EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62013CJ0279

C More Entertainment

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 26 March 2015.
C More Entertainment AB v Linus Sandberg.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Copyright and related rights — Directive 2001/29/EC — Information society — Harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights — Article 3(2) — Direct broadcast of a sporting fixture on an internet site.
Case C-279/13.

Case C‑279/13

C More Entertainment AB

v

Linus Sandberg

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen)

‛Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Copyright and related rights — Directive 2001/29/EC — Information society — Harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights — Article 3(2) — Direct broadcast of a sporting fixture on an internet site’

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber), 26 March 2015

Approximation of laws — Copyright and related rights — Directive 2001/29 — Harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society — Communication to the public —Meaning — Option for the Member States to extend the rights of broadcasting organisations to acts of communication on the Internet — Lawfulness — Condition

(European Parliament and Council Directives 2001/29, Art. 3(2)(d) and 2006/115, Recital 16 and Arts 8(3) and 12)

Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/29 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation extending the exclusive right of the broadcasting organisations referred to in Article 3(2)(d) as regards acts of communication to the public which broadcasts of sporting fixtures made live on internet, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, may constitute, provided that such an extension does not undermine the protection of copyright.

Thus, Article 3(2) of that directive does not affect the option open to the Member States, set out in Article 8(3) of Directive 2006/115 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property, read in conjunction with recital 16 to that directive, of providing for more protective provisions with regard to the broadcasting and communication to the public of transmissions made by broadcasting organisations than those which must be instituted in accordance with Article 8(3) of that directive. Such an option implies that the Member States may grant broadcasting organisations an exclusive right to authorise or prohibit acts of communication to the public of their transmissions on conditions different from those laid down in Article 8(3) and in particular transmissions to which members of the public may obtain access from a place individually chosen by them, it still being understood that, as provided for in Article 12 of Directive 2006/115, such a right must not affect the protection of copyright in any way.

(see paras 35-37, operative part)

Top

Case C‑279/13

C More Entertainment AB

v

Linus Sandberg

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen)

‛Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Copyright and related rights — Directive 2001/29/EC — Information society — Harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights — Article 3(2) — Direct broadcast of a sporting fixture on an internet site’

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber), 26 March 2015

Approximation of laws — Copyright and related rights — Directive 2001/29 — Harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society — Communication to the public —Meaning — Option for the Member States to extend the rights of broadcasting organisations to acts of communication on the Internet — Lawfulness — Condition

(European Parliament and Council Directives 2001/29, Art. 3(2)(d) and 2006/115, Recital 16 and Arts 8(3) and 12)

Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/29 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation extending the exclusive right of the broadcasting organisations referred to in Article 3(2)(d) as regards acts of communication to the public which broadcasts of sporting fixtures made live on internet, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, may constitute, provided that such an extension does not undermine the protection of copyright.

Thus, Article 3(2) of that directive does not affect the option open to the Member States, set out in Article 8(3) of Directive 2006/115 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property, read in conjunction with recital 16 to that directive, of providing for more protective provisions with regard to the broadcasting and communication to the public of transmissions made by broadcasting organisations than those which must be instituted in accordance with Article 8(3) of that directive. Such an option implies that the Member States may grant broadcasting organisations an exclusive right to authorise or prohibit acts of communication to the public of their transmissions on conditions different from those laid down in Article 8(3) and in particular transmissions to which members of the public may obtain access from a place individually chosen by them, it still being understood that, as provided for in Article 12 of Directive 2006/115, such a right must not affect the protection of copyright in any way.

(see paras 35-37, operative part)

Top