Here's a summary of interesting developments in intellectual property, technology, social media, and Internet law for the week ending May 17, 2019.

Europe’s Copyright Directive: Article 17 | Shifting the Burden on Policing

Recently we discussed the implications of EU’s Copyright Directive, Article 13.  We now discuss the directive further delving into Article 17. 

It appears the European Union intends to be at the forefront of intellectual property law innovation through Article 17, another controversial new copyright directive intended to standardize copyright law among European Union member nations.  

Article 17 of the Copyright Directive is an amendment that shifts the burden of copyright infringement policing from copyright owners to the streaming platforms on which the works are uploaded.  The Copyright Directive’s Article 17 was originally voted upon in 2006, but has now received renewed attention as it approaches the final stages of implementation by the European Union member nations.  

Advocate Opinion on Copyright Directive Article 17 

While proponents of Article 17 state that the amendment to the Copyright Directive is intended to help protect content creators and allow them to better monetize their works, critics note that the implementation of Article 17 may result in pushing out smaller players.  As an example, YouTube has an estimated whopping 300 hours of video being uploaded every minute.  Experts in the field note that placing the onus on YouTube to monitor such uploading activity would most likely have to result in the implementation of automated filters to check for copyright infringement.  It has been noted in recent news, regarding YouTube itself, that automated filters can have major flaws.

Critical Opinion on EU’s Article 17 of the Copyright Directive

Since it is known that such automated filters are rarely on point and often cannot distinguish original content or fair use of content (e.g., parody or critique of a work from the original work) from infringing content, other experts believe that the end result of Article 17 will be self-defeating.

Moreover, critics of Article 17 of the Copyright Directive also note that smaller platforms and other startups that want to compete with platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter will have much more difficulty doing so against such giants, if they cannot afford to implement time consuming review and policing measures, or to pay for the creation of automated filters or other similar procedures that are sure to be costly and potentially deterrent for smaller companies to attempt to do business in the same space.

Read the full article here.

Europe’s Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market: Article 13

The European Union has made news again by passing a new comprehensive intellectual property directive that may have big impact on copyright law across the globe. In this blog post, we discuss the most highly-debated portion of the directive, Article 13, which has critics claiming that the directive will have a chilling effect on content creators online and cost hosting sites millions annually in regulation.

A Discussion on the Directive and Article 13

The European Union Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market is a directive from the European Union that sets limits for how copyrighted works may be shared online. Unlike actual law or legislation, European Union directives are objectives that European Union regulators believe that member states of the European Union should strive to meet but are not necessarily required to do so.

Article 13, the most controversial section of the directive, requires online web platforms to both filter and/or remove any copyrighted material from their services or websites. As such, this initiative would make a plethora of website and online services, such as YouTube or Tumblr, liable for copyright infringement from simply hosting copyrighted material that users upload.  Because the speed at which users upload copyrighted material onto hosting websites is arguably impossible to police, this would open hosting websites to copyright violations they previously were not held responsible for.

Find the full article here.

Click to read the previous Weekly IP Buzz.

For more posts, see our Intellectual Property Law Blog.

--------

Darin M. Klemchuk is founder of Klemchuk LLP, a litigation, intellectual property, and transactional law firm located in Dallas, Texas. He also co-founded Project K, a charitable movement devoted to changing the world one random act of kindness at a time, and publishes Thriving Attorney, a blog dedicated to exploring the business of the practice of law, productivity and performance for attorneys, and other topics such as law firm leadership and management, law firm culture, and business development for attorneys.

Click to learn more about Darin M. Klemchuk's law practice as an intellectual property lawyer.