国家法院是信息社会三步测试的对象吗?

R. Arnold, Eleonora Rosati
{"title":"国家法院是信息社会三步测试的对象吗?","authors":"R. Arnold, Eleonora Rosati","doi":"10.1093/JIPLP/JPV138","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Directive 2001/29/EC (the ‘InfoSoc Directive’) contains an exhaustive list of exceptions and limitations that Member States are free to implement into their own copyright laws (save that the exemption for temporary copies is mandatory). Article 5(5) incorporates the three-step test and mandates that exceptions and limitations shall only be applied in certain special cases that do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work or other subject-matter and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rightholder. Unlike the three-step test in international copyright law, it is uncertain whether the three-step test in the InfoSoc Directive is addressed to national courts as well as the legislatures of the Member States.Recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘CJEU’) has provided guidance in this respect. Although the Court has held that Article 5(5) of the InfoSoc Directive is not intended to affect the substantive content of the exceptions contained in Article 5(1), (2) and (3) thereof, and hence cannot extend their scope, and has held that, if acts fall clearly within one of those exceptions, then they satisfy Article 5(5), it has also held that those exceptions must be construed in the light of Article 5(5). More significantly, despite holding that Article 5(5) takes effect only at the time that the exceptions are applied by the Member States, the CJEU has also held that the acts of the defendant in question must satisfy the requirements of Article 5(5). As such, it appears from the CJEU’s jurisprudence that the three-step test in the InfoSoc Directive is addressed at national legislators and courts alike.The consequence of this is that, even in those Member States that have not transposed the language of the three-step test into their own legal systems, courts must determine not only whether the acts of the defendant in question are eligible for the application of a certain exception or limitation, but also whether they comply with the cumulative conditions set in the InfoSoc three-step test.","PeriodicalId":382921,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Regulation (European) (Topic)","volume":"160 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"25","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are National Courts the Addressees of the InfoSoc Three-Step Test?\",\"authors\":\"R. Arnold, Eleonora Rosati\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/JIPLP/JPV138\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Directive 2001/29/EC (the ‘InfoSoc Directive’) contains an exhaustive list of exceptions and limitations that Member States are free to implement into their own copyright laws (save that the exemption for temporary copies is mandatory). Article 5(5) incorporates the three-step test and mandates that exceptions and limitations shall only be applied in certain special cases that do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work or other subject-matter and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rightholder. Unlike the three-step test in international copyright law, it is uncertain whether the three-step test in the InfoSoc Directive is addressed to national courts as well as the legislatures of the Member States.Recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘CJEU’) has provided guidance in this respect. Although the Court has held that Article 5(5) of the InfoSoc Directive is not intended to affect the substantive content of the exceptions contained in Article 5(1), (2) and (3) thereof, and hence cannot extend their scope, and has held that, if acts fall clearly within one of those exceptions, then they satisfy Article 5(5), it has also held that those exceptions must be construed in the light of Article 5(5). More significantly, despite holding that Article 5(5) takes effect only at the time that the exceptions are applied by the Member States, the CJEU has also held that the acts of the defendant in question must satisfy the requirements of Article 5(5). As such, it appears from the CJEU’s jurisprudence that the three-step test in the InfoSoc Directive is addressed at national legislators and courts alike.The consequence of this is that, even in those Member States that have not transposed the language of the three-step test into their own legal systems, courts must determine not only whether the acts of the defendant in question are eligible for the application of a certain exception or limitation, but also whether they comply with the cumulative conditions set in the InfoSoc three-step test.\",\"PeriodicalId\":382921,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Regulation (European) (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"160 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-07-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"25\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Regulation (European) (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/JIPLP/JPV138\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Regulation (European) (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JIPLP/JPV138","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25

摘要

指令2001/29/EC(“InfoSoc指令”)包含详尽的例外和限制列表,成员国可以自由地将其实施到自己的版权法中(除非临时副本的豁免是强制性的)。第5(5)条纳入了三步检验,并规定例外和限制仅适用于某些特殊情况,这些情况不与作品或其他主题的正常利用相冲突,也不会不合理地损害权利人的合法利益。与国际版权法中的三步测试不同,InfoSoc指令中的三步测试是否适用于国家法院以及成员国的立法机构尚不确定。欧洲联盟法院(“欧洲法院”)最近的判例法在这方面提供了指导。尽管法院认为,InfoSoc指令第5(5)条无意影响第5(1)、(2)和(3)条所包含的例外的实质性内容,因此不能扩大其范围,并且认为,如果行为明显属于这些例外之一,则它们符合第5(5)条,法院还认为,这些例外必须根据第5(5)条进行解释。更重要的是,尽管欧洲法院认为第5(5)条仅在成员国适用例外情况时生效,但欧洲法院也认为,所涉被告的行为必须满足第5(5)条的要求。因此,从欧洲法院的判例来看,InfoSoc指令中的三步测试似乎适用于国家立法机构和法院。这样做的结果是,即使在那些没有将三步测试的语言转换为其本国法律体系的成员国中,法院不仅必须确定所涉被告的行为是否有资格适用某种例外或限制,而且还必须确定它们是否符合InfoSoc三步测试中设定的累积条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are National Courts the Addressees of the InfoSoc Three-Step Test?
Directive 2001/29/EC (the ‘InfoSoc Directive’) contains an exhaustive list of exceptions and limitations that Member States are free to implement into their own copyright laws (save that the exemption for temporary copies is mandatory). Article 5(5) incorporates the three-step test and mandates that exceptions and limitations shall only be applied in certain special cases that do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work or other subject-matter and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rightholder. Unlike the three-step test in international copyright law, it is uncertain whether the three-step test in the InfoSoc Directive is addressed to national courts as well as the legislatures of the Member States.Recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘CJEU’) has provided guidance in this respect. Although the Court has held that Article 5(5) of the InfoSoc Directive is not intended to affect the substantive content of the exceptions contained in Article 5(1), (2) and (3) thereof, and hence cannot extend their scope, and has held that, if acts fall clearly within one of those exceptions, then they satisfy Article 5(5), it has also held that those exceptions must be construed in the light of Article 5(5). More significantly, despite holding that Article 5(5) takes effect only at the time that the exceptions are applied by the Member States, the CJEU has also held that the acts of the defendant in question must satisfy the requirements of Article 5(5). As such, it appears from the CJEU’s jurisprudence that the three-step test in the InfoSoc Directive is addressed at national legislators and courts alike.The consequence of this is that, even in those Member States that have not transposed the language of the three-step test into their own legal systems, courts must determine not only whether the acts of the defendant in question are eligible for the application of a certain exception or limitation, but also whether they comply with the cumulative conditions set in the InfoSoc three-step test.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信