Publication details
La contribution de la Cour de justice a l’harmonisation du droit d’auteur dans l’Union Européenne
| Title in English | The contribution of the Court of Justice to the harmonisation of copyright law in the European Union |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Year of publication | 2012 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | ERA Forum: scripta iuris Europaei; journal of the Academy of European Law (Europäische Rechtsakademie Trier) |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Web | Repozitář MU |
| Doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12027-012-0264-x |
| Field | Law sciences |
| Keywords | "Communication to the public"; "Remuneration"; Balancing different fundamental rights; Harmonisation of EU copyrights law; Notions of "work"; Right to intellectual property; The unity and coherence of the EU legal order |
| Attached files | |
| Description | The Grand Chamber's Promusicae judgment in 2008 gave the Court an opportunity to weigh and balance the right to intellectual property and other fundamental rights intervening in this domain. In this case, the Court, in accordance with its approach in the Schmidberger ruling, leaves it to Member States to weigh up those rights in order to find a fair balance. In substance, the "'Schmidberger" approach was applied to the protection of intellectual property, despite the lack of any fundamental freedom or any reference to public interest. There is also often a need to balance different interests within the sole framework of the fundamental right to intellectual property. In this respect, the Court supports basically a broad concept of copyright which is reflected in a wide interpretation of the notions of "work", of the "communication to the public" and of the "remuneration" to be paid to the author. According to the requirements deriving from the unity and coherence of the legal order of the European Union, the Court develops a conceptual unity of the whole set of the directives applicable in the area of copyright, which favors the process of its harmonisation. Consistency of this whole with international treaties on intellectual property is also important, although the Court's possibilities of conciliation in this respect are rather limited. |