De playlists van Spotify: Hoe ver reikt het nabuurrechtelijke vergoedingsrecht met betrekking tot audiostreamingdiensten? external link

Auteursrecht, iss. : 2, pp: 75-84, 2022

Abstract

Op grond van art. 7 lid 1 WNR vallen onder het vergoedingsrecht voor ‘secundair gebruik’ alle mogelijke vormen van openbaarmaking van commercieel uitgebrachte fonogrammen, doch niet het online beschikbaar stellen. Algemeen wordt aangenomen dat het vergoedingsrecht niet geldt voor het streamen via Spotify en dergelijke diensten. Maar geldt dat ook voor de door Spotify aangeboden playlists en vergelijkbare omroepachtige diensten? In dit artikel wordt een poging gedaan criteria te formuleren aan de hand waarvan het ‘beschikbaar stellen’ van andere vormen van openbaarmaking kan worden onderscheiden.

Auteursrecht, frontpage, muziek, Naburige rechten, streamingdiensten

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {De playlists van Spotify: Hoe ver reikt het nabuurrechtelijke vergoedingsrecht met betrekking tot audiostreamingdiensten?}, author = {Hugenholtz, P.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/auteursrecht_2022_2/}, year = {0607}, date = {2022-06-07}, journal = {Auteursrecht}, issue = {2}, abstract = {Op grond van art. 7 lid 1 WNR vallen onder het vergoedingsrecht voor ‘secundair gebruik’ alle mogelijke vormen van openbaarmaking van commercieel uitgebrachte fonogrammen, doch niet het online beschikbaar stellen. Algemeen wordt aangenomen dat het vergoedingsrecht niet geldt voor het streamen via Spotify en dergelijke diensten. Maar geldt dat ook voor de door Spotify aangeboden playlists en vergelijkbare omroepachtige diensten? In dit artikel wordt een poging gedaan criteria te formuleren aan de hand waarvan het ‘beschikbaar stellen’ van andere vormen van openbaarmaking kan worden onderscheiden.}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, frontpage, muziek, Naburige rechten, streamingdiensten}, }

Annotatie bij Hof van Justitie van de EU 8 september 2020 (Recorded Artists Actors Performers / Phonographic Performance (Ireland)) external link

Nederlandse Jurisprudentie, iss. : 15, num: 126, pp: 2384-2386, 2022

Auteursrecht, frontpage, muziek, Naburige rechten

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Annotatie bij Hof van Justitie van de EU 8 september 2020 (Recorded Artists Actors Performers / Phonographic Performance (Ireland))}, author = {Hugenholtz, P.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/annotatie_nj_2022_126/}, year = {0419}, date = {2022-04-19}, journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie}, issue = {15}, number = {126}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, frontpage, muziek, Naburige rechten}, }

DJs are Phonogram Producers, says Dutch Supreme Court external link

Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2022

Auteursrecht, frontpage, muzikanten, Naburige rechten

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {DJs are Phonogram Producers, says Dutch Supreme Court}, author = {Hugenholtz, P.}, url = {http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2022/01/31/djs-are-phonogram-producers-says-dutch-supreme-court/}, year = {0131}, date = {2022-01-31}, journal = {Kluwer Copyright Blog}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, frontpage, muzikanten, Naburige rechten}, }

Study on emerging issues on collective licensing practices in the digital environment external link

Bulayenko, O., van Gompel, S., Handke, C.W., Peeters, R., Poort, J., Quintais, J. & Regeczi, D.
2021

Abstract

Collective management of copyright and related rights is an important element of the copyright system. First and foremost, it can ensure that rightholders reap greater rewards. By exploiting economies of scale and network effects, collective management can also make markets for copyright licences more efficient, to benefit users and other stakeholders. This study examines two central aspects of collective management of copyright and related rights in Europe. Part I documents the development of multi-territorial licensing of online rights in musical works in the European Economic Area (EEA) under Title III of Directive 2014/26/EU on Collective management of copyright and related rights and multi-territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online use in the internal market (CRM Directive). It highlights the consequences of legal and regulatory reform, based on pervasive quantitative and qualitative data – produced in surveys, interviews and a workshop with stakeholders – and collected among collective management organisations (CMOs), rightholders, online music service providers, and national competent authorities. Part II examines national mechanisms of collective licensing with an extended effect and comprehensive network of national experts, complemented by surveys of CMOs, as well as interviews with national competent authorities. The present study provides a legal and economic analysis that can serve as input for the European Commission to draft the reports required by Article 40 of the CRM Directive and Article 12(6) of the Directive 2019/790/EU on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market (DSM Directive).

Auteursrecht, collectief beheer, collectieve licenties, digitalisering, Europe, frontpage, Naburige rechten

Bibtex

Report{nokey, title = {Study on emerging issues on collective licensing practices in the digital environment}, author = {Bulayenko, O. and van Gompel, S. and Handke, C.W. and Peeters, R. and Poort, J. and Quintais, J. and Regeczi, D.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Study_on_collective_practices_in_the_digital_environment.pdfhttps://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/reports-collective-management-and-extended-licensing}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.2759/611658}, year = {2021}, date = {2021-11-25}, abstract = {Collective management of copyright and related rights is an important element of the copyright system. First and foremost, it can ensure that rightholders reap greater rewards. By exploiting economies of scale and network effects, collective management can also make markets for copyright licences more efficient, to benefit users and other stakeholders. This study examines two central aspects of collective management of copyright and related rights in Europe. Part I documents the development of multi-territorial licensing of online rights in musical works in the European Economic Area (EEA) under Title III of Directive 2014/26/EU on Collective management of copyright and related rights and multi-territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online use in the internal market (CRM Directive). It highlights the consequences of legal and regulatory reform, based on pervasive quantitative and qualitative data – produced in surveys, interviews and a workshop with stakeholders – and collected among collective management organisations (CMOs), rightholders, online music service providers, and national competent authorities. Part II examines national mechanisms of collective licensing with an extended effect and comprehensive network of national experts, complemented by surveys of CMOs, as well as interviews with national competent authorities. The present study provides a legal and economic analysis that can serve as input for the European Commission to draft the reports required by Article 40 of the CRM Directive and Article 12(6) of the Directive 2019/790/EU on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market (DSM Directive).}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, collectief beheer, collectieve licenties, digitalisering, Europe, frontpage, Naburige rechten}, }

Robot Creativity: An Incentive-Based Neighbouring Rights Approach external link

Senftleben, M. & Buijtelaar, L.D.
European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 42, num: 12, 2020

Abstract

Today texts, paintings and songs need no longer be the result of human creativity. Advanced artificial intelligence (AI) systems are capable of generating creations that can hardly be distinguished from those of authors of flesh and blood. This development raises the question whether AI-generated works could be eligible for copyright protection. In the following analysis, we explore this question. After a discussion of the traditional copyright requirement of human creativity, the rationales underlying copyright protection – in particular the utilitarian incentive theory – will serve as a compass to decide on the grant of protection and delineate the scope of exclusive rights. In addition, the analysis will address the question who the owner of protected AI creations should be. Finally, the discussion of pros and cons of protection will be placed in the broader context of competing policy goals and legal obligations, such as the prospect of enriching the public domain and the question of liability for AI creations that infringe the rights of third parties.

Copyright, creativiteit, frontpage, Naburige rechten

Bibtex

Article{Senftleben2020d, title = {Robot Creativity: An Incentive-Based Neighbouring Rights Approach}, author = {Senftleben, M. and Buijtelaar, L.D.}, url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3707741}, year = {1013}, date = {2020-10-13}, journal = {European Intellectual Property Review}, volume = {42}, number = {12}, pages = {}, abstract = {Today texts, paintings and songs need no longer be the result of human creativity. Advanced artificial intelligence (AI) systems are capable of generating creations that can hardly be distinguished from those of authors of flesh and blood. This development raises the question whether AI-generated works could be eligible for copyright protection. In the following analysis, we explore this question. After a discussion of the traditional copyright requirement of human creativity, the rationales underlying copyright protection – in particular the utilitarian incentive theory – will serve as a compass to decide on the grant of protection and delineate the scope of exclusive rights. In addition, the analysis will address the question who the owner of protected AI creations should be. Finally, the discussion of pros and cons of protection will be placed in the broader context of competing policy goals and legal obligations, such as the prospect of enriching the public domain and the question of liability for AI creations that infringe the rights of third parties.}, keywords = {Copyright, creativiteit, frontpage, Naburige rechten}, }

Flexibility Grave – Partial Reproduction Focus and Closed System Fetishism in CJEU, Pelham external link

IIC, vol. 51, num: 6, pp: 751-769, 2020

Abstract

In the ongoing discussion about the impact of fundamental rights on EU copyright law, the Pelham judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has received much attention. However, the decision also raises important legal-doctrinal issues. The CJEU employs the harmonized right of reproduction as a vehicle to regulate adaptations of pre-existing source material. Moreover, the Court insists on a balancing of interests within the EU matrix of exclusive rights and limitations. The closed list of limitations in EU copyright law, however, can hardly be expected to offer sufficient breathing space for adaptation scenarios. As the Information Society Directive did not harmonize the right of adaptation, there was no need to include indispensable free adaptation rules that have evolved at the national level, such as the German “free use” doctrine. Instead of embracing national rules of equity and fairness to fill the gap, the CJEU is reluctant to borrow from the legal traditions of EU Member States and misses an important opportunity to provide guidance for the regulation of adaptations outside the sound sampling arena. After an introduction to the German “Metall auf Metall” saga that led to the Pelham decision, the following analysis sheds light on these developments in EU copyright law and discusses problems arising from the approach taken by the CJEU.

Auteursrecht, frontpage, Naburige rechten, Pelham, soundsampling

Bibtex

Article{Senftleben2020c, title = {Flexibility Grave – Partial Reproduction Focus and Closed System Fetishism in CJEU, Pelham}, author = {Senftleben, M.}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-020-00940-z}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-020-00940-z}, year = {0512}, date = {2020-05-12}, journal = {IIC}, volume = {51}, number = {6}, pages = {751-769}, abstract = {In the ongoing discussion about the impact of fundamental rights on EU copyright law, the Pelham judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has received much attention. However, the decision also raises important legal-doctrinal issues. The CJEU employs the harmonized right of reproduction as a vehicle to regulate adaptations of pre-existing source material. Moreover, the Court insists on a balancing of interests within the EU matrix of exclusive rights and limitations. The closed list of limitations in EU copyright law, however, can hardly be expected to offer sufficient breathing space for adaptation scenarios. As the Information Society Directive did not harmonize the right of adaptation, there was no need to include indispensable free adaptation rules that have evolved at the national level, such as the German “free use” doctrine. Instead of embracing national rules of equity and fairness to fill the gap, the CJEU is reluctant to borrow from the legal traditions of EU Member States and misses an important opportunity to provide guidance for the regulation of adaptations outside the sound sampling arena. After an introduction to the German “Metall auf Metall” saga that led to the Pelham decision, the following analysis sheds light on these developments in EU copyright law and discusses problems arising from the approach taken by the CJEU.}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, frontpage, Naburige rechten, Pelham, soundsampling}, }

The WIPO Broadcasting Treaty. A Conceptual Conundrum external link

Abstract

Keynote at KEI Seminar, Appraising the WIPO Broadcast Treaty and its Implications on Access to Culture, Geneva 3-4 October 2018

Auteursrecht, broadcasting treaty, frontpage, Naburige rechten, omroepen, WIPO

Bibtex

Other{Hugenholtz2018g, title = {The WIPO Broadcasting Treaty. A Conceptual Conundrum}, author = {Hugenholtz, P.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Keynote_WIPO_Broadcasting_Treaty_2018.pdf}, year = {1024}, date = {2018-10-24}, abstract = {Keynote at KEI Seminar, Appraising the WIPO Broadcast Treaty and its Implications on Access to Culture, Geneva 3-4 October 2018}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, broadcasting treaty, frontpage, Naburige rechten, omroepen, WIPO}, }

Annotatie bij Hof van Justitie EU 27 maart 2014 (UPC Telekabel Wien / Constantin Film Verleih & Wega Filmproduktionsgesellschaft) en Hoge Raad 13 november 2015 (Stichting Brein / Ziggo & XS4ALL) external link

Nederlandse Jurisprudentie, vol. 2018, num: 13, pp: 1672-1674, 2018

Auteursrecht, frontpage, handhavingsrichtlijn, internetproviders, Naburige rechten

Bibtex

Article{Hugenholtz2018b, title = {Annotatie bij Hof van Justitie EU 27 maart 2014 (UPC Telekabel Wien / Constantin Film Verleih & Wega Filmproduktionsgesellschaft) en Hoge Raad 13 november 2015 (Stichting Brein / Ziggo & XS4ALL)}, author = {Hugenholtz, P.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2018_110.pdf}, year = {0403}, date = {2018-04-03}, journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie}, volume = {2018}, number = {13}, pages = {1672-1674}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, frontpage, handhavingsrichtlijn, internetproviders, Naburige rechten}, }

Say Nay to the Neighbouring Right! external link

Auteursrecht, Naburige rechten, uitgevers

Bibtex

Online publication{Hugenholtz2016b, title = {Say Nay to the Neighbouring Right!}, author = {Hugenholtz, P.}, url = {http://kluwercopyrightblog.com/2016/04/14/say-nay-to-the-neighbouring-right/}, year = {0414}, date = {2016-04-14}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, Naburige rechten, uitgevers}, }

Annotatie bij Hof van Justitie van de EU 12 november 2015 (HP Belgium / Reprobel) external link

Nederlandse Jurisprudentie, num: 39, pp: 4962-4964, 2016

Auteursrecht, frontpage, harmonisatie van de wetgevingen, Naburige rechten, privé kopie, reproductierecht, vergoedingen

Bibtex

Article{Hugenholtz2016b, title = {Annotatie bij Hof van Justitie van de EU 12 november 2015 (HP Belgium / Reprobel)}, author = {Hugenholtz, P.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_NJ_2016_370.pdf}, year = {1018}, date = {2016-10-18}, journal = {Nederlandse Jurisprudentie}, number = {39}, keywords = {Auteursrecht, frontpage, harmonisatie van de wetgevingen, Naburige rechten, privé kopie, reproductierecht, vergoedingen}, }