(5) In the fields of research, innovation, education and preservation of cultural heritage, digital technologies permit new types of uses that are not clearly covered by the existing Union rules on exceptions and limitations.
In addition, the optional nature of exceptions and limitations provided for in Directives 96/9/EC, 2001/29/EC and 2009/24/EC in those fields could negatively impact the functioning of the internal market.
This is particularly relevant as regards cross-border uses, which are becoming increasingly important in the digital environment.
Therefore, the existing exceptions and limitations in Union law that are relevant for scientific research, innovation, teaching and preservation of cultural heritage should be reassessed in the light of those new uses. Mandatory exceptions or limitations for uses of text_and_data_mining technologies, illustration for teaching in the digital environment and for preservation of cultural heritage should be introduced.
The existing exceptions and limitations in Union law should continue to apply, including to text_and_data_mining, education, and preservation activities, as long as they do not limit the scope of the mandatory exceptions or limitations provided for in this Directive, which need to be implemented by Member States in their national law.
Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC should, therefore, be amended.
- = -
(38) When determining whether works or other subject matter are out of commerce, a reasonable effort should be required to assess their availability to the public in the customary channels of commerce, taking into account the characteristics of the particular work or other subject matter or of the particular set of works or other subject matter.
Member States should be free to determine the allocation of responsibilities for making that reasonable effort.
The reasonable effort should not have to involve repeated action over time but it should nevertheless involve taking account of any easily accessible evidence of upcoming availability of works or other subject matter in the customary channels of commerce.
A work-by-work assessment should only be required where that is considered reasonable in view of the availability of relevant information, the likelihood of commercial availability and the expected transaction cost.
Verification of availability of a work or other subject matter should normally take place in the Member State where the cultural_heritage_institution is established, unless verification across borders is considered reasonable, for example in cases where there is easily available information that a literary work was first published in a given language version in another Member State.
In many cases, the out-of-commerce status of a set of works or other subject matter could be determined through a proportionate mechanism, such as sampling.
The limited availability of a work or other subject matter, such as its availability in second-hand shops, or the theoretical possibility that a licence for a work or other subject matter could be obtained should not be considered as availability to the public in the customary channels of commerce.
- = -
(39) For reasons of international comity, the licensing mechanism and the exception or limitation provided for in this Directive for the digitisation and dissemination of out-of-commerce works or other subject matter should not apply to sets of out-of-commerce works or other subject matter where there is evidence available to presume that they predominantly consist of works or other subject matter of third countries, unless the collective management organisation concerned is sufficiently representative for that third country, for example via a representation agreement.
That assessment could be based on the evidence available following the making of the reasonable effort to determine whether the works or other subject matter are out of commerce, without the need to search for further evidence.
A work-by-work assessment of the origin of out-of-commerce works or other subject matter should only be required insofar as it is also required for making the reasonable effort to determine whether they are commercially available.
- = -
(63) The assessment of whether an online_content-sharing_service_provider stores and gives access to a large amount of copyright-protected content should be made on a case-by-case basis and should take account of a combination of elements, such as the audience of the service and the number of files of copyright-protected content uploaded by the users of the service.
- = -
(74) Authors and performers need information to assess the economic value of rights of theirs that are harmonised under Union law.
This is especially the case where natural persons grant a licence or a transfer of rights for the purposes of exploitation in return for remuneration.
That need does not arise where the exploitation has ceased, or where the author or performer has granted a licence to the general public without remuneration.
- = -
(75) As authors and performers tend to be in the weaker contractual position when they grant licences or transfer their rights, they need information to assess the continued economic value of their rights, compared to the remuneration received for their licence or transfer, but they often face a lack of transparency.
Therefore, the sharing of adequate and accurate information by their contractual counterparts or their successors in title is important for the transparency and balance in the system governing the remuneration of authors and performers. That information should be up-to-date to allow access to recent data, relevant to the exploitation of the work or performance, and comprehensive in a way that it covers all sources of revenues relevant to the case, including, where applicable, merchandising revenues. As long as exploitation is ongoing, contractual counterparts of authors and performers should provide information available to them on all modes of exploitation and on all relevant revenues worldwide with a regularity that is appropriate in the relevant sector, but at least annually.
The information should be provided in a manner that is comprehensible to the author or performer and it should allow the effective assessment of the economic value of the rights in question.
The transparency obligation should nevertheless apply only where copyright relevant rights are concerned.
The processing of personal data, such as contact details and information on remuneration, that are necessary to keep authors and performers informed in relation to the exploitation of their works and performances, should be carried out in accordance with Article 6(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
- = -
(76) In order to ensure that exploitation-related information is duly provided to authors and performers also in cases where the rights have been sub-licensed to other parties who exploit the rights, this Directive entitles authors and performers to request additional relevant information on the exploitation of the rights, in cases where the first contractual counterpart has provided the information available to them, but that information is not sufficient to assess the economic value of their rights. That request should be made either directly to sub-licensees or through the contractual counterparts of authors and performers. Authors and performers, and their contractual counterparts, should be able to agree to keep the shared information confidential, but authors and performers should always be able to use the shared information for the purpose of exercising their rights under this Directive.
Member States should have the option, in compliance with Union law, to provide for further measures to ensure transparency for authors and performers.
- = -
(78) Certain contracts for the exploitation of rights harmonised at Union level are of long duration, offering few opportunities for authors and performers to renegotiate them with their contractual counterparts or their successors in title in the event that the economic value of the rights turns out to be significantly higher than initially estimated.
Accordingly, without prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in Member States, a remuneration adjustment mechanism should be provided for as regards cases where the remuneration originally agreed under a licence or a transfer of rights clearly becomes disproportionately low compared to the relevant revenues derived from the subsequent exploitation of the work or fixation of the performance by the contractual counterpart of the author or performer.
All revenues relevant to the case in question, including, where applicable, merchandising revenues, should be taken into account for the assessment of whether the remuneration is disproportionately low.
The assessment of the situation should take account of the specific circumstances of each case, including the contribution of the author or performer, as well as of the specificities and remuneration practices in the different content sectors, and whether the contract is based on a collective bargaining agreement.
Representatives of authors and performers duly mandated in accordance with national law in compliance with Union law, should be able to provide assistance to one or more authors or performers in relation to requests for the adjustment of the contracts, also taking into account the interests of other authors or performers where relevant.
- = -