Diritto d'autore 2019/0790 EN

1. Member States shall provide that a collective management organisation, in accordance with its mandates from rightholders, may conclude a non-exclusive licence for non-commercial purposes with a cultural_heritage_institution for the reproduction, distribution, communication to the public or making available to the public of out-of-commerce works or other subject matter that are permanently in the collection of the institution, irrespective of whether all rightholders covered by the licence have mandated the collective management organisation, on condition that:

(a)	the collective management organisation is, on the basis of its mandates, sufficiently representative of rightholders in the relevant type of works or other subject matter and of the rights that are the subject of the licence; and

(b)	all rightholders are guaranteed equal treatment in relation to the terms of the licence.

2. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights provided for in Article 5(a), (b), (d) and (e) and Article 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC, and Article 15(1) of this Directive, in order to allow cultural_heritage_institutions to make available, for non-commercial purposes, out-of-commerce works or other subject matter that are permanently in their collections, on condition that:

(a)	the name of the author or any other identifiable rightholder is indicated, unless this turns out to be impossible; and

(b)	such works or other subject matter are made available on non-commercial websites.

3. Member States shall provide that the exception or limitation provided for in paragraph 2 only applies to types of works or other subject matter for which no collective management organisation that fulfils the condition set out in point (a) of paragraph 1 exists.

4. Member States shall provide that all rightholders may, at any time, easily and effectively, exclude their works or other subject matter from the licensing mechanism set out in paragraph 1 or from the application of the exception or limitation provided for in paragraph 2, either in general or in specific cases, including after the conclusion of a licence or after the beginning of the use concerned.

5. A work or other subject matter shall be deemed to be out of commerce when it can be presumed in good faith that the whole work or other subject matter is not available to the public through customary channels of commerce, after a reasonable effort has been made to determine whether it is available to the public.

Member States may provide for specific requirements, such as a cut-off date, to determine whether works and other subject matter can be licensed in accordance with paragraph 1 or used under the exception or limitation provided for in paragraph 2. Such requirements shall not extend beyond what is necessary and reasonable, and shall not preclude being able to determine that a set of works or other subject matter as a whole is out of commerce, when it is reasonable to presume that all works or other subject matter are out of commerce.

6. Member States shall provide that the licences referred to in paragraph 1 are to be sought from a collective management organisation that is representative for the Member State where the cultural_heritage_institution is established.

7. This Article shall not apply to sets of out-of-commerce works or other subject matter if, on the basis of the reasonable effort referred to in paragraph 5, there is evidence that such sets predominantly consist of:

(a)	works or other subject matter, other than cinematographic or audiovisual works, first published or, in the absence of publication, first broadcast in a third country;

(b)	cinematographic or audiovisual works, of which the producers have their headquarters or habitual residence in a third country; or

(c)	works or other subject matter of third country nationals, where after a reasonable effort no Member State or third country could be determined pursuant to points (a) and (b).

By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, this Article shall apply where the collective management organisation is sufficiently representative, within the meaning of point (a) of paragraph 1, of rightholders of the relevant third country.

Article 13

Negotiation mechanism

Member States shall ensure that parties facing difficulties related to the licensing of rights when seeking to conclude an agreement for the purpose of making available audiovisual works on video-on-demand services may rely on the assistance of an impartial body or of mediators. The impartial body established or designated by a Member State for the purpose of this Article and mediators shall provide assistance to the parties with their negotiations and help the parties reach agreements, including, where appropriate, by submitting proposals to them.

Member States shall notify the Commission of the body or mediators referred to in the first paragraph no later than 7 June 2021. Where Member States have chosen to rely on mediation, the notification to the Commission shall at least include, when available, the source where relevant information on the mediators entrusted can be found.

CHAPTER 4

Works of visual art in the public domain

Article 17

Use of protected content by online_content-sharing_service_providers

1. Member States shall provide that an online_content-sharing_service_provider performs an act of communication to the public or an act of making available to the public for the purposes of this Directive when it gives the public access to copyright-protected works or other protected subject matter uploaded by its users.

An online_content-sharing_service_provider shall therefore obtain an authorisation from the rightholders referred to in Article 3(1) and (2) of Directive 2001/29/EC, for instance by concluding a licensing agreement, in order to communicate to the public or make available to the public works or other subject matter.

2. Member States shall provide that, where an online_content-sharing_service_provider obtains an authorisation, for instance by concluding a licensing agreement, that authorisation shall also cover acts carried out by users of the services falling within the scope of Article 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC when they are not acting on a commercial basis or where their activity does not generate significant revenues.

3. When an online_content-sharing_service_provider performs an act of communication to the public or an act of making available to the public under the conditions laid down in this Directive, the limitation of liability established in Article 14(1) of Directive 2000/31/EC shall not apply to the situations covered by this Article.

The first subparagraph of this paragraph shall not affect the possible application of Article 14(1) of Directive 2000/31/EC to those service providers for purposes falling outside the scope of this Directive.

4. If no authorisation is granted, online_content-sharing_service_providers shall be liable for unauthorised acts of communication to the public, including making available to the public, of copyright-protected works and other subject matter, unless the service providers demonstrate that they have:

(a)	made best efforts to obtain an authorisation, and

(b)	made, in accordance with high industry standards of professional diligence, best efforts to ensure the unavailability of specific works and other subject matter for which the rightholders have provided the service providers with the relevant and necessary information; and in any event

(c)	acted expeditiously, upon receiving a sufficiently substantiated notice from the rightholders, to disable access to, or to remove from their websites, the notified works or other subject matter, and made best efforts to prevent their future uploads in accordance with point (b).

5. In determining whether the service provider has complied with its obligations under paragraph 4, and in light of the principle of proportionality, the following elements, among others, shall be taken into account:

(a)	the type, the audience and the size of the service and the type of works or other subject matter uploaded by the users of the service; and

(b)	the availability of suitable and effective means and their cost for service providers.

6. Member States shall provide that, in respect of new online_content-sharing_service_providers the services of which have been available to the public in the Union for less than three years and which have an annual turnover below EUR 10 million, calculated in accordance with Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC (20), the conditions under the liability regime set out in paragraph 4 are limited to compliance with point (a) of paragraph 4 and to acting expeditiously, upon receiving a sufficiently substantiated notice, to disable access to the notified works or other subject matter or to remove those works or other subject matter from their websites.

Where the average number of monthly unique visitors of such service providers exceeds 5 million, calculated on the basis of the previous calendar year, they shall also demonstrate that they have made best efforts to prevent further uploads of the notified works and other subject matter for which the rightholders have provided relevant and necessary information.

7. The cooperation between online_content-sharing_service_providers and rightholders shall not result in the prevention of the availability of works or other subject matter uploaded by users, which do not infringe copyright and related rights, including where such works or other subject matter are covered by an exception or limitation.

Member States shall ensure that users in each Member State are able to rely on any of the following existing exceptions or limitations when uploading and making available content generated by users on online content-sharing services:

(a)	quotation, criticism, review;

(b)	use for the purpose of caricature, parody or pastiche.

8. The application of this Article shall not lead to any general monitoring obligation.

Member States shall provide that online_content-sharing_service_providers provide rightholders, at their request, with adequate information on the functioning of their practices with regard to the cooperation referred to in paragraph 4 and, where licensing agreements are concluded between service providers and rightholders, information on the use of content covered by the agreements.

9. Member States shall provide that online_content-sharing_service_providers put in place an effective and expeditious complaint and redress mechanism that is available to users of their services in the event of disputes over the disabling of access to, or the removal of, works or other subject matter uploaded by them.

Where rightholders request to have access to their specific works or other subject matter disabled or to have those works or other subject matter removed, they shall duly justify the reasons for their requests. Complaints submitted under the mechanism provided for in the first subparagraph shall be processed without undue delay, and decisions to disable access to or remove uploaded content shall be subject to human review. Member States shall also ensure that out-of-court redress mechanisms are available for the settlement of disputes. Such mechanisms shall enable disputes to be settled impartially and shall not deprive the user of the legal protection afforded by national law, without prejudice to the rights of users to have recourse to efficient judicial remedies. In particular, Member States shall ensure that users have access to a court or another relevant judicial authority to assert the use of an exception or limitation to copyright and related rights.

This Directive shall in no way affect legitimate uses, such as uses under exceptions or limitations provided for in Union law, and shall not lead to any identification of individual users nor to the processing of personal data, except in accordance with Directive 2002/58/EC and Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Online content-sharing service providers shall inform their users in their terms and conditions that they can use works and other subject matter under exceptions or limitations to copyright and related rights provided for in Union law.

10. As of 6 June 2019 the Commission, in cooperation with the Member States, shall organise stakeholder dialogues to discuss best practices for cooperation between online_content-sharing_service_providers and rightholders. The Commission shall, in consultation with online_content-sharing_service_providers, rightholders, users' organisations and other relevant stakeholders, and taking into account the results of the stakeholder dialogues, issue guidance on the application of this Article, in particular regarding the cooperation referred to in paragraph 4. When discussing best practices, special account shall be taken, among other things, of the need to balance fundamental rights and of the use of exceptions and limitations. For the purpose of the stakeholder dialogues, users' organisations shall have access to adequate information from online_content-sharing_service_providers on the functioning of their practices with regard to paragraph 4.

CHAPTER 3

Fair remuneration in exploitation contracts of authors and performers

Article 22

Right of revocation

1. Member States shall ensure that where an author or a performer has licensed or transferred his or her rights in a work or other protected subject matter on an exclusive basis, the author or performer may revoke in whole or in part the licence or the transfer of rights where there is a lack of exploitation of that work or other protected subject matter.

2. Specific provisions for the revocation mechanism provided for in paragraph 1 may be provided for in national law, taking into account the following:

(a)	the specificities of the different sectors and the different types of works and performances; and

(b)

where a work or other subject matter contains the contribution of more than one author or performer, the relative importance of the individual contributions, and the legitimate interests of all authors and performers affected by the application of the revocation mechanism by an individual author or performer.

Member States may exclude works or other subject matter from the application of the revocation mechanism if such works or other subject matter usually contain contributions of a plurality of authors or performers.

Member States may provide that the revocation mechanism can only apply within a specific time frame, where such restriction is duly justified by the specificities of the sector or of the type of work or other subject matter concerned.

Member States may provide that authors or performers can choose to terminate the exclusivity of the contract instead of revoking the licence or transfer of the rights.

3. Member States shall provide that the revocation provided for in paragraph 1 may only be exercised after a reasonable time following the conclusion of the licence or the transfer of the rights. The author or performer shall notify the person to whom the rights have been licensed or transferred and set an appropriate deadline by which the exploitation of the licensed or transferred rights is to take place. After the expiry of that deadline, the author or performer may choose to terminate the exclusivity of the contract instead of revoking the licence or the transfer of the rights.

4. Paragraph 1 shall not apply if the lack of exploitation is predominantly due to circumstances that the author or the performer can reasonably be expected to remedy.

5. Member States may provide that any contractual provision derogating from the revocation mechanism provided for in paragraph 1 is enforceable only if it is based on a collective bargaining agreement.

Article 30

Review

1. No sooner than 7 June 2026, the Commission shall carry out a review of this Directive and present a report on the main findings to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.

The Commission shall, by 7 June 2024, assess the impact of the specific liability regime set out in Article 17 applicable to online_content-sharing_service_providers that have an annual turnover of less than EUR 10 million and the services of which have been available to the public in the Union for less than three years under Article 17(6) and, if appropriate, take action in accordance with the conclusions of its assessment.

2. Member States shall provide the Commission with the necessary information for the preparation of the report referred to in paragraph 1.

whereas

(15) Research organisations and 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 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 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.

- = -

(27) Member States should, therefore, be required to provide for an exception to permit 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 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.

- = -

(33) Member States should, within the framework provided for in this Directive, have flexibility in choosing the specific type of licensing mechanism, such as extended collective licensing or presumptions of representation, that they put in place for the use of out-of-commerce works or other subject matter by cultural_heritage_institutions, in accordance with their legal traditions, practices or circumstances. Member States should also have flexibility in determining what the requirements for collective management organisations to be sufficiently representative are, as long as that determination is based on a significant number of rightholders in the relevant type of works or other subject matter having given a mandate allowing the licensing of the relevant type of use.
Member States should be free to establish specific rules applicable to cases in which more than one collective management organisation is representative for the relevant works or other subject matter, requiring for example joint licences or an agreement between the relevant organisations.

- = -

(43) The measures provided for in this Directive to facilitate the collective licensing of rights in out-of-commerce works or other subject matter that are permanently in the collections of cultural_heritage_institutions should be without prejudice to the use of such works or other subject matter under exceptions or limitations provided for in Union law, or under other licences with an extended effect, where such licensing is not based on the out-of-commerce status of the covered works or other subject matter.
Those measures should also be without prejudice to national mechanisms for the use of out-of-commerce works or other subject matter based on licences between collective management organisations and users other than cultural_heritage_institutions.

- = -

(62) Certain 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 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.

- = -

(66) Taking into account the fact that online_content-sharing_service_providers give access to content which is not uploaded by them but by their users, it is appropriate to provide for a specific liability mechanism for the purposes of this Directive for cases in which no authorisation has been granted.
That should be without prejudice to remedies under national law for cases other than liability for copyright infringements and to national courts or administrative authorities being able to issue injunctions in compliance with Union law.
In particular, the specific regime applicable to new online_content-sharing_service_providers with an annual turnover below EUR 10 million, of which the average number of monthly unique visitors in the Union does not exceed 5 million, should not affect the availability of remedies under Union and national law.
Where no authorisation has been granted to service providers, they should make their best efforts in accordance with high industry standards of professional diligence to avoid the availability on their services of unauthorised works and other subject matter, as identified by the relevant rightholders. For that purpose, rightholders should provide the service providers with relevant and necessary information taking into account, among other factors, the size of rightholders and the type of their works and other subject matter.
The steps taken by online_content-sharing_service_providers in cooperation with rightholders should not lead to the prevention of the availability of non-infringing content, including works or other protected subject matter the use of which is covered by a licensing agreement, or an exception or limitation to copyright and related rights. Steps taken by such service providers should, therefore, not affect users who are using the online content-sharing services in order to lawfully upload and access information on such services.

- = -

(77) When implementing the transparency obligation provided for in this Directive, Member States should take into account the specificities of different content sectors, such as those of the music sector, the audiovisual sector and the publishing sector, and all relevant stakeholders should be involved when deciding on such sector-specific obligations. Where relevant, the significance of the contribution of authors and performers to the overall work or performance should also be considered.
Collective bargaining should be considered as an option for the relevant stakeholders to reach an agreement regarding transparency.
Such agreements should ensure that authors and performers have the same level of transparency as or a higher level of transparency than the minimum requirements provided for in this Directive.
To enable the adaptation of existing reporting practices to the transparency obligation, a transitional period should be provided for.
It should not be necessary to apply the transparency obligation in respect of agreements concluded between rightholders and collective management organisations, independent management entities or other entities subject to the national rules implementing Directive 2014/26/EU, as those organisations or entities are already subject to transparency obligations under Article 18 of Directive 2014/26/EU.
Article 18 of Directive 2014/26/EU applies to organisations that manage copyright or related rights on behalf of more than one rightholder for the collective benefit of those rightholders. However, individually negotiated agreements concluded between rightholders and those of their contractual counterparts who act in their own interest should be subject to the transparency obligation provided for in this Directive.

- = -

(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.

- = -

(80) When authors and performers license or transfer their rights, they expect their work or performance to be exploited.
However, it could be the case that works or performances that have been licensed or transferred are not exploited at all.
Where those rights have been transferred on an exclusive basis, authors and performers cannot turn to another partner to exploit their works or performances.
In such a case, and after a reasonable period of time has elapsed, authors and performers should be able to benefit from a mechanism for the revocation of rights allowing them to transfer or license their rights to another person.
As exploitation of works or performances can vary depending on the sectors, specific provisions could be laid down at national level in order to take into account the specificities of the sectors, such as the audiovisual sector, or of the works or performances, in particular providing for time frames for the right of revocation.
In order to protect the legitimate interests of licensees and transferees of rights and to prevent abuses, and taking into account that a certain amount of time is needed before a work or performance is actually exploited, authors and performers should be able to exercise the right of revocation in accordance with certain procedural requirements and only after a certain period of time following the conclusion of the licence or of the transfer agreement.
Member States should be allowed to regulate the exercise of the right of revocation in the case of works or performances involving more than one author or performer, taking into account the relative importance of the individual contributions.

- = -

(81) The provisions regarding transparency, contract adjustment mechanisms and alternative dispute resolution procedures laid down in this Directive should be of a mandatory nature, and parties should not be able to derogate from those provisions, whether in contracts between authors, performers and their contractual counterparts, or in agreements between those counterparts and third parties, such as non-disclosure agreements.
As a consequence, Article 3(4) of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (17) should apply to the effect that, where all other elements relevant to the situation at the time of the choice of applicable law are located in one or more Member States, the parties' choice of applicable law other than that of a Member State does not prejudice the application of the provisions regarding transparency, contract adjustment mechanisms and alternative dispute resolution procedures laid down in this Directive, as implemented in the Member State of the forum.

- = -

keyboard_tab Diritto d'autore 2019/0790 EN

Diritto d'autore 2019/0790 EN