Оut-of-court settlement of disputes in accordance with European copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market

V. Trotska
{"title":"Оut-of-court settlement of disputes in accordance with European copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market","authors":"V. Trotska","doi":"10.33731/12022.258189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Keywords: copyright, providers, rightsholders, users, content, downloads, interactiveaccess, out-of-court settlement of disputes. \nThe article is devoted to the study of the norms of Directive 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market, and Guidance on Article 17 of Directive 2019/790 on Copyright in the Digital Single Market.The purpose of this article is to conduct a legal analysis of the EU Directive and Guidance, and determine the features of protection of copyright and related rights through out-of-court settlement of disputes, in the new realities of digital market development, and the feasibility of considering the relevant norms in the legislation of Ukraine.Article 17 of this EU Directive and the provisions of the reference are analysed in details. \nRights and obligations of all participants in legal relations arising in the digital environment are considered: rightholders, users, online content-sharing service providers (hereinafter — providers).The definition of the new term «online content-sharing service providers», proposed in the EU Directive, has been explored. It is stated that providers have the right to provide access to legal content, uploaded by users. At the same time, they are obliged to act based on the permission received from the rightholders, do not affect on users who are using the online content-sharing services in order to legal upload and access to information, to prevent the availability of unauthorized content, uploaded by users.In the article explores the norms about out-of-court mechanisms of compensation for damage and the settlement of disputes. Its advantages are defined. The disadvantages that may arise in the practical application of the norms are indicated. \nIn particular, in the Article 17 of the EU Directive and the Guidance do not provide a clear answer to certain questions, such as the status of the person who will have the authority to resolve the relevant disputes; what will be the decisions made by such a person; the procedure, amount and terms of compensation for damages; cross-border application of decisions.A comparison is made between the norms of the legislation of Ukraine on copyright and related rights and the relevant norms of European legislation. It is noted that in the Law of Ukraine «On Copyright and Related Rights» there is a procedure for termination of infringements of copyright and related rights on the Internet by providers. Out-ofcourtsettlement of disputes is not provided for, but it is not prohibited. The provider restores access to the object if the right holder has not provided him with confirmation of the opening of legal proceedings to protect his rights to the object of copyright and (or) related rights, in respect of which the application for termination of the violation was filed.Unlike the provisions of the Law, according to Art. 17 (9) of the EU Directive and the Guidance, the user can appeal the decision of the provider to block, delete content. Access to content can be restored based on out-of-court settlement of the dispute, i.e., without going to court.It is concluded that these European standards are noteworthy and need further study in the context of the application of out-of-court mechanisms of the settlement of disputes that arise between rightsholders, users and providers in the digital environment.","PeriodicalId":356184,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Intellectual Property","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Practice of Intellectual Property","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33731/12022.258189","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Keywords: copyright, providers, rightsholders, users, content, downloads, interactiveaccess, out-of-court settlement of disputes. The article is devoted to the study of the norms of Directive 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market, and Guidance on Article 17 of Directive 2019/790 on Copyright in the Digital Single Market.The purpose of this article is to conduct a legal analysis of the EU Directive and Guidance, and determine the features of protection of copyright and related rights through out-of-court settlement of disputes, in the new realities of digital market development, and the feasibility of considering the relevant norms in the legislation of Ukraine.Article 17 of this EU Directive and the provisions of the reference are analysed in details. Rights and obligations of all participants in legal relations arising in the digital environment are considered: rightholders, users, online content-sharing service providers (hereinafter — providers).The definition of the new term «online content-sharing service providers», proposed in the EU Directive, has been explored. It is stated that providers have the right to provide access to legal content, uploaded by users. At the same time, they are obliged to act based on the permission received from the rightholders, do not affect on users who are using the online content-sharing services in order to legal upload and access to information, to prevent the availability of unauthorized content, uploaded by users.In the article explores the norms about out-of-court mechanisms of compensation for damage and the settlement of disputes. Its advantages are defined. The disadvantages that may arise in the practical application of the norms are indicated. In particular, in the Article 17 of the EU Directive and the Guidance do not provide a clear answer to certain questions, such as the status of the person who will have the authority to resolve the relevant disputes; what will be the decisions made by such a person; the procedure, amount and terms of compensation for damages; cross-border application of decisions.A comparison is made between the norms of the legislation of Ukraine on copyright and related rights and the relevant norms of European legislation. It is noted that in the Law of Ukraine «On Copyright and Related Rights» there is a procedure for termination of infringements of copyright and related rights on the Internet by providers. Out-ofcourtsettlement of disputes is not provided for, but it is not prohibited. The provider restores access to the object if the right holder has not provided him with confirmation of the opening of legal proceedings to protect his rights to the object of copyright and (or) related rights, in respect of which the application for termination of the violation was filed.Unlike the provisions of the Law, according to Art. 17 (9) of the EU Directive and the Guidance, the user can appeal the decision of the provider to block, delete content. Access to content can be restored based on out-of-court settlement of the dispute, i.e., without going to court.It is concluded that these European standards are noteworthy and need further study in the context of the application of out-of-court mechanisms of the settlement of disputes that arise between rightsholders, users and providers in the digital environment.
Оut-of-court根据数字单一市场中的欧洲版权和相关权利解决纠纷
关键词:版权、提供者、权利人、用户、内容、下载、交互访问、庭外纠纷解决本文致力于研究欧洲议会和理事会关于数字单一市场中版权和相关权利的指令2019/790的规范,以及关于数字单一市场中版权的指令2019/790第17条的指南。本文的目的是对欧盟指令和指南进行法律分析,确定在数字市场发展的新现实中,通过庭外和解方式保护版权和相关权的特点,以及在乌克兰立法中考虑相关规范的可行性。详细分析了本欧盟指令第17条和参考文献的规定。考虑到数字环境中产生的法律关系中所有参与者的权利和义务:权利人、用户、在线内容共享服务提供商(以下简称提供商)。欧盟指令中提出的新术语“在线内容共享服务提供商”的定义已经进行了探索。据称,提供商有权提供对用户上传的合法内容的访问。同时,他们有义务在获得权利人许可的基础上采取行动,不影响正在使用在线内容共享服务的用户合法上传和获取信息,防止用户上传的未经授权的内容。本文对庭外损害赔偿和纠纷解决机制的规范进行了探讨。它的优势是明确的。指出了规范在实际应用中可能出现的缺点。特别是,在欧盟指令和指南第17条中没有对某些问题提供明确的答案,例如将有权解决相关争议的人的地位;这样的人会做出什么样的决定?损害赔偿的程序、数额和条件;决策的跨界应用。对乌克兰的版权及相关权立法规范与欧洲的相关立法规范进行了比较。值得注意的是,在乌克兰《版权和相关权利法》中,有一项程序可以终止提供商在互联网上侵犯版权和相关权利的行为。不规定庭外解决纠纷,但不禁止。如果权利人未向其提供已启动法律程序以保护其对版权客体和(或)相关权利的权利的确认书,则提供商恢复对该客体的访问权,而终止侵权的申请是针对该客体提起的。与法律规定不同的是,根据欧盟指令和指南第17(9)条,用户可以对提供商阻止、删除内容的决定提出上诉。可以通过庭外和解的方式恢复对内容的访问,即不上法庭。结论是,这些欧洲标准值得注意,需要在应用庭外机制解决数字环境中权利持有人、用户和提供者之间产生的纠纷的背景下进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信