Modernisation of EU copyright rules: Initial Appraisal of a European Commission Impact Assessment

21-12-2016

The IA clearly defines the underlying problems and the objectives of the proposed initiatives. It relies on various recent external studies, reviews and evaluations. The Commission consulted widely and the IA appears to have analysed a broad range of options and their impacts on all relevant stakeholders. However, the IA, which is very dense, is based on limited quantitative data, which the Commission openly acknowledges. It would also perhaps have benefited from a more detailed assessment of social impacts and impacts on fundamental rights. Moreover, with regard to the third general objective of achieving a well-functioning marketplace for copyright, it would seem that some specific issues were not addressed: concerning the use of right holders' content by online services, it appears the Commission changed its preferred option following the issuing of the RSB opinion, since a negotiation obligation is no longer included in the final IA. The IA could also have given more guidance on the coherence of the proposed acts with the E-Commerce Directive. Finally, concerning rights in (press) publications, it would have been useful if the IA had provided more thorough reasoning regarding the new ancillary right.

The IA clearly defines the underlying problems and the objectives of the proposed initiatives. It relies on various recent external studies, reviews and evaluations. The Commission consulted widely and the IA appears to have analysed a broad range of options and their impacts on all relevant stakeholders. However, the IA, which is very dense, is based on limited quantitative data, which the Commission openly acknowledges. It would also perhaps have benefited from a more detailed assessment of social impacts and impacts on fundamental rights. Moreover, with regard to the third general objective of achieving a well-functioning marketplace for copyright, it would seem that some specific issues were not addressed: concerning the use of right holders' content by online services, it appears the Commission changed its preferred option following the issuing of the RSB opinion, since a negotiation obligation is no longer included in the final IA. The IA could also have given more guidance on the coherence of the proposed acts with the E-Commerce Directive. Finally, concerning rights in (press) publications, it would have been useful if the IA had provided more thorough reasoning regarding the new ancillary right.