Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
Evolutionofcopyright–realityorillusion?
onthe“three-steptest”(Art.35PCA48).Tisprovisionprovides,amongothers,that
referencetofairuseshouldnotharmtheauthor’slegitimateinterests.Furthermore,
paragraph33ofthepreambletoDirective2001/29/ECmentions“browsing”,meaning
asituationinwhichoneisvisitingwebsites,oftenrandomly.However,streamingis
qualitativelydiferentfromwebbrowsing,especiallywheninternetusestreamscontent
ischosendeliberately.ItappearsthattheECJhasnotthusfarsharedthesedoubts,
sincethisprovisionwasappliedinacaseofusingonlinereportsfromthemonitoring
ofpressarticlespublishedontheInternet49.TeCourtismovinginthedirectionof
non-diferentiationofthelegalsituation,dependingonthecontentreceivedonacom-
puterscreen.Certainlyanundisputableadvantageofthispositionistoachievegreater
legalcertaintyforusers.
7.SUMMARY
ItappearsthattheECJhassignalledanarrowingunderstandingoftheconceptof
useofthework.Tisistherightsignal.Suchauseshouldbedeterminedbyits“social”
context,alltheaccompanyingcircumstances,andaboveall–realisticassessmentof
theefectsforthelegitimateinterestsoftherightholder.Merelycreatinganopportu-
nitytoreviewthecontentoftheworkshouldnotbedecisive.AlthoughtheECJcriteria
indicatedsofararequitediverse,theyaregoingintherightdirection.Provisionof
furtherguidanceinthisregardisamatteroftime.Insodoing,theCourtappearsto
beforcingasingle,functionalunderstandingofcopyright,usingtheideaoftheeco-
nomicinterestsofacreator(orotherauthorizedparty).Suchapositiontosomeextent
neutralizesnegativeefectsarisingfromexpandingcopyrightlaw.
DamianFlisak–Ph.D.,radcaprawny
48“Tepermissibleusemustnotinfringethenormaluseoftheworkorviolatetherightful
interestsoftheauthor”.
49PublicRelationsConsultantsAssociationLtdvNewspaperLicensingAgencyLtdandOth-
ers,EU:C:2014:1195.
137
