# C_2022191EN.01000701.xml

| 10.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 191/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 191/7

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 15 December 2021 — Blue Air Aviation SA v UCMR — ADA Asociația pentru Drepturi de Autor a Compozitorilor

(Case C-775/21)

(2022/C 191/09)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel București

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant (defendant at first instance): Blue Air Aviation SA

Respondent (applicant at first instance): UCMR — ADA Asociația pentru Drepturi de Autor a Compozitorilor

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (1) be interpreted as meaning that the broadcasting, inside a commercial aircraft occupied by passengers, of a musical work or a fragment of a musical work on take-off, on landing or at any time during a flight, via the aircraft’s public address system, constitutes a communication to the public within the meaning of that provision, particularly (but not exclusively) in the light of the criterion relating to the profit-making objective of the communication?
  If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative: |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (1) be interpreted as meaning that the broadcasting, inside a commercial aircraft occupied by passengers, of a musical work or a fragment of a musical work on take-off, on landing or at any time during a flight, via the aircraft’s public address system, constitutes a communication to the public within the meaning of that provision, particularly (but not exclusively) in the light of the criterion relating to the profit-making objective of the communication?

If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative:

| 2. | Does the existence on board the aircraft of an address system required by air traffic safety legislation constitute a sufficient basis for making a rebuttable presumption as to the communication to the public of musical works on board that aircraft?
  If the answer to that question is in the negative: |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does the existence on board the aircraft of an address system required by air traffic safety legislation constitute a sufficient basis for making a rebuttable presumption as to the communication to the public of musical works on board that aircraft?

If the answer to that question is in the negative:

| 3. | Does the presence on board the aircraft of an address system required by air traffic safety legislation and of software which enables the communication of phonograms (containing protected musical works) via that system constitute a sufficient basis for making a rebuttable presumption as to the communication to the public of musical works on board that aircraft? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does the presence on board the aircraft of an address system required by air traffic safety legislation and of software which enables the communication of phonograms (containing protected musical works) via that system constitute a sufficient basis for making a rebuttable presumption as to the communication to the public of musical works on board that aircraft?

---

(1)  OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10.

---