WRITTEN QUESTION E-3685/98

by Sebastiano Musumeci (NI) to the Commission

(7 December 1998)

Subject: Copyright

In Italy copyright is governed by Law No 633 of 22 April 1941 supplemented by Law No 159 of 1993.

The two laws provide for heavy economic and penal sanctions for those who on their own behalf or on behalf of third parties without authorisation reproduce in whole or in part texts and documents protected by copyright.

The Italian legislation is anachronistic in this multimedia era and clearly conflicts with legislation in force in the other Member States.

Does the Commission not think that as a matter of urgency it should make representations to the Italian Government so that it adapts its copyright legislation to the new conditions and requirements of the European Union and thus no longer subjects thousands of Italian workers to heavy sanctions with unavoidable serious repercussions on an already precarious labour market?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 1999)

The Honourable Member is referring more specifically to the issue of reprography, i.e. the reproduction of works and other items protected by copyright, by means of techniques which make it possible to produce a copy or a print.

The exclusive right forms the hard core of the exclusive rights to which holders of copyright and of related rights are entitled, with a view to monitoring the uses of their works and of other protected items. This exclusive right is generally accompanied by exceptions or limitations which relate in particular to reprography and private copying.

At present, the right of reproduction has only been partially harmonised at Community level, with respect to the reproduction of computer programs (Council Directive 91/250/EEC of 14 May 1991 on the legal protection of computer programs(1)), the reproduction of databases (Directive 96/9/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases(2)), and the right of reproduction of holders of a related right (under Council Directive 92/100/EEC of 19 November 1992 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property(3)). Nevertheless, this harmonisation was directed only at certain aspects of the right of reproduction and did not affect reprography or private copying (except, in the case of the latter, in Directive 91/250/EEC).

Within the framework of its proposal for a directive on copyright in the information society of 10 December 1997(4), the Commission proposed the harmonisation of the right of reproduction, in particular with a view to the exploitation of works on the information society networks and the accompanying exceptions. As regards reprography, the proposed harmonisation is limited. In accordance with the provision which appears in Article 5-2a), the Member States have the authorization to uphold or to introduce an exception for reprographic reproductions, whether there is a system of remuneration for proprietors of rights or not. Those Member States which do not provide for such an exception are not, nevertheless, obliged to introduce one. In its opinion (first reading), several committees of the Parliament which were consulted proposed amendments to the area of reprography. On the basis of the final opinion of Parliament, which is expected shortly, the Commission will opt for the solution most suited to the internal market, whilst at the same time taking into account the need to respect the balance between the rights of the holders and the interests of the users.

Under these conditions, the Italian legislation cannot be classed as contradictory to Community legislation insofar as at present there is no Community law on reprography. The national legislator has a considerable amount of room for manoeuvre in defining the scope of application and the conditions for implementation of the right of reproduction, including anything falling under the exceptions for reprography. This should, however, be done in a manner respecting the general rules of Community law in terms of copyright and the rules deriving from international standards and, in particular, from the test of prejudice to economic interests also mentioned in the new treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO).

(1) OJ L 122, 17.5.1991.

(2) OJ L 77, 27.3.1996.

(3) OJ L 346, 27.1.1992.

(4) OJ C 108, 7.4.1998.