Culture as merchandise, thanks to recent copyright reform

In July, the European Parliament adopted the ‘Reda report’ on copyright. Pirate Party MEP Julia Reda’s report focuses on the functionality of the current Infosoc Directive, and is broadly seen as a bellwether for the coming copyright legislation. But it is also seen as a potential threat to authors and artists, who will see their creations turn into merchandise.

The recent articles about the Reda Report have focused a lot on the so-called ‘Freedom of panorama.” This is just the tip of the iceberg and if you read even further between the lines, you will realize that there is a change of status for cultural creation, which is downgraded to a simple merchandise.

The freedom of panorama only reveals how the Reda Report is controversial, even among the MEPs working on the topic. The plenary session decided to remove the proposal that would “restrict the freedom of panorama,” despite efforts from French MEP Jean-Marie Cavada from the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, who insisted that the commercial use of pictures of public buildings and sculptures should require authorization from the rights-holders (architects or designers). So the MEPs decided to keep the status quo - thereby allowing countries to decide for themselves whether or not they would allow freedom of panorama.

The need for a reform at a European level is therefore questionable, since the exceptions are numerous. The report was amended over 550 times and seemed to lose a little more of its substance with each amendment.

Commissioner Gunther Oettinger is due to present his proposal before the end of this year and yet the task seems almost impossible, considering how the Reda Report has blurred the lines even more. The Parliament also rejected the attempt “to pave the way for an ancillary copyright for press publishers, also known as the ‘Google tax’. “Virtually all the value generated by creative works is transferred to digital intermediaries, which refuse to pay authors or negotiate extremely low levels of remuneration.” according to Cavada. Based on Julia Reda’s view, it is just merchandise and should be treated as such.

“The problem with ancillary copyright rules is that they create a business climate that favors incumbent companies in both press publishing and the digital economy – as only the biggest players have the infrastructure to deal with such rules,” said Jakob Kucharczyk, Director of the Computer and Communications Industry Association of Europe.

But the so-called collecting agencies have largely disagreed. Cécile Despringre, executive director of the SAA (Society of Audiovisual Authors), described the report as “user-focused,” even though it calls for “measures to ensure fair and appropriate remuneration for all categories of right-holders, including with regard to digital distribution of their works, and improve the contractual position of authors and performers in relation to other right-holders and intermediaries.”
It has been a constant problem since Reda was appointed as rapporteur for this reform, the Pirate Party she comes from only sees copyright as an enemy.
“We know this resolution has had a long and difficult path to adoption, but every side seems to defend the importance of authors receiving fair remuneration but fails to put forward any concrete proposals to correct current failings,” argued Despringre.

There was also really last-ditch effort by Mary Honeyball (labour MEP) to create “an unwaivable right to remuneration subject to collective management,” for performers for downloads and streaming services, which was also struck down, much to the chagrin of the Fair Internet campaign, made up of organizations, such as the International Federation of Actors and the International Federation of Musicians.

“Performers are still not fairly rewarded when their performances are exploited via legal online on-demand services. Most of them receive an all-inclusive fee at the time of the recording for all type of exploitation of their performances. Others receive an insufficient proportional remuneration,” according to Fair Internet, revealing that it represents more than 500,000 individuals through its 35 Europe-based collective management organizations.

Jean Claude Juncker, President of the Commission must now be haunted by his choice to appoint Reda rapporteur of this crucial reform. But the future could be even more surprising.

The report also calls on the European Commission to look at the possibility of providing an exception for libraries to lend works in digital format and for scientists to mine text and data.

Now the serious lobbying on Reda’s Report is about to start. Her report was supposed to be a first step, but we know that each proposition will be fought before it becomes law. Artists and authors across Europe hope for the best and for their creations not to be turned into merchandise. They are now asking for more clarity and protection by lawmakers.

“The report is the beginning of an ongoing debate signalling to the European Commission which aspects of substantive copyright law merit reform,” said Kucharczyk. In the coming months, we will see if the Reda Report will really influence Europe’s future culture, or whether the report will end up in the paper shredder…let’s hope for the latter!