Unions demand fair share in EU Copyright Directive submission

CEPIC welcomes the submission of the European/ International Federation of Journalist which expressly mentions images (and CEPIC) on page 3

Article 17 of the new Directive aims to close the “value-gap” between rightsholders and online platforms and to ensure a fair share of the wealth generated by platforms, – tech giants in particular – using protected works, is distributed to creative industries and their authors.

The position paper was submitted to the EC following a series of six Stakeholder Dialogue meetings on the implementation of the article it organized and IFJ/EFJ participated in. The institution has called a seventh meeting on 30 March.

Structured around six key points, the paper clarifies the federations’ joint position on Article 17 and offers in-depth advice on licensing, remuneration, transparency and complaints and redress mechanisms in the context of this provision.

It stresses the importance of safeguarding contents’ sharing and availability and suggests platforms should proactively seek broad licensing schemes to this end.

The document also underlines key issues to be considered to achieve balance between competing fundamental rights, offering tips to ensure both copyright and the article’s exceptions and limitations are respected and harmonized across platforms and EU countries.

In a letter cosigned by them, IFJ and EFJ General Secretaries Anthony Bellanger and Ricardo Gutierrez wrote: “We welcome this consultation and highly appreciate the opportunity to submit this paper. Our federations will continue to monitor the implementation of this legislation and to demand fair remuneration for journalists and maximum transparency mechanisms in the context of this provision”.

Click here  to read the position paper

For more information contact the IFJ/EFJ Authors’ rights adviser at sarah.bouchetob 

Some platforms – as YouTube– may argue images are not part of their business model (they say they are “video sharing platforms, not pic banks”), and they aren’t obliged, therefore, to remunerate their rightsholders.
But images/photographs that are protected and used in videos (in high numbers in song videos), should be remunerated, especially since image recognition tools are highly reliable and can detect photos in videos and any content lasting at least 1 second.
In this regard, YouTube’s position that it does not need to remunerate authors of images shows a deep misunderstanding of the Directive and is profoundly discriminatory towards the sector. It entails damaging consequences that undermine the spirit of the Directive.
It is important that OCSSPs respect the Directive and cease to be under the impression that they can continue to set the rules, based on their business model. Images should be paid for by all platforms that use them.
This remuneration is crucial for photographers and visual artists in general. Our federations demand this remuneration and will campaign with the European Visual Artists (EVA) and the Coordination of European Picture Agencies Stock, Press and Heritage (CEPIC), for the enforcement of the Dir0ective on images.