to all Member States, it should respect the traditions in this area and not oblige Member States that do not currently have such compensation-sharing schemes to introduce them.
It should not affect existing or future arrangements in Member States regarding remuneration in the context of public lending.
- = -
(61) In recent years, the functioning of the online content market has gained in complexity.
Online content-sharing services providing access to a large amount of copyright-protected content uploaded by their users have become a main source of access to content online.
Online services are a means of providing wider access to cultural and creative works and offer great opportunities for cultural and creative industries to develop new business models. However, although they enable diversity and ease of access to content, they also generate challenges when copyright-protected content is uploaded without prior authorisation from rightholders. Legal uncertainty exists as to whether the providers of such services engage in copyright-relevant acts, and need to obtain authorisation from rightholders for content uploaded by their users who do not hold the relevant rights in the uploaded content, without prejudice to the application of exceptions and limitations provided for in Union law.
That uncertainty affects the ability of rightholders to determine whether, and under which conditions, their works and other subject matter are used, as well as their ability to obtain appropriate remuneration for such use.
It is therefore important to foster the development of the licensing market between rightholders and title='definition'>online_content-sharing_service_providers. Those licensing agreements should be fair and keep a reasonable balance between both parties. Rightholders should receive appropriate remuneration for the use of their works or other subject matter.
However, as contractual freedom should not be affected by those provisions, rightholders should not be obliged to give an authorisation or to conclude licensing agreements.
- = -
(62) Certain title='definition'>information_society_services, as part of their normal use, are designed to give access to the public to copyright-protected content or other subject matter uploaded by their users. The definition of an title='definition'>online_content-sharing_service_provider laid down in this Directive should target only online services that play an important role on the online content market by competing with other online content services, such as online audio and video streaming services, for the same audiences. The services covered by this Directive are services, the main or one of the main purposes of which is to store and enable users to upload and share a large amount of copyright-protected content with the purpose of obtaining profit therefrom, either directly or indirectly, by organising it and promoting it in order to attract a larger audience, including by categorising it and using targeted promotion within it.
Such services should not include services that have a main purpose other than that of enabling users to upload and share a large amount of copyright-protected content with the purpose of obtaining profit from that activity.
The latter services include, for instance, electronic communication services within the meaning of Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council (14), as well as providers of business-to-business cloud services and cloud services, which allow users to upload content for their own use, such as cyberlockers, or online marketplaces the main activity of which is online retail, and not giving access to copyright-protected content.
- = -