Diesen Beitrag in Deutsch lesen
Study – Paul Keller
The EU Member States In this document Member States is understood to include the EEA countries that will also need to implement the provisions contained in the Directive. have 2 years to implement the provisions laid down in the DSM Directive. The Directive supplements a number of existing EU Directives in the field of copyright law, most importantly Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (hereafter “InfoSoc Directive”).member states have traditionally implemented the EU Directives in the field of copyright in various ways. Some unified acts that cover all types of rights while others have different acts for different types of rights (copyright, related rights, database rights, ect). As a result some member states may implement the Directive all at once, while others may implement different parts of the Directive separately France for example has already implemented Article 15 of the Directive in a separate law that came into force on the 24th of october 2019 (“LOI n° 2019-775 du 24 juillet 2019 tendant à … Continue reading). It can be expected that most member states will implement the provisions contained in the Directive by adapting and expanding existing legislation (most importantly their copyright acts). This also means that legislative processes aimed at implementing the Directive in the Member states provide an opportunity to include additional changes to the existing national copyright rules (as long as such changes stay within the legislative scope that is provided by the InfoSoc Directive). This fact is explicitly acknowledged by Article 25 of the Directive.
One of the main legislative objectives of the DSM Directive was to further harmonize the EU copyright rules between the member states. While the effort to harmonize stayed well behind what civil society organisations, academics and progressve politicians have advocated for, the objective to harmonize is reflected throughout the Directive. Most of the provisions in the Directive are mandatory for member states to implement The only optional provision is Article 12 which deals with Extended Collective Licensing and was included during the trilogue negotiations at the request of the Council. and there is relatively little room for member states to make substantive choices or deviate from the text of the provisions. However there are still substantive choices that can be made by the Member States when implementing the Directive.
Another (relatively novel) element of the Directive is that it leaves some specific implementation questions to be determined by stakeholder through a number of stakeholder dialogues both on the European (Article 17) and on the Member State level (Articles 3 and 10). This means that stakeholders such as organisations from the education, research and cultural heritage sectors have some ability to directly participate in shaping elements of the national Implementations.
|↑1||In this document Member States is understood to include the EEA countries that will also need to implement the provisions contained in the Directive.|
|↑2||France for example has already implemented Article 15 of the Directive in a separate law that came into force on the 24th of october 2019 (“LOI n° 2019-775 du 24 juillet 2019 tendant à créer un droit voisin au profit des agences de presse et des éditeurs de presse”|
|↑3||The only optional provision is Article 12 which deals with Extended Collective Licensing and was included during the trilogue negotiations at the request of the Council.|