Abstract
The objective of this paper is to discuss the EU policy making in the field of copyright. This is an important issue in view of recent EU initiatives to adapt copyright law to the needs of the digital single market as well as of challenges of exploitation of immaterial goods in connection with the development of new technologies and controversies over the EU directives. The article focuses on the consultation process (conducted by the European Commission) and the stakeholders’ participation (including lobbies) in creation of the EU policy in a given field. It is discussed in relation to the legislative process of the following two, recently adopted directives: 2011/77/EU which extends the term of protection of certain related rights and 2012/28/EU which introduces certain permitted uses of orphan works. The first part refers to the question why some groups of interest are successful and some other fail (the analysis concerns factors resulting from groupactions and the character of a consultation process). Next, the article evaluates the Commission’s activity in the field of regulations of the consultation process and lobbying. The EU legislative process is discussed from the point of view of political sciences as it concerns the EU actions related to the consultation process and the participation of citizens in the legislative process.
Funding
National Science Centre Research Grant No. DEC-2014/12/S/HS5/00006
References
Farrand, B. (2014), Networks of power in digital copyright law and policy: Political salience, expertise and the legislative process, Abingdon, New York.
Greenwood, J. (2005), Reprezentacja interesów w Unii Europejskiej, Łódź.
Helberger, N., Dufft, N., van Gompel, S.B., Hugenholtz, B. (2008), Never Forever: Why Extending the Term of Protection for Sound Recordings is a Bad Idea, European Intellectual Property Review 5: 174-181.
Hilty, R.M., Kur A., Klass, N., Geiger, C., Peukert, A., Drexl, J., Katzenberger, P. (2008), Comment by the Max-Planck Institute on the Commission’s proposal for a Directive to amend Directive 2006/116 EC of the European Parliament and Council concerning the Term of Protection for Copyright and Related Rights, www.ip.mpg.de/files/pdf1/Comments-ProtectionCopyrights.pdf.
Hilty, R., Köklü, K., Nérisson, S., Trumpke, F. (2011), Comments of the Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law on the Commission Proposal for a Directive on Certain Permitted Uses of Orphan Works, “Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property & Competition Law Research Paper”, No. 11-14, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1948323.
Horten, M. (2013), A Copyright Masquerade: How Coporate Lobbying Threatens Online Freedoms, London-New York.
Jasiecki, K., Molęda-Zdziech, M, Kurczewska, U. (2006), Lobbing. Sztuka skutecznego wywierania wpływu, wyd. 2, Kraków.
Kurczewska, U. (red.), (2008), Deficyt demokracji w Unii Europejskiej a europejskie grupy interesu, Warszawa.
Molęda-Zdziech, M. (2008), Ku skuteczniejszym regulacjom lobbingu na forum Unii Europejskiej, w: U. Kurczewska (red.), Deficyt demokracji w Unii Europejskiej a europejskie grupy interesu, Warszawa.
Stanisławska-Kloc, S. (2013), Dyrektywa 2012/28/UE o utworach osieroconych – czy jesteśmy na właściwej drodze do rozwiązania problemu?, Kwartalnik Prawa Prywatnego 22(1): 117-158.
Vetulani-Cęgiel A. (2014), Lobbing w procesie kształtowania prawa autorskiego w Unii Europejskiej. Studium przypadków: czas trwania praw pokrewnych, dzieła osierocone, ACTA, Warszawa.
License
Copyright (c) 2015 WPiA UAM
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.