EU Copyright Reform: A Missed Opportunity for Authors and Performers

The European Parliament's initiative report on reforming EU copyright and authors' rights law, drafted by German MEP Julia Reda, has failed to adequately address the contractual position of authors and performers. The report, adopted in the plenary session yesterday in Strasbourg, was the result of months of lobbying and heated debates. While the adopted text makes proposals to amend authors' rights legislation in the EU, it also contains a provision that contradicts the original purpose of the report by emphasizing the importance of freedom of contracts, thus undermining steps to strengthen authors' bargaining power.

Journalists, particularly freelancers, find themselves in a weak position when negotiating contracts with publishers and broadcasters. The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) argue that the principle of freedom of contracts allows media conglomerates to exploit the weaker party during negotiations. In reality, journalists are often forced to sign away all their authors' rights to their employer, with no hope for further remuneration when their work is reused on different formats or in different titles.

The IFJ and EFJ have launched a campaign against unfair contracts to highlight the damages such contracts can have on journalists' income and eventually on the quality of journalism. For a contract to be fair, the federations recommend introducing safeguards to prevent abusive clauses that exploit journalists' authors' rights. The European Commission must reflect on the contractual situation of authors if its copyright package is to sustain the creative workforce in the European Union.

The adopted text in the European Parliament's report makes a specific call for improvements in the contractual position of authors and performers. However, the provision recalling the importance of freedom of contracts potentially contradicts this purpose. This provision could allow powerful entities, such as large corporations, to impose unfair terms on artists and creators, undermining the intended balance between creators' rights and users' freedoms.

For example, the report initially recommended strengthening the position of rightholders, such as music and film producers, as well as collecting societies acting on their behalf, to negotiate and be remunerated for the online exploitation of their content by user-uploaded content platforms. However, the emphasis on freedom of contracts could allow these entities to impose unfavorable terms on creators, potentially undermining the intended benefits of the report.

Moreover, the provision could also contradict the report's goal of updating copyright laws to reflect current cultural practices. The emphasis on freedom of contracts might lead to a situation where outdated or unfair contractual practices persist, hindering the development of new, more equitable models for creators and users alike.

In conclusion, the European Parliament's initiative report on reforming EU copyright and authors' rights law has failed to adequately address the contractual position of authors and performers. The provision recalling the importance of freedom of contracts potentially contradicts the original purpose of the report by allowing powerful entities to exploit their market power and undermining the intended balance between creators' rights and users' freedoms. The European Commission must reflect on the contractual situation of authors if its copyright package is to sustain the creative workforce in the European Union.