Presentation on theme: "Rethinking Copyright in the Name of"— Presentation transcript:
1 Rethinking Copyright in the Name of Directive 2013/37/EU:Rethinking Copyright in the Name ofOpen DataMadrid LAPSI Meeting – 23rd May 2014
2 1) by broadening the spectrum of PSBs which are subject to its rules Directive 2013/37/EU amending Directive 2003/98/EC on the re-use of public sector information (PSI) represents the renewed legal framework aimed at improving the adoption of open data practices by European public sector bodies (PSBs). Is does so by1) by broadening the spectrum of PSBs which are subject to its rules2) by declaiming a general obligation for Member States to make all accessible PSI re-usable
3 But the same Directive acknowledges that PSBs must adopt this presumption in favour of openness to the extent permitted by certain bodies of law, such as data protection law and intellectual property rights (IPRs)…What kind of IPRs?The Directive does not apply to documents covered by industrial property rights, i.e. patents, registered designs and trademarks (Rec /98).What kind of PSI is also a piece of IPR?A single piece of PSI that amounts to a work of art (copyright)Collection of pieces of PSI that amounts to a database (sui generis database right)Pieces of PSI that are, at the same time, parts of protected databases and works of art in themselvesPieces of PSI that, whereas parts of protected databases, are not IPRs on a stand alone baseWho may be the owner of those IPRs?The very same PSBsThird parties (and even initial owners of IPRs held by cultural institutions)PSBs’ employees: economic rights may go to the employer by the contract of employment (right to control + benefits from use, at least in theory) but employee is the author (paternity right + integrity rights)
4 Is there a general obligation to allow re-use? PSINOT covered by IPRscovered by IPRsOrdinaryPSBsCulturalIs there a general obligation to allow re-use?Yes: when PSI is accessible (according to the national rules on access), then the institution shall ensure the re-use(Article /37)but…No: denial is possible in case of PSI for which third parties hold IPRs, but with the obligation to indicate the rights holder (Article /37)No: denial is possible in case of PSI for which third parties hold IPRs, and without the obligation to indicate the rights holder (Article /37)No: denial is possible in case of PSI for which employees of PSBs hold IPRs: economic and moral rights(Rec 12, /37)Don’t know: PSI for which the PSB holds IPRs, but…a contrario, shall the institution must authorize re-use? ( Article /37)PSBs should, however, exercise their copyright in a way that facilitates re-use (Rec /98/EC)No: denial is possible in case of PSI for which the PSB holds IPRs (‘where the re-use of such documents is allowed’ Article /37)liability rule?value as interpretative principle?In these cases, rights clearance is neededNo authorisation to reuseAuthorization under the conditions set by the IP holders
5 How much can they charge? OrdinaryPSBsCulturalHow much can they charge?(article /37)Marginal costs incurred for their reproduction, provision and disseminationexceptAt any price below or equal to the cost of collection, production, reproduction and dissemination, preservation and rights clearance, plus a reasonable return on investmentRec /37 (should retain the right to exploit the document)PSIheld by PSBsthat have to cover a substantial part of their cost relating to the collection, production, reproduction and disseminationPSBsthat have to cover a substantial part of their costs relating to the performance of their public tasksAt any price below or equal to the cost of collection, production, reproduction and dissemination, plus a reasonable return on investment
6 Under what conditions (price excluded) re-use shall be granted? Ordinary PSBsCultural PSBsUnder what conditions (price excluded) re-use shall be granted?Via arrangements that are neither discriminatory nor exclusive unless an exclusive right is necessary for the provision of a service in the public interest, provided that:- the arrangement is transparent and public- reviewed at least every three years(Article /98)What about ordinary PSBs with cultural resources? What is the meaning of ‘cultural resources’?(cfr. Rec /37)Via arrangements that are neither discriminatory nor exclusive unless an exclusive right is necessary for the ‘digitisation of cultural resources’, provided that:- the exclusivity shall in general not exceed 10 years (if longer, reviewed during the 11th year and at least every seven years thereafter) (Article 11, 2 and 2a 2013/37)+ general exception of exclusive agreements for the provision of a service in the public interest
7 PSI is curving out copyright and sui generis rights! In light of this…Ordinary PSBs holding copyright or sui generis rights on their PSI:shall/should not refuse re-use on the basis of their IPRs (limited ‘right to control’)cannot define a charging policy beyond what the new Directive permits (limited ‘equitable remuneration’)But, exclusivity can originate from different sources rather than IPRs… exclusive arrangements!PSI is curving out copyright and sui generis rights!