A public consultation on the review of the EU copyright rules was held between 5 December 2013 and 5 March 2014. The consultation covered a broad range of issues, identified in the Commission communication on content in the digital single market. One of them was “Registration of works and other subject matters”
End users/consumers
The majority of end users/consumers would support the creation of a registration system at EU level. They argue that registration would allow collecting data about right-ownership and length of copyright protection of registered works. This would facilitate licensing, reduce transaction costs and increase legal certainty. According to end users/consumers, registration would be particularly helpful to identify works that fall in the public domain or that have been made available through open content licences such as Creative Common licences. Registration would also help reduce the occurrence of orphan works.
Respondents are generally in favour of a non-mandatory registration system managed by an independent body. Some point out that registration would have to be simple and user-friendly, both for rightholders and content users. They warn against the risk of an excessively bureaucratic or costly mechanism. Some see the risk that a registration mechanism would penalise specific categories of creators (e.g. in the visual arts) and eventually only benefit big corporations.
Institutional users
The big majority of institutional users support the idea of an EU registration system. They believe registration would allow an easier identification of authors and reduce the problem of orphan works. Access to knowledge and creativity would be improved since registration would draw a distinction between content for which creators want to control reuse and works which are not produced for commercial gain and could therefore be freely reused by third parties for cultural and financial benefit.
They argue that an effective and useful registration system needs to record transfers of rights throughout the duration of the copyright protection of the work; it also needs to be transparent and easy to use. All types of rightholders (including individual creators) should be able to register their works, and the register should include information on works that are out of copyright or that are available under open licences, in order to create more legal certainty for users of such works.
Some institutional users consider that for such a system to be effective, it would need to be mandatory, but highlight that this would not be feasible because of the Berne Convention which prohibits making copyright protection subject to formalities.
Authors/performers
A large majority of authors and performers are against the idea of registration. They consider it costly, complicated, unnecessary and burdensome. They also point out that several optional registration systems already exist in the Member States (e.g. the ‘Registre Public du Cinema et de l’Audiovisuel’ or the ‘Balzac’ database for literary works in France) and consider that the Commission should further support such optional systems at national level. An EU registration mechanism would not be useful. Authors and performers are also concerned about the quality of data that would be collected for the purposes of registration, and in general the costs and risks associated with formalities.
Collective management organisations (CMOs)
CMOs generally consider that an EU registration system would be unnecessary, complex and an administrative burden. They refer to market-led initiatives for the identification of works and rightholders – such as ISBN (International Standard Book Number), ISAN (International Standard Audio-visual Number), the Global Repertoire Database project or EIDR (Entertainment Identifier Registry) – that should be supported instead. Moreover, they point to the existence of voluntary registration systems managed by CMOs. They believe that if some form of registration is introduced at EU level, it should be complementary to market-led solutions, and voluntary, since international conventions (in particular the Berne Convention) do not require formal registration as a condition for obtaining copyright protection. At most, registration may be useful for orphan works.
Some point out that a registration system would not provide legal certainty about the copyright status of a work, its rightholder(s), the transfer of rights or the duration of protection, because there could be misuses or inaccuracies in the information that is declared. They consider that legal certainty can only be provided by the courts.
Some CMOs point out that registration would be a disadvantage for small or first-time creators. The need to register could be perceived as an administrative burden and act as disincentive to creation.
Publishers/producers/broadcasters
Publishers, producers and broadcasters express views on this subject similar to those of CMOs.
Intermediaries/distributors/other service providers
Most intermediaries/service providers consider that an EU-wide registration system may be generally useful. Increasing the information about works in copyright would be beneficial to licensees, the public, and authors who need practical solutions to enjoy the benefits of their rights. Many respondents stress that any such system should be voluntary in order to ensure compliance with the Berne Convention. In their opinion, registries would facilitate licensing and improve legal certainty. Creative Commons is mentioned as an example of a simple platform, where millions of works are ‘signalled’ on a voluntary basis, and where free copyright licences provide a uniform way to give the public permission to share and use the creative work.
Respondents stress that it should be possible to build in sufficient incentives within a voluntary registration system for rightholders to make use of it. For instance they suggest introducing a rule making registration a condition for access to certain legal remedies. As in some countries, a certificate of registration could provide evidence that the copyright exists and that the person registered is the owner of the copyright. Some suggest that voluntary systems could be set up on a sector-specific basis.
Member States
Member States that replied to the public consultation generally consider that there should be no mandatory EU system of registration. On the other hand, some Member States is more open to consider a voluntary registration system (which could receive financial and organisational support by the EU). They say that voluntary registration could allow a quick identification of the beneficiary, which would help the licensing process. Some general rules on registers could therefore be included in legislation. However, there should be no formalities to determine the existence or the exercise of rights – the registration could only be a tool, for example to provide evidence on works ownership.
One Member State refers to rightholders’ reluctance to support a registration system and considers that a better option is to support market-based mechanisms to enrich right-ownership information.
Source: EUROPEAN COMMISION
