1. EGIL Report 2010-2011 Harald von Hielmcrone

2. Mission To maintain general awareness of legal issues that affect the provision and circulation of information especially where libraries and archives are concerned To address the European institutions By making proposals regarding laws or changes to laws that would improve the legal position of libraries and archives to cooperate and work with other organisations and institutions for these purposes

3. Mission cont EGIL’s primary focus is copyright legislation in the European Union data protection other legislation which may have effects on whether and how information may be available

4. Members Kristine Abelsnes Norwegian Library Association Norway Núria Altarriba FesabidSpain Jennefer Aston Library Association of Ireland Ireland Emilija Banionyte Vilnius Pedagogical University Library Lithuania Michèle Battisti ADBS France Pekka Heikkinen National Library of Finland Finland Harald von Hielmcrone (Chair) State and University Library Denmark Aleksandra Horvat Croatian Library Association Rosa Maiello Associazione Italiana Biblioteche Wilma Mossink StichtingSURF The Netherlands Harald Mueller BID Germany Kjell Nilsson Library Associations of Sweden Christian Recht Austrian Association of Librarians Austria Jorge Resende FundacãoCalousteGulbenkianPortugal Jerker Ryden National Library Sweden Barbara Stratton CILIP United Kingdom Barbara Szczepanska Polish Librarians Association Poland Ben White British Library UK Vincent Bonnet EBLIDA 18 members representing 16 European States + the director of EBLIDA

5. Activities Since the last Council meeting in 2010 EGIL has met three times: May 6 in Helsinki September 1-2 in Copenhagen and April 12 2011 in The Hague 2 telephone conferences And intense e-mail correspondence, more than 600 in 2010 We have discussed work form resources strategic positions in relation to upcoming issues concrete issues of immediate relevance for lobbying activities

6. Resources 2010-2011 has been a difficult year Wilma Mossink has been so kind as to take the Minutes from the meetings members have been very active in contributing most of the paper work had to be done by the chairman OK for a limited period with special demands

7. Important legal issues Stakeholder dialogue ACTA Term of Protection E-lending

8. Stakeholder dialogue The clearance of rights in relation to large scale digitisations projects had been focussed on the Orphan Works Problem This has been a mistake The real issue is how to clear the rights for large numbers of works of a certain category Orphan Works is a residual problem A Directive is expected

9. Stakeholder cont Copyright Office of DG Internal Market invited to the Stakeholder Dialogue on Out of Commerce Works in order to draw up some main principles which might form the basis for agreements between right holders and libraries EBLIDA, IFLA and LIBER and some National- and University Libraries were invited

10. Stakeholder cont The dialogue has centred on three main principles: The definition of Out of Commerce Works The extension of the agreement to cover also rights holders who are not members of the Collecting Society The cross border access to digital libraries within the European Union

11. Stakeholder cont The main idea is to provide a framework for the contracting parties to negotiate an agreement Basic for these agreements are the possibility for rights holders to opt out if they so wish and that rights holders are entitled to remuneration

13. The cross border access to digital libraries within the European Union is still unsolvedHope that meeting 14 June will give solution

14. ACTA Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement Initiated by USA EU and Japan Negotiations started in 2008 conducted in secrecy with a small group of countries

15. ACTA cont Draft treaty in 2010 Rumours about draconic measures against copyright infringements EU insisted on the rules of the E-Commerce Directive Intermediaries cannot be held liable unless in cases of gross negligence

16. ACTA cont Individual Member States may introduce stronger enforcement measures some have done so Therefore: important to remain alert at the national level

17. Virtual Schengen? Plan to establish a EU-wide system to prevent access to illicit material on the internet. Joint meeting of the Law Enforcement Working Party and the Customs Cooperation Working Party 17 February 2011

18. Virtual Schengen cont. The Presidency of the LEWP presented its intention to propose concrete measures towards creating a single secure European cyberspace with a certain "virtual Schengen border" and "virtual access points" whereby the Internet Service Providers (ISP) would block illicit contents on the basis of the EU "black-list".

19. Term of protection Proposal for an extension of the term of protection for producers and performing artists of recorded music to 95 years The protection now: 50 years after the publication of the phonogram provided the phonogram is made public within 50 years after the making of the recording

20. Term of protection cont Blocking minority of Member States against this proposal The blocking minority is crumbling in favour of a compromise proposal of 70 years

21. Term of protection cont EGIL is against any prolongation of the term of protection Most of the music in question is also protected by the copyright of the authors ie70 after the death of the composer and the author of the lyrics Therefore libraries will not avoid having to negotiate licence agreements for the public performance of such music anyway

22. Term of protection cont Libraries in some Member States (e.g. UK) have an issue regarding the preservation of recordings because the provisions of the Infosoc Directive (art 5.2.c) have not been fully implemented in their national legislation Difficult to bring this particular problem forward as a reason for EU not to prolong the term of protection

23. Term of protection cont The proposal will increase the workload and costs for libraries in making recorded music available to users but we should not to exaggerate the negative effects of the proposal we may lose in credibility

24. E-lending Electronic lending of books or other types of protected works is a relatively new concept E-lending is a new business model based on the communication to the public right It is necessary to understand the difference of distribution of physical copies and communication to the public

25. E-lending cont Author cannot control distribution after sale And no right to do so Lending right = right to remuneration for library lending If published by giving access in a database the author (or publisher)remains in full control because he (or the publisher) controls the access to the database he also has the legal right to do so

26. E-lending cont For libraries the problems arise when a publisher removes works from the database or refuses to give libraries access to the database or access to certain works in the database The author or publisher is in a position where he can control the acquisition policy of the library

27. E-lending cont When books are available for sale on the market anybody can buy The publisher cannot exclude libraries from acquiring the books The library is free to use the book within the limits of copyright or other relevant legislation The author or publisher cannot remove the books from the library That would be theft

28. E-lending cont With electronic publishing all this changes In the near future users will have access to streamed versions instead It makes it even more obvious that the control over the content which libraries may make available to their patrons remains in the hands of publishers

29. E-lending cont This raises broad political issues about Future publishing The right to access information The future of libraries Primary responsibility of EBLIDA Ex. & Council EGIL will have a supportive role in pointing to legal possibilities or changes needed in order to secure access to information

30. Thank you