This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following contribution by former GuestKat Mirko Brüß (Brüß Law) analyzing two recent decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the evergreen right of communication to the public. Here’s what he writes: CJEU: New licensing rules for the provision of guest TVs in Germany?
The defendant was offering an internet protocol television (“IPTV”) service to business clients (e.g., The second case ( 4 Ob 44/21f – in German) relates to an online streaming platform aimed at émigrés from the territory of former Yugoslavia. The defendant operated the platform based on license agreements with TV channel operators.
This seems to have pushed EU Member States towards compliance – the latest examples here are the Irish European Union (Copyright and RelatedRights in the Digital Single Market) Regulations 2021 (19 November), the Italian Decree (published on 27 November), and the Estonian Act implementing the Directive (8 December).
It was formed following a state license, in order to collect, among other things, the equitable remuneration provided by article 49 of Law 2121/93 in favour of producers, performers, and musicians for the public performance of legitimately released sound carriers. The direct licensing of in-store music was not covered by the agreement.
Aimed at ensuring remuneration for publishers when their publications are reused online by news aggregators, Article 15 grants press publishers the right of reproduction and the right of making available for online uses of their press publications by information society service providers.
improve authoritative and updated information on right holders, terms and conditions and licensing opportunities). It is also noted that the Commission will “work with relevant stakeholders to promote the quality of copyright data and achieve a well-functioning “copyright infrastructure” (e.g. Coming soon and latest referrals.
It has several aims, including the following: To facilitate copyright and relatedrightslicensing in protected works and other subject matters in certain television transmissions and radio programs. To introduce a mechanism of extended copyright licensing.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Restrict the treaty’s terms to apply only to traditional broadcasting–linear radio and television broadcasting and cablecasting. Copyright: WIPO. Photo: Emmanuel Berrod. See Love 2023.
Aimed at ensuring remuneration for publishers when their publications are reused online by news aggregators, Article 15 grants press publishers the right of reproduction and the right of making available for online uses of their press publications by information society service providers.
In order to carry out this activity, company A signed contracts with certain suppliers from which it acquired all of the copyrights and relatedrights regarding the specific musical repertoire. The advertising messages are played at a higher volume than the music.
Union law does not provide for a neighboring right to copyright for sport event’s organizers but that some Members States have introduced specific rights for sports events organizers in their legislation, including a new “neighboring right” to copyright.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content