The EUCD was created to bring the copyright laws of European Union countries into alignment with the WIPO Treaties of 1996, just as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act was originally designed to do in the US.  Two features of the EUCD are particularly focused on issues related to online content -- and, not coincidentally, mirror certain ideas in the copyright law of the US. One is the EUCD's equivalent of Fair Use in the US.

The EUCD's fair-use provisions are actually closer to those of the UK, Canada, and Australia, in that they provide acceptable defenses to infringement charges based on types of usage, such as criticism or research. In contrast, the US copyright law bases fair-use judgments on broader principles, such as how much of the original work is used and whether the use affects the market for the original work.  The EUCD also has a provision similar to DMCA 1201 that makes it illegal to hack copy protection schemes. 

One of the outcomes of EU-wide implementation of the EUCD is to make Europe a safer place for US-based media.  In this way, the action on the EUCD is similar to the clause in the Free Trade Agreement that Australia signed with the US last year, which required Oz to implement a DMCA 1201- like provision.

In reality, only some EU countries have actually implemented the EUCD in their national copyright laws to date, including Austria, Denmark, Germany, Greece, and the UK. Other countries (besides the three being threatened with fines) have implementations in process.

Turning to the US Senate, Sen. Hatch now has an official "bully pulpit" from which to launch media industry-friendly copyright legislation.  After siding with Napster during the original P2P service's trial in 2001, Hatch turned into a staunch ally of media-industry trade groups like RIAA and MPAA, even suggesting at one point that media companies should be allowed to destroy infringers' computers. 

Following the acquittal of P2P providers Grokster and Streamcast in the 9th Circuit appeals court, Hatch worked with the media industry to sponsor the so-called Induce Act, which was derailed from fast-track passage by furious opposition followed by negotiations that broke down -- and was denounced by some of the far-right conservatives who constitute Hatch's core constituency.  As a result, the media industry pressed the Supreme Court to hear an appeal of the Grokster case, oral arguments for which are set for later this month.  Hatch has yet to reintroduce the Induce legislation (as he had promised to do); he is presumably waiting for the outcome of the Grokster case, which may make the Induce Act unnecessary.

We are big fans of government officials paying attention to online intellectual property issues and learning all they can.  Only after they have done so would we be likely to be fans of any relevant legislation they might pass.

Get DRM Watch Newsletter

Click here to subscribe to DRM Watch