Scholarlink

<p><UnorderedList Mark="None"><ItemContent><p><b>1. 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 must be interpreted as meaning that making a protected work available by means of an offline streaming copy, which is made by the provider of a streaming service on the end-user’s device at the request of that user, that user not being able technically to have it available to himself or herself outside that service and it being ensured that the holder of the copyright in that work retains such control over that work as allows him or her the possibility to block access to that copy, does not fall within the scope of the private copying exception laid down in that provision.</b></p></ItemContent><ItemContent><p><b>2. Article 5(2)(b) of Directive 2001/29 must be interpreted as meaning that the application of the exception laid down in that provision is not affected by the fact that the act of copying the work concerned for offline streaming or the use of that copy was the subject of a payment to the holder of the copyright in that work under a licence authorising such copy, provided that (i) no technological measures have been implemented by the holder of the copyright in the work concerned and (ii) consequently, that copyright holder has been unable to provide authorisation for such an act.</b></p></ItemContent></UnorderedList></p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

“Stichting de Thuiskopie”

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月18日

查看全文

摘要

1. 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 must be interpreted as meaning that making a protected work available by means of an offline streaming copy, which is made by the provider of a streaming service on the end-user’s device at the request of that user, that user not being able technically to have it available to himself or herself outside that service and it being ensured that the holder of the copyright in that work retains such control over that work as allows him or her the possibility to block access to that copy, does not fall within the scope of the private copying exception laid down in that provision.

2. Article 5(2)(b) of Directive 2001/29 must be interpreted as meaning that the application of the exception laid down in that provision is not affected by the fact that the act of copying the work concerned for offline streaming or the use of that copy was the subject of a payment to the holder of the copyright in that work under a licence authorising such copy, provided that (i) no technological measures have been implemented by the holder of the copyright in the work concerned and (ii) consequently, that copyright holder has been unable to provide authorisation for such an act.