Copyright enforcement in the digital age: A post-ACTA view on the balancing of fundamental rights

International Journal of Law and Information Technology

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 92-104

  Baraliuc, Irina ^a   Depreeuw, Sari ^a   Gutwirth, Serge ^a  

^a VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT BRUSSEL   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Copyright; Data protection; Digital environment; Enforcement; Fundamental rights; International agreements; Internet; Privacy

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874275584     PISSN: 09670769     EISSN: 14643693     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ijlit/eas024     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Anti-counterfeiting trade agreement between the European Union and its member states, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Mexican States, the Kingdom of Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Singapore, the Swiss Confederation and The United States of America [2011] accessed 29 October 2012.
2. Sari Depreeuw and Serge Gutwirth, 'Bescherming intellectuele rechten mag niet ten koste van privacy'[2010] De Juristenkrant 12
3. European Parliament, Committee on Petitions 'Parliament receives petition against ACTA' (Press Release) accessed 29 October 2012.
4. See also European Parliament, Committee on Petitions 'Petitions Committee debates complaints against ACTA'(Press Release) accessed 29 October 2012.
5. ACTA s 5
6. 'Czech Government Suspends Process of Ratification of ACTA-PM' (2012) accessed 29 October 2012.
7. 'Economy Minister Blocks Ratification ofACTA' (2012) accessed 29 October 2012.
8. Resolution of theMembers of theDutch ParliamentBemmel and Elissen (21 501-30,No. 286) 29May 2012 accessed 29 October 2012.
9. Resolution of theMembers of the Dutch Parliament Verhoeven and Schaar (21 501-30, No 287) 29May 2012 accessed 29October 2012.
10. Resolution of theMembers of the Dutch Parliament Verhoeven and Schaar No. 287 and Resolution of the Member of the Dutch Parliament Verhoeven (21 501-30, No. 288) 29 May 2012 accessed 29 October 2012.
11. 'Prime Minister Wants to Reject ACTA' (2012) accessed 29 October 2012.
12. 'PM Ponta: Romania Cannot Ratify an Agreement Such as ACTA Now, ButOnly After ThisUndergoes the Necessary Changes to Guarantee Freedom and the Observance of Rights of Each of Us' (2012) accessed 29 October 2012.
13. 'Slovak Economy Minister Says ACTA Puts Copyrights Above Basic Freedoms' (2012) accessed 29 October 2012.
14. Four committees of the European Parliament (Development, Civil Liberties, Industry and Legal Affairs) advising the International Trade Committee on ACTA and the latter itself voted against the agreement, European Parliament 'ACTA now rejected by four EP Committees' (Press Release) accessed 29 October 2012.
15. European Parliament, 'Parliament should say NO to ACTA, says International Trade Committee' (Press Release) accessed 29 October 2012.
16. European Commission, 'Proposal for a Revision of the Directive on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (Directive 2004/48/EC)' accessed 29 October 2012.
17. See on other aspect sinter alia 'Opinion of European Academics on Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement' accessed 29 October 2012.
18. Christophe Geiger, 'The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement and Criminal Enforcement of Intellectual Property: What Consequences for the European Union?' [2012] in J Rosen (ed), IP Rights at the Crossroads of Trade (Edward Elgar 2012)
19. Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law Research Paper No. 12-04 accessed 29 October 2012.
20. Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights, OJ L 157, 30 April 2004 (corrigendum OJ L 195, 2 June 2004, 16-25) ('IP Rights Enforcement Directive') arts 6-13
21. Case C-275/06 Productores deMúsica de España (Promusicae) v Telefónica de España SAU[2006] ECR I-00271 ('Promusicae')
22. Directive 2002/58/EC of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector [2002] OJ L 201 ('Directive on privacy and electronic communications')
23. Directive 95/46/ECof the European Parliament and of the Council of 24October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the freemovement of such data [1995]OJ L 281 ('Data protection Directive')
24. Data protection Directive, art 13(1)g
25. Promusicae, s 54
26. Promusicae, ss 55, 58
27. Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EuropeanUnion [2010] OJ C 83 of 30March 2010 ('Charter'), art 7, 8, 17, 47; See Promusicae, s 61 ff
28. Case C-461/10 Bonnier Audio AB, Earbooks AB, Norstedts Förlagsgrupp AB, Piratförlaget AB, Storyside AB v Perfect Communication Sweden AB [2012] ('Bonnier')
29. Bonnier, s 58
30. Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the InternalMarket [2000] OJ L 178, 17 July 2000, 1-16 ('E-commerce Directive') s 4, arts 12-14)
31. E-commerce Directive art 15(1)
32. Case C-70/10 Scarlet Extended SA v SABAM[2011] ('Scarlet'); Scarlet is an Internet access provider, which does not offer downloading or file sharing services; see in the same sense Case C-360/10 SABAM v Netlog [2012]; Netlog is an online social network and considered a hosting provider in this case
33. Scarlet, s 31
34. E-commerce Directive art (15) 1
35. Scarlet, s 36 by reference to Case C-324/09 L'Oréal SA and Others v eBay International AG and Others [2011], s 139
36. Charter art 16; Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights [2004] OJ L 157 art 3(1)
37. Charter, arts 8 and 11;Data protection Directive and Directive on privacy and electronic communications
38. Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users' rights relating to electronic communications networks and services [2002] OJ L 108, as amended by Directive 2009/136 (Universal Service Directive), art 1(3)
39. The UK have created a legal framework for implementing a graduated response system as well Digital Economy Act 2010; the act was challenged but found in conformity with the European legal framework: see British Telecommunications PlcandAnor, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills [2011] EWHC1021 (Admin); concrete measures implementing the enforcement regime have not been issued yet so this act will not be discussed here
40. Loi relative au droit d'auteur et aux droits voisins dans la société de l'information [2006] JORF 3 août 2006, 11541
41. Conseil constitutionnel 27 July 2006, case nr. 2006-540 DC accessed 29 October 2012.
42. For critical observations to the current system see Valérie Laure Benabou 'La riposte graduée contre la contrefaçon de masse: de l'alibi pédagogique à la tentation sécuritair' [2010] AandM 5-6, 438
43. Jean-Sébastien Mariez 'French « three strikes » law...,...3 small suspension points' (2011) Juriscom.net accessed 29 October 2012.
44. EMI Records (Ireland) Ltd v Eircom PLC [2009] IEHC 411; EMI RecordsandOrs v Eircom Ltd [2010] IEHC 108
45. EMI Records (Ireland) Ltd and others v UPC Communications Ireland Limited [2011] unreported accessed 29 October 2012.
46. Damien MCALLIG 'No basis for three strike copyright rule' [2011] IRIS 1:1/38 accessed 29 October 2012.
47. Gemma O'Farrell 'Time for Pirates to Walk the Plank? The Position of Internet Service Providers After EMI v UPC' (2011) 33 EIPR 655-59
48. 'Irish ISP ordered to stop using 'three strikes' system against illegal file-sharers' (Outlaw.com, 20 December 2011) accessed 29 October 2012.
49. ACTA s 5, in particular art 27
50. ACTA art 27(4)
51. IP Rights Enforcement Directive art 8
52. Using the verb 'may' rather than 'shall'
53. Michael Geist 'The trouble with ACTA: An analysis of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement' (2012) Proceedings of the Workshop on 'The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)' accessed 29 October 2012.
54. ACTA art 27(1)
55. See the leaked documents on the ACTA 'Internet Chapter' accessed 29 October 2012.
56. Public Pre-decisional/Deliberative Draft of ACTA (2010) .
57. Annemarie Bridy 'ACTA and the Specter of Graduated Response' [2010] PIJIP Research Paper No. 2 accessed 29 October 2012.
58. ACTA art 27(2)-(4)
59. See in relation to the protection of personal data: 'Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the current negotiations by the EuropeanUnion of anAnti-CounterfeitingTrade Agreement (ACTA)'OJC 147, 5 June 2010, 1
60. 'Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement of 24 April 2012' accessed 29 October 2012 and Executive summary in OJ C 215, 21 July 2012, 7-9.
61. The request for an opinion was submitted by the European Commission on 10 May 2012, but in the meanwhile the European Parliament rejected ACTA. One wonders what the effect of an ex post factum opinion of the Court will be, especially since the decision of the Parliament is a political one, while the opinion of the Court will be legal.
62. See the roadmap on the Proposal for a revision of the Directive on the enforcement of intellectual property rights
63. See 'Notice-and-action Procedures' accessed 29 October 2012.
64. European Commission, Roadmap, 'Initiative on a Clean and Open Internet: Procedures for Notifying and Acting on Illegal Content Hosted by Online Intermediaries' accessed 29 October 2012.
65. See alsoMichael Geist 'ACTA Lives: How the EU and Canada Are Using CETA as BackdoorMechanism To Revive ACTA' (09 July 2012) accessed 29 October 2012.
66. European Commission 'Factsheet: The EU's Free Trade Agreement with Canada and intellectual property rights protection' (14 August 2012) accessed 29 October 2012.