Case C-263/21: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 8 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Asociación Multisectorial de Empresas de la Electrónica, las Tecnologías de la Información y la Comunicación, de las Telecomunicaciones y de los Contenidos Digitales (AMETIC) v Administracíon del Estado and Others (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Copyright and related rights — Directive 2001/29/EC — Article 5(2)(b) — Exclusive reproduction right — Exception — Copies for private use — Levy — Ex ante exemption — Exemption certificate issued by a private law entity controlled solely by copyright management societies — Powers of review of that entity)
Date: 2022-09-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: confidentiality, copyright exception, legal person








C_2022408EN.01001702.xml










24.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 408/17






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 8 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Asociación Multisectorial de Empresas de la Electrónica, las Tecnologías de la Información y la Comunicación, de las Telecomunicaciones y de los Contenidos Digitales (AMETIC) v Administracíon del Estado and Others
(Case C-263/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Copyright and related rights - Directive 2001/29/EC - Article 5(2)(b) - Exclusive reproduction right - Exception - Copies for private use - Levy - Ex ante exemption - Exemption certificate issued by a private law entity controlled solely by copyright management societies - Powers of review of that entity)
(2022/C 408/19)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Asociación Multisectorial de Empresas de la Electrónica, las Tecnologías de la Información y la Comunicación, de las Telecomunicaciones y de los Contenidos Digitales (AMETIC)

Defendants: Administracíon del Estado, Entidad de Gestión de Derechos de los Productores Audiovisuales (EGEDA), Asociación para el Desarrollo de la Propiedad Intelectual (ADEPI), Artistas Intérpretes o Ejecutantes, Sociedad de Gestión de España (AIE), Artistas Intérpretes, Entidad de Gestión de Derechos de Propiedad Intelectual (AISGE), Ventanilla Única Digital, Derechos de Autor de Medios Audiovisuales (DAMA), Centro Español de Derechos Reprográficos (CEDRO), Asociación de Gestión de Derechos Intelectuales (AGEDI), Sociedad General de Autores y Editores (SGAE)

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Both Article 5(2)(b) 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 and the principle of equal treatment
must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation under which a legal person established and controlled by intellectual property rights management organisations is entrusted with the management of (i) exemptions from payment in respect of compensation for private copying and (ii) reimbursements in respect of such compensation, where that national legislation provides that exemption certificates and reimbursements must be granted in good time and in accordance with objective criteria which do not allow that legal person to refuse an application for the granting of such a certificate or of reimbursement on the basis of considerations involving the exercise of discretion and that the decisions of that legal person refusing such an application may be challenged before an independent body.










2.


Article 5(2)(b) of Directive 2001/29 and the principle of equal treatment
must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which empowers a legal person, which is established and controlled by intellectual property rights management organisations and which is entrusted with the management of (i) exemptions from payment in respect of compensation for private copying and (ii) reimbursements in respect of such compensation, to request access to the information necessary for the exercise of the powers of review conferred on it in that regard, without it being possible, in particular, for the person under review to rely on the confidentiality of business accounts provided for by national law, that legal person being obliged to safeguard the confidential nature of the information obtained.






(1)  
            OJ C 329, 16.8.2021.