Streams

15. Oktober 2013 - 16:14

3. Oktober 2013 - 10:16

27. September 2013 - 15:34

24. September 2013 - 10:45

21. September 2013 - 9:30

19. September 2013 - 14:24

13. September 2013 - 11:34

15. August 2013 - 13:01

31. Juli 2013 - 15:50

30. Juli 2013 - 15:02

26. Juli 2013 - 10:14

27. Juni 2013 - 13:01

21. Juni 2013 - 22:37

19. Juni 2013 - 12:40

12. Juni 2013 - 17:11

10. Juni 2013 - 10:27

21. Mai 2013 - 16:39

16. Mai 2013 - 11:30

15. Mai 2013 - 11:12

10. Mai 2013 - 12:33

4. Mai 2013 - 13:29

29. April 2013 - 12:28

25. März 2013 - 10:10

23. März 2013 - 22:40

22. März 2013 - 19:34

21. März 2013 - 14:01

20. März 2013 - 14:46

15. März 2013 - 15:00

Aktuelles

Lobo: Leistungsschutzrecht ist "realitätsfernes Quatschgesetz"   Am 15. Juni 2018 - 10:38 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Jeden Mittwoch erscheint Sascha Lobos Kolumne für SPIEGEL Online, in der er sich ein ums andere Mal mit hochaktuellen digitalpolitischen Themen auseinandersetzt. In seinem jüngsten Text befasst er sich mit den Plänen für ein EU-weites Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger. Lobos Fazit findet sich gleich in der Überschrift: "So ein Quatschgesetz." Weiter

Nimm dir nur eine Minute und #SaveYourInternet   Am 12. Juni 2018 - 15:41 Uhr von Tom Hirche

In acht Tagen wird der Rechtsausschuss endlich über seine Änderungsvorschläge für die bevorstehende neue Urheberrechtsrichtlinie abstimmen. Anschließend wird sich das gesamte Plenum des Europäischen Parlaments auf eine gemeinsame Position einigen. Es ist höchste Zeit zu handeln! Melde Dich bei Deinem EU-Abgeordneten und #SaveYourInternet! Weiter

German government is intentionally stalling evaluation process to prevent evidence against publishers' right   Am 11. Juni 2018 - 17:03 Uhr von Tom Hirche

It was on 1 August 2013 when the ancillary copyright for press publishers became effective in Germany. Nearly five years have passed by since then with the promised evaluation of one of the worst laws of the recent past still yet to come. But the German government is intentionally stalling the process.

The opposition in the German parliament has officially requested information on the status of the evaluation twelve times so far, as Patrick Beuth notes in his article for the German online news website Spiegel Online, but was put off every time. More practical experience was needed and the outcome of the different lawsuits related to the new right should be awaited first, they were told. Until then, the developments in this matter would be carefully watched. Once enough information has been gathered the German government would initiate the evaluation process. But for now, a final verdict was impossible to make.

This last statement is wrong in two different aspects. First, there have been four years of intense discussions before the publishers' right was even adopted. There is us and a number of other websites that constantly write about the effects of this right in Germany. And there is scientific research that has dealt with the German regulation, like the independent study that was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) or the study that the European Commission tried to hide but that was ultimately disclosed thanks to MEP Julia Reda (Greens/EFA, Germany). All facts are on the table und so far there is almost unanimous agreement that the ancillary copyright for press publishers has failed and is harmful in many ways.

Second, the German government is not even required to come to a final verdict even though it tries to create this impression. All it actually has to do is put together the available information on the effects of the publishers' right. This could and should have already been done.

The reason for the German government's hesitation is as simple as obvious: it is trying to buy time. A preliminary verdict would without doubt come to the same result as all the studies and comments before. But coming straight from the German government, this would be a strong (if not the strongest) evidence against the introduction of a publishers' right on EU level. Including this evidence into the discussions within and between the EU institutions will presumably lead to a sudden end of the introduction plans.

However, the German government must be aware of this. Therefore, it comes with no surprise that it will not take any risks in pushing for an EU-wide publishers' right on behalf of a handful of influential German publishers. The evaluation will probably never come. But if it does, it will already be too late.

Over 100 MEPs sign an open letter against introduction of link tax   Am 7. Juni 2018 - 13:27 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Today, a total of 104 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) from across the political groups published an open letter addressing MEP Axel Voss (EPP, Germany) who is the lead Rapporteur on the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market for the Legal Affairs (JURI) Committee.

Under the lead of MEP Marietje Schaake (ALDE, Netherlands), the undersigned MEPs are "extremely worried about the impact that the introduction of a new neighbouring right for press publishers will have" as they "believe that the introduction of a new European neighbouring right will have a nocent and injurious effect on citizens’ access to quality news and information."

They therefore urge Voss to "listen to the voices of consumer groups, small publishers, civil society and the business community who are overwhelmingly opposed to the introduction" of a link tax. It is sad to see that this request is necessary but the fact that these voices have been largely ignored by the decision makers shows that it really is.

Voss also gets reminded not only of the recent open letter from by now over 200 European copyright legal and academic experts who had shut down the proposed new publishers' right but also of the independent, non-partisan academic study conducted by the European Parliament's JURI Committee which also suggested to lay the plans for a publishers' right to rest.

The MEPs finally urge Axel Voss to delete Article 11, to delete the proposed press publishers' right and instead to "find an alternative, less invasive, and more proportionate solution to support quality journalism and freedom of the press in the digital age."

This is a strong signal to all the other MEPs that have not been this deeply involved in the discussions so far. It is also refreshing to see that two MEPs of the EPP group have decided to sign the letter despite Axel Voss's imposed so-called joint opinion. May more MEPs follow their lead and put an end to this destructive proposal.

Weitere Infos zu dieser News

Member States agree on implementation of link tax   Am 29. Mai 2018 - 12:34 Uhr von Tom Hirche

After months of discussions, the Committee of Permanent Representatives of the Council (COREPER) has agreed its common position on the text for the upcoming Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market. This position will serve as a negotiating mandate for the Presidency of the Council of the European Union. Despite all warnings, this mandate also allows for the introduction of an ancillary copyright for press publishers aka the link tax.

Compared to the proposal of the European Commission, the Member States have slightly mitigated the text making it very similar to the German regulation.

The link tax shall only be available to press publishers established in the EU "for the online use of their press publications by information society service providers." This limitation corresponds with JURI rapporteur MEP Axel Voss's so far unofficial proposal and suffers from the same problem: without further carve-outs every ISP will be affected, even non-profit platforms like Wikipedia.

Although the majority of the Member States was willing to introduce the link tax, they have been deeply divided on how to further limit it. They seem to have come to the conclusion that they will not be able to settle their dispute in the near future which would explain the agreed upon compromise:

The [press publisher's right] shall not apply in respect of uses of insubstantial parts of a press publication. Member States shall be free to determine the insubstantial nature of parts of press publications taking into account whether these parts are the expression of the intellectual creation of their authors, or whether these parts are individual words or very short excerpts, or both criteria.

When introducing this right on a national level a few years ago, the German government had opted for the second criterion. Due to a lack of clarification, it is highly unclear what falls under this exception up to this day. Taking into account the originality of a part of a press publication on the other side might not help the publishers at all because they would still have to prove this point in court in each and every case. A legal presumption of representation would have been the better solution.

Leaving the decision of what insubstantial parts are to each Member State will most certainly lead to many different and thus unharmonised national implementations. The consequence will be that depending on the location within the EU, users' access to online press publications will be different. Service providers might even decide to not offer their service anymore in certain member states in order to avoid paying fees (like it has been done with Google News in Spain).

In any case, the freedom of information and the internet itself is under threat. The proposed reduction of the protection term from 20 years to 1 year as well as the deletion of any retroactive effect will not change this fact. The whole idea of giving publishers the legal right to demand a fee when others bring them readers (= money) by only linking to their publications is absurd and lacks the necessary justification.

Voss's changes can not cure the rotten root   Am 17. Mai 2018 - 17:03 Uhr von Tom Hirche

The rapporteur of the Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) of the European Parliament, MEP Axel Voss (EPP, Germany) has updated his draft compromise amendment for Article 11, the ancillary copyright for press publishers, pushing for a vote next month. Although the proposed text is now less extreme compared to the first version from seven weeks ago, it fails to tackle the real problem.

Small changes

A few weeks ago, several open letters all addressing Article 11 and warning of its consequences were published (see here, here and here). It can be seen as a success by all critics that Axel Voss apparently responded by making a few modifications to his initial draft compromise amendment. His second version (docx) was shortly followed by a third version (docx).

Voss now proposes to reduce the protection term from 20 years to 5 years. Also, the link between "fake news" and the need for an ancillary copyright for press publishers was deleted from recital 31 as well as the notion that the press publishers are given an inalienable right; instead it was added that they "may obtain fair and proportionate remuneration". Furthermore, it is now clarified that the new right shall not extend to hyperlinks in general and the new right shall not be applied retroactively.

Some of the changes only appear to be good at first glance. A 5 year protection term is still too long considering that the value of a press article drops heavily just hours after its publication. It also remains unclear if the exception for hyperlinks applies to the display of snippets to the linked article – probably not due to a new sentence that was added and according to which the "listing in a search engine should not be considered as fair and proportionate remuneration", meaning that press publishers are still supposed to get money for this act of use. A requirement for a certain length or originality of the snippet is still missing.

The most significant change is that press publishers shall only be able to demand a remuneration "for the digital use of their press publications by information society service providers." This considerably limits the scope of the new right by excluding private individuals and libraries for example. However, the scope is still enormously wide. Although the proposal contains no definition of this term, it is obvious that it applies for any kind of ISP. Without further carve-outs, Wikipedia would be affected as well as any other non-profit host provider or platform. Hence, although the proposal reminds more and more of the German ancillary copyright for press publishers Voss's proposals are still far broader. 

Core problem remains

However, all these changes cannot cover up the fact that the introduction of an ancillary copyright for press publishers is still and will always be a terrible idea – no matter what changes will be made in the future. Its root is rotten which has already been demonstrated in Germany and Spain. Such a right will not help the publishers with their problems but will harm them, innovative internet service providers as well as the freedom of information. Voss still completely ignores the option to let go of the ancillary copyright in total and to give the press publishers a legal presumption instead that would help them fight (online) copyright infringements easier.

Verlage zahlen weiterhin kräftig drauf   Am 17. Mai 2018 - 10:22 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Laut dem aktuellen Geschäftsbericht der VG Media für 2017 sorgt das Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger weiterhin für fette rote Zahlen. Damit setzt sich die Entwicklung der vergangen Jahre ungebremst fort. Weiter

Open letter: "The EU Copyright Directive is failing" and should be stopped   Am 26. April 2018 - 17:39 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Another open letter has been sent to the members of the European Parliament, this time by academics from 25 leading intellectual property research centres in Europe. They request them to stop the legislation process altogether if it continues to progress in the form proposed by the recent drafts of the Bulgarian Presidency and JURI rapporteur Voss.

The signees point out the scientific consensus

  • that the proposed exception for text-and-data-mining in Art. 3 will not achieve its goal to stimulate innovation and research if restricted to certain organisations,
  • that the proposals for a new publishers’ right under Art. 11 will favour incumbent press publishing interests rather than innovative quality journalism,
  • and that the proposals for Art. 13 threaten the user participation benefits of the eCommerce Directive (2000/31/EC) which shared the responsibility for enforcement between rightholders and service providers.

While the draft report by former MEP and rapporteur Therese Comodini Cachia is praised as "balanced" and "the most workable basis", the compromise amendments proposed by the new rapporteur MEP Axel Voss (EPP, Germany) only pay lip service to authors' interest but respond in effect to the agenda of powerful corporate interests. The same goes for the drafts emerging from the Bulgarian Council presidency. These proposals "will not serve the public interest."

The full text of the open letter can be downloaded here.

Weitere Infos zu dieser News

Nearly 170 academics warn against ancillary copyright for press publishers   Am 25. April 2018 - 12:05 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Another open letter calling for the deletion of Art. 11 of the proposed DSM directive has been sent out to the members of the European Parliament today. It was signed by not less than 169 scholars (and counting) from all over Europe of whom 100 are full professors. Weiter

Weitere Infos zu dieser News

Open letter: 59 organisations encourage Axel Voss to delete ancillary copyright from the DSM directive   Am 19. April 2018 - 11:29 Uhr von Tom Hirche

In a couple of weeks, the Legal Committee of the European Parliament (JURI) will release its opinion on the EU Commission’s proposal for a new copyright directive. The responsible rapporteur MEP Axel Voss (EPP, Germany) is currently making his final conversations with the shadow rapporteurs of the other political groups. For this very reason, together with Communia and OpenMedia/Safe-the-Link, we have sent out an open letter that was co-signed by 56 further organisations. Weiter

Open Letter: 59 Organisationen fordern Axel Voss auf, das Leistungsschutzrecht aus der Urheberrechts-Richtlinie zu streichen   Am 19. April 2018 - 9:27 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Der Rechtsausschuss des Europäischen Parlaments wird in wenigen Wochen seine Stellungnahme zum EU-Kommissionsvorschlag für eine neue Urheberrechts-Richtlinie präsentieren. Der zuständige Berichterstatter MdEP Axel Voss (EVP, Deutschland) führt gerade die letzten Gespräche mit den Schattenberichterstattern der anderen Fraktionen . Zusammen mit COMMUNIA und OpenMedia/Safe-the-Link haben wir deshalb einen Open Letter verfasst, dem sich 56 weitere Organisationen angeschlossen haben. Weiter

MEP Voss presents the most extreme proposal for a link tax (so far)   Am 29. März 2018 - 0:11 Uhr von Tom Hirche

We have called the publisher's right as proposed by the EU Commission in September 2016 an "ancillary copyright on steroids" – for good reasons! Now MEP Axel Voss has published his proposal for the European Parliament's position which is so extreme and destructive, not even the Incredible Hulk would dare to pick a fight.

Extension of the new right

Executives of press agencies will read the proposal with a big smile on their faces as their lobbying work has finally paid off: MEP Axel Voss wants to add them to the beneficiaries of the link tax. This is despite the fact that in their open letter the press agencies have made it clear that to them even the mere hyperlink will undoubtedly be covered by the new right – a case of intentionally breaking the internet.

The extension does not stop here. Additionally, the scope of the publisher's right shall be widened by incorporating more exclusive rights, i. e. rental and lending rights as well as the right for the distribution of press products. These extensions would inter alia drag libraries into the scope. Libraries lend or rent content to their users. The publisher right would add another layer of rights that they had to clear and pay remunerations for when they want to use press publications. It comes with no surprise that an explanation for the necessity of this stretch is nowhere to be found. The reason why the link tax in Germany has been a complete failure was not that press publishers were given too few rights. 

An inalienable right to remuneration will cause severe damage

Besides extending the scope of the new right which would have to be licenced, MEP Voss also added an inalienable right to remuneration to the text. In case of doubt, this levy would have to be negotiated with and paid to collecting societies. Not only is this combination of a bunch of exclusive rights with a remuneration right absurd, it will also have dramatic consequences. Even if a press publisher (or a press agency) is convinced that links to its articles eventually help its business, it still has to demand a payment for that. There will be no other choice.

It is not hard to predict what will happen next: news aggregators will shut down; search engine providers and social media platforms will delist or not allow links to news articles anymore. Maybe the large press media outlets will be spared from this adaptation, but smaller publishers will definitely suffer from this act of excessive paternalism as they will struggle to reach the public and attract readers.

This is not a vague guess but a simple repetition of what has already happened in Spain right after an inalienable link tax was introduced. Google News and other news aggregators were shut down and smaller publishers consequently experienced a harsh drop in the number of their readers. As a result, the Spanish Association of Daily Newspaper Publishers (AEDE) that had lobbied for this law demanded the national and EU authorities to step in and force Google to re-open its news aggregation service – without success.

Also, an inalienable right to remuneration causes fundamental conflicts with public licence models like Creative Commons. Against the basic idea of the "open" philosophie in Open Access, Open Content or Open Educational Resources (among others), every publisher of news will be legally forced to claim remuneration for the reuse of their content. MEP Julia Reda points out in her blog post that

"[s]uccessful innovative news companies such as eldiario, whose business model is completely based on Creative Commons, would take a hit, all in the name of 'supporting quality journalism'."

Theoretical participation in revenue

In an attempt to not only win other MEPs' approval but also of the International and the European Federation of Journalists, MEP Voss added some text to "ensure that authors [...] receive an appropriate share of the additional revenues press publishers receive". However, their share is limited to the money press publishers receive from internet service providers, i. e. search engine providers, news aggregators and social media platforms. The German publisher's right already has such a provision but over the last four and a half years since its introduction, the authors did not receive a single Euro until this day. This is due to various still ongoing legal trials that have cost the publishers millions while at the same time they were hardly making any money off their new right. In combination with the proposal for an Art. 12, according to which authors shall in the future have to share their levies with the publishers, the authors will end up with less in their pockets after the copyright reform than they had before. 

Contact your MEP!

If you are asking yourself what you can do about his (and even if not), simply go to OpenMedia's Save the Link website and use their e-mail form to write your MEP to stand up against the link tax. You can also write your own text and add a few words why MEP Axel Voss' proposal will be extremely harmful and should thus be rejected. In case you prefer to directly call your MEP, you can use another Save the Link website that will help you with that.

Kommende Staatsministerin lehnt Leistungsschutzrecht ab   Am 12. März 2018 - 18:40 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Dorothee Bär (CSU) steht als kommende Staatsministerin für Digitales fest und hat sich bereits vorab klar gegen das Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger positioniert. Nicht zum ersten Mal. Weiter

Startup-Verband unterstützt IGEL   Am 28. Februar 2018 - 11:29 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Akteure: Schlagworte: Lizenz: 

Das deutsche Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger stellt eine Markteintrittshürde für Startups dar und verhindert damit die Umsetzung innovativer Ideen. Die Pläne zur Einführung eines EU-weiten Leistungsschutzrechts werden zu demselben Ergebnis führen und den Innovationsstandort EU massiv gefährden. Aus diesem Grund unterstützt der Bundesverband Deutsche Startups e.V. die Initiative gegen ein Leistungsschutzrecht.

Weiter

Voss: "Besser etwas Falsches tun als gar nichts."   Am 22. Februar 2018 - 9:51 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Vor mittlerweile 17 Monaten hat die EU-Kommission ihren Vorschlag für eine neue Urheberrechtsrichtlinie präsentiert. Im Europäischen Parlament, genauer gesagt in dessen Rechtsausschuss, verhandelt man aber immer noch über die eigene Verhandlungsposition. In einem Interview mit Friedhelm Greis für Golem.de hat Verhandlungsführer MEP Axel Voss (EVP) gezeigt, dass er weder Argumente für ein Leistungsschutzrecht noch Ahnung vom Internet hat. Weiter

Weitere Infos zu dieser News

Bulgarische Ratspräsidentschaft ignoriert Erfahrungen aus deutschem Leistungsschutzrecht   Am 11. Februar 2018 - 19:11 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Seit dem 1. Januar hat Bulgarien die Präsidentschaft im Europäischen Rat inne. Dort versucht man aktuell, sich auf eine gemeinsame Position zum Vorschlag der EU-Kommission für eine neue Urheberrechtsrichtlinie zu verständigen. Der Kompromiss, den Bulgarien nun in puncto Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger vorgeschlagen hat, ist an Ignoranz kaum zu überbieten. Weiter

Neue Bundesregierung vermeidet klares Bekenntnis zu EU-Leistungsschutzrecht   Am 8. Februar 2018 - 19:55 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Lange hat es gedauert, endlich gibt es einen Koalitionsvertrag. Von einem "Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger" wird darin allerdings nicht gesprochen. Stattdessen gibt es dazu nur vage Aussagen. Weiter

Weitere Infos zu dieser News

EU Council is deeply split over link tax   Am 5. Februar 2018 - 0:04 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Akteure: Schlagworte: Lizenz: 

Within the EU Parliament's Legal Committee (JURI), the discussions about the Commission's proposal for a new copyright directive are still dragging on. However, with MEP Axel Voss (EVP, Germany) as the Committee's rapporteur it is very likely that the terrible idea of an ancillary copyright for press publications a.k.a. the link tax will be supported. But the situation looks completely different in the EU Council where the number of varying opinions on this topic could hardly be any larger. Weiter

Investoren warnen in offenem Brief an EU-Parlament vor Einführung eines Verlegerrechts   Am 15. Januar 2018 - 18:56 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Vergangene Woche haben sich 20 Vertreter deutscher Wagniskapitalinvestoren und Business Angels mit einem offenen Brief an die Mitglieder des Europäischen Parlaments gerichtet. Darin üben sie scharfe Kritik an den Urheberrechtsplänen der EU-Kommission, speziell am Vorschlag für ein europäisches Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger. Weiter

Weitere Infos zu dieser News

"Wenn das Leistungsschutzrecht kommt, wäre das Internet tot."   Am 14. Januar 2018 - 18:08 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Die Nachrichtensendung "Arte Journal" hat sich vergangenen Freitag in einem prägnanten Beitrag mit den EU-Plänen für ein Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger auseinandergesetzt. Dafür wurde u.a. Dr. Till Kreutzer von IGEL interviewt. Der Beitrag ist jetzt online verfügbar. Weiter

Small publishers raise their voices against link tax   Am 4. Januar 2018 - 14:41 Uhr von Tom Hirche

A few weeks ago, several press agencies have joined the large publishing houses in their ongoing lobbying for a new neighbouring right. Carlos Astiz, Chairman of the European Innovative Media Publishers, was disappointed by this endorsement and stood once again to take a stance for the smaller publishers, content creators and journalists. Weiter

EU Commission tried to hide a study that debunks the publisher's right as ineffective   Am 3. Januar 2018 - 13:26 Uhr von Tom Hirche

What once seemed to be a single incident turned out to be a habit: Once again it has been revealed that the EU Commission tried to hide the results of a self-requested copyright-related study because the results were not suitable. This time the study is all about "Online News Aggregation and Neighbouring Rights for News Publishers". Weiter

Press agencies join the collective moaning and demand new publisher's right   Am 14. Dezember 2017 - 14:25 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Some of Europe's largest press agencies urge the EU institutions to introduce the proposed ancillary copyright for publishers plus they also want to belong to the beneficiaries. Among those agencies are the German DPA, the French AFP as well as the Spanish EFE. Weiter

Weitere Infos zu dieser News

JURI members try to water down results of their own requested study   Am 8. Dezember 2017 - 16:21 Uhr von Tom Hirche

A couple of months ago, the European Parliament’s directorate general for internal policies of the union had commissioned a study on the proposed new right for publishers. After the results were published last October, they were finally presented to members of the Legal Affairs Committee yesterday. What should have been an informing workshop turned out to be yet another opportunity for the right's supporters to shut down arguments with their lies and to cause confusion. Weiter

New open letter representing a broad spectrum of stakeholders   Am 4. Dezember 2017 - 14:37 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Together with over 80 other organizations, we have co-signed an open letter to the Ministers attending the Competitiveness Council and the EU institutions last week to once again warn them of causing severe damage. Weiter

Weitere Infos zu dieser News

LIBE Committee remains silent on link tax   Am 21. November 2017 - 1:00 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Today, the European Parliament's Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) has finally voted on its opinion on the Commission's proposal for a new copyright directive. While problematic provisions for mandatory content filtering have been tackled, the Committee did not take any stand when it came to the ancillary copyright for press publishers aka the link tax. Weiter

Vorschlag aus Großbritannien: Facebook und Google als Verlage behandeln   Am 18. Oktober 2017 - 11:56 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Vergangene Woche wurden Überlegungen aus Großbritannien zur Regulierung von sozialen Medien bekannt. Man denke darüber nach, Google, Facebook und Co. als Verlage einzustufen, um sie so strengeren Kontrollfpflichten zu unterwerfen. Im Interview mit dem Deutschlandfunk Kultur machte Dr. Till Kreutzer deutlich, dass er dies für den ganz falschen Schritt hält. Weiter

European Parliament's study suggests abandonment of link tax   Am 13. Oktober 2017 - 11:41 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Now that is some good news! An independent study reviewing the publisher's right a.k.a. link tax that had been requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) has just been published this week. It confirms once and for all what we and others were saying for quite some time now: the link tax will be harmful and should therefore be abandoned right away. Weiter

Weitere Infos zu dieser News

Oettinger: "Mir liegt das Leistungsschutzrecht sehr am Herzen"   Am 20. September 2017 - 0:22 Uhr von Tom Hirche

Anfang dieser Woche fand in Stuttgart der Jahreskongress des Bundesverbands Deutscher Zeitungsverleger (BDZV) statt. Unmittelbar davor hatten die "Stuttgarter Nachrichten" ein Interview mit EU-Kommissar Günther Oettinger veröffentlicht, das bei vielen Verlegern für Freudentränen gesorgt haben wird. Denn der Politiker hat sich mal wieder für ein europäisches Verlegerrecht stark gemacht – undifferenziert und uninformiert wie eh und je. Weiter

Weitere Infos zu dieser News

The neighboring right for press publishers is a thread to Open Content and Open Access   Am 6. September 2017 - 14:37 Uhr von Till Kreutzer

Back in July, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) of the EU parliament suggested a few changes to the Commission's initial proposal for a new publisher's right. One of them is to remove the explicit exception for academic and scientific publications as found in recital 33 of the draft directive. This combined with the already extensive COM proposal would result in a tremendous threat to Open Content and Open Access publishing. Weiter