As the International and European Federations (IFJ/EFJ) have repeatedly pointed out, the proposal includes important provisions for the publishing industry and authors, including a share of the revenue press publications generate online (Article 11), the principle of proportionate remuneration for authors (Article -14), key transparency obligations and the possibility for authors to be represented by their unions (Articles 14-16). However, the wording of Recital 35 runs the risk that journalists may be entirely denied a share of the revenue via buy-out contracts and national regulations.
To counter the Recital’s negative impact, we urge you to support the amendment 256 – tabled by MEP Paloma Lopez - in the event that the Directive is opened to amendments during tomorrow’s vote.
Only Amendment 256 mitigates the risks for journalists’ remuneration. We call on the European Parliament to support it if the directive is reopened. All other proposals for Recital 35 include the restrictions we are seeking to lift, and should be therefore rejected.
Paloma López Bermejo, Sofia Sakorafa, Kostadinka Kuneva, Stelios Kouloglou
(35) The protection granted to publishers of press publications under this Directive should not affect the rights of the authors and other rightholders in the works and other subject-matter incorporated therein, including as regards the extent to which authors and other rightholders can exploit their works or other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. Therefore, publishers of press publications should not be able to invoke the protection granted to them against authors and other rightholders or against other authorised users of the same works and other subject-matter. Authors whose works are incorporated in a press publication should be entitled to an appropriate and proportionate share of the revenues press publishers receive for the uses of their press publications by information society service providers.