UK will not implement EU copyright law
According to Universities, Science, Research and Innovation Minister Chris Skidmore, there are “no plans” for it to be taken on.
EU nations have until June 7 2021 to implement the Directive.
Given that the UK will leave the EU on January 31 2020 and the implementation period will end on December 31 2020, the UK does not need to comply with the reforms, Mr Skidmore said in response to a question on the matter from Labour MP Jo Stevens.
“The Government has committed not to extend the implementation period,” he said.
“Therefore, the United Kingdom will not be required to implement the Directive, and the Government has no plans to do so.
“Any future changes to the UK copyright framework will be considered as part of the usual domestic policy process.”
Andrea C. Martin, chief executive, PRS for Music, comments:
‘We acknowledge the political reasons behind this announcement, but that doesn’t change the fact that in some areas the UK’s current copyright framework is failing to protect creators.
This lack of clarity will stifle the UK’s creative sector – one of our engines for growth.
If our creator community is not going to benefit from the same level of protection as those in Europe, we urge the government to set out clearly and quickly how it will ensure the UK remains an attractive home for creative businesses and their rights.’
Will UK become a ‘safe harbour for safe harbour’?
It will, unless implementing – Regulated registration and trade of copyrights.
Let me try and put the “safe harbour” practice and the EU Copyright directive into the context by simplifying the challenges of implementing the directive using NIMs solutions as an example (after all thats what I know best)
A regulated registration of copyrights and Intellectual property rights is a significant step in making creators of content able to live upon their creativity.
A Copyright registration places on record a verifiable account of the date and content of the work in question so that in the event of a legal claim, or case of infringement or plagiarism, the copyright owner can produce an accurate copy of provenance from a reliable source.
By using NIM’s open-source technology (CopyrightChain), an immutable provenance is created for each registration.
Registration of CopyrightShares (both initially and at transfer) is essential for receiving royalties.
When CopyrightShares has changed hands, it will immediately reflect in the ownership shares of the Copyright and royalties received from the DSP will always be sent to the right shareholder.
NIM (or any White Label partner) will ALWAYS know what percentages each copyright shareholder has and ALWAYS paid the right owner the right amount according to CopyrightShares (split).
New Internet Media (NIM) has the technology ready to implement (will also go a long way to fix the political solution in a save face manner)
Article 13 (now 17) says that if you have a website that allows users to post content, then you are responsible for making sure that content is not infringing on a copyright.
And if it is, then you need to make sure it’s taken down.
In theory – this will provide copyright owners with more royalties, as well as more security against misappropriated use or use without their knowledge.
Safe Harbour – I’m gonna make him an offer he can’t refuse!
YouTube tells copyright owners to license their copyright that is uploaded by users at the rate of 12 million each day at a price set exclusively by YouTube.
The alternative is to check 12 million videos each day and send a take-down notice for copyright infringement for each occurrence of copyright piracy – an impossible task…
This Don Corleone approach has enabled YouTube to pay 1/10 of what Spotify is paying copyright owners for a music stream.
And as we all know, Spotify is not the best p(l)ayer in the class.
The new EU directive says that for the more than 500 million citizens of the European Union, YouTube and Facebook will be treated like Spotify, Apple Music, Netflix or any DSP.
They must license the copyrighted works on their sites or face the music (pun intended) for copyright infringement.
Critics have been making a point that individual users now can be legally responsible for misuse of copyright (infringement) with big fines as a result.
The reality is the opposite – it makes users’ legal position safer than what is currently the case.
In fact, the directive will protect users from the risk of legal liability for sharing protected content.
If “upload filter” is becoming a thing (it is already a buzzword), NIM is the upload filter…´
“Upload filters” are to be used by online platforms such as YouTube and Facebook in order to check whether the content users publish on their site (such as videos, images, audio files or code) are protected by copyright.
For instance, you film your sister’s birthday on your mobile, and you want to put the song “Happy birthday to you by Stevie Wonder” as music always make a video better.
Since this is a copyrighted song, Facebook and YouTube will have to refuse upload under article 17 UNLESS you make a quick stop at one of NIM’s partners MaaS (Music as a Service) and register the use of “Happy birthday to you” as a UUC (User Uploaded Content) BEFORE uploading the video.
Since the Copyright is registered and you registered the use (will take 5 to 15 seconds) neither Facebook nor YouTube will have any objections, and they will pay the royalties to the owners of Happy Birthday to you, each time it’s played (however reluctantly).
In my opinion, users will be better off with the Copyright directive – than they are under the ‘safe harbour’ system:
1) Under the directive the license will cover both the platform and the user.
This is a major change.
Currently, end-users uploading content has the legal responsibility for what they publish.
If you look at any platform’s terms of service (you have to read them 🙂 ), you’ll see that you take responsibility for the content you share and might be legally liable for it.
With the new directive (in general terms) it will be the platform that will bear the responsibility for the content you share, not you (in an EU country).
I see only upside here for New Internet Media and our ecosystem.
If the UK does not implement the EU Copyright directive, a massive withdrawal from the UK PRO’s will probably happen.
Being a natural alternative, Isle of Man will be in a great position to welcome the copyright owners.
However, since IoM is not a member of EU, the legislation regulating registration and trade of copyrights will have to be in place.
If IoM is able to push through a new law before 31st of December 2020, IoM will be in a very strong position to welcome copyright owners.
If not the copyright owners will most likely move to an EU country like Estonia or Sweden.
NIM has a well-established presence in both Estonia and Sweden and we are ready to move to IoM (pending legislation), so we welcome all scenarios.