EU Council deadlock on music copyright released
- Author: Monica Horten
- Published: 12 September 2011
Copyright term extension directive sneaked through the Council - 70 years is now law
An 18-month deadlock over music copyright in the EU has been released today. The issue concerns the term of copyright for music and specifically for sound recordings. A directive to extend the term from the current maximum of 50 years has been languishing in the bowels of Justus Lipsius building, as the large Member States with big copyright interests
clashed with many of the smaller ones. Until now, the smaller ones, plus Britain, had been able to block the directive.
However, it seems that the situation has been resolved, as the Council of Ministers has rubber-stamped the copyright term extension directive means that copyright on music in the EU now lasts for 70 years. It is not entirely clear what has happened, but it looks as though Britain and Denmark switched sides. Previously, both countries had opposed the term extension, but they no longer appear on the list of countries which maintain opposition. If this was the case, it would have changed the voting position from a blocking minority against it to a small majority in favour.
The countries who voted against were Belgium, Holland, Czech Republic, Luxembourg, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden. Austria and Estonia abstained.
The voting positions appear to have been sorted in the back rooms of the Council, because today's vote was an 'A' point, with no discussion. The directive was prepared on 1 September.
The 70-year term was one of the EU's so-called 'compromises'. There were strong positions taken in the European Parliament as well as in the Council, against the Commission's original proposal to extend music copyright to 95 years.
In March 2009, a blocking minority managed to stall the 95-year proposal in the Council of Ministers. The Council's decision was not to the liking of the British music industry, where an un-named executive declared that it was 'un-bloody-believable'. But it seemed that Britain was one of the countries which opposed the extension.
The proposal went immediately back to the European Parliament, where a series of 'compromise' amendments were tabled, including one for the 70 year extension. The MEPs who favoured this 'compromise' were largely the same group who favoured - and indeed promoted - the insertion of copyright enforcement in the Telecoms Package. Significant names were Jacques Toubon, Manolis Mavrommatis, and Manuel Medina Ortega. Other supporters were Christopher Heaton-Harris and Roberta Angellilli. MEPS who opposed it included Christofer Fjellner and Sharon Bowles.
COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION New rules on term of protection of music recordings Press release
Please attribute this article: Monica Horten (2011) EU Council deadlock on music copyright released http://www.iptegrity.com 12 September 2011 .
- Article Views: 9527
IPtegrity politics
- Why would the UK take on Apple?
- What's influencing tech policy in 2025?
- Online Safety and the Westminster honey trap
- Shadow bans: EU and UK diverge on user redress
- EU at loggerheads over chat control
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Whatever happened to the AI Bill?
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- EU puts chat control on back burner
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Creation of deep fakes to be criminal offence under new law
- AI and tech: Asks for the new government
- How WhatsApp holds structural power
- Meta rolls out encryption as political headwinds ease
- EU law set for new course on child online safety
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
About Iptegrity
Iptegrity.com is the website of Dr Monica Horten, independent policy advisor: online safety, technology and human rights. Advocating to protect the rights of the majority of law abiding citizens online. Independent expert on the Council of Europe Committee of Experts on online safety and empowerment of content creators and users. Published author, and post-doctoral scholar, with a PhD from the University of Westminster, and a DipM from the Chartered Institute of Marketing. Former telecoms journalist, experienced panelist and Chair, cited in the media eg BBC, iNews, Times, Guardian and Politico.
Politics & copyright
A Copyright Masquerade: How Corporate Lobbying Threatens Online Freedoms
'timely and provocative' Entertainment Law Review
Online Safety
- Online Safety and the Westminster honey trap
- Shadow bans: EU and UK diverge on user redress
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- Online Safety - a non-consensual Act
- Online Safety Bill passes as US court blocks age-checks law
- Online Safety Bill: ray of hope for free speech
- National Crime Agency to run new small boats social media centre
- Online Safety Bill: does government want to snoop on your WhatsApps?
- What is content of democratic importance?
- Online Safety Bill: One rule for them and another for us
- Online Safety Bill - Freedom to interfere?