Advanced

Privatkopieringsersättning, ett förlegat rättsystem i den svenska rätten?

Lundgren, Sara LU (2012) JURM02 20121
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Sedan implementeringen av Infosoc-direktivet måste Sverige, genom att enskilda tillåts att kopiera för privat bruk, säkerställa att en rimlig kompensation utges till upphovsmän och närstående rättsinnehavare. Hur denna kompensation ska upptas, utges eller fördelas har lämnats till respektive medlemsstat och enbart generella regler framhålls i direktivet och dess praxis. Rätten till en rimlig kompensation är i Sverige utformad som en ersättning för vissa typer av anordningar särskilt ägnade för privatkopiering, vilket även är den lösning som har valts av det stora flertalet medlemsländer.

Till följd av medlemsstaternas utrymme att utforma rätten till en rimlig kompensation har skillnader mellan olika länders regleringar uppkommit,... (More)
Sedan implementeringen av Infosoc-direktivet måste Sverige, genom att enskilda tillåts att kopiera för privat bruk, säkerställa att en rimlig kompensation utges till upphovsmän och närstående rättsinnehavare. Hur denna kompensation ska upptas, utges eller fördelas har lämnats till respektive medlemsstat och enbart generella regler framhålls i direktivet och dess praxis. Rätten till en rimlig kompensation är i Sverige utformad som en ersättning för vissa typer av anordningar särskilt ägnade för privatkopiering, vilket även är den lösning som har valts av det stora flertalet medlemsländer.

Till följd av medlemsstaternas utrymme att utforma rätten till en rimlig kompensation har skillnader mellan olika länders regleringar uppkommit, vilket har lett till konkurrensbegränsningar på den inre marknaden. Detta genom att medlemsstater uttager ersättning på olika produkter samt tillämpar olika nivåer som dessutom markant skiljer sig från varandra. Försök till harmonisering av lagstiftningen har gjorts av Europeiska kommissionen - emellertid har ett enhetligt system inte kunnat uppnås.

Förutom övergripande problem på den inre marknaden har systemet med privatkopieringsersättning väckt kritik både nationellt och internationellt. Denna uppsats syftar till att granska denna kritik och analysera privatkopieringsersättningen i svensk rätt: Finns det alls ett behov av ett ersättningssystem, är den svenska implementering korrekt och lämplig; finns det alternativa lösningar?

Sammantaget kan konstateras att behovet av ett ersättningssystem har minskat till följd av att upphovsmän och närstående rättsinnehavare funnit andra vägar att tillvarata sin rätt till ersättningen, genom licensieringar och kopieringsspärrar (DRM-system). Så länge privatkopieringen inte är obetydlig ska emellertid en rimlig kompensation utges till upphovsmän och närstående rättsinnehavare i enlighet med Infosoc-direktivet.

Sverige har i huvudsak gjort en korrekt och lämplig implementering av Infosoc-direktivet genom utformningen av privatkopieringsersättningen. Dock har delar lagstiftningen till följd av den tekniska utvecklingen fått problem och är redan förlegad. Vissa förändringar av lagen skulle dessutom på ett bättre sätt spegla verkligheten, förtydliga lagen och göra den mindre komplex.

I andra länder såsom Storbritannien, Tyskland och Norge har annorlunda system valts för att reglera rätten till en rimlig kompensation. Det system som skulle ge upphov till minst nackdelar är ett statsfinansierat avgiftssystem såsom i Norge. Dock kan ifrågasättas om ett sådant system ryms inom den svenska statsbudgeten. (Less)
Abstract
Since the implementation of the Infosoc-directive Sweden must, in relation to the private copying exception, secure that a fair compensation is given to the copyright and neighbouring right holders. However the directive does not contain specific rules regarding in which way the compensation shall be collected, brought out or divided; only general guidelines are given in the directive and in case law. The right for right holders to receive fair compensation is in Sweden elaborated as a levy charged on devices especially suitable for private copying. Similar systems are used in most of the European Union member states.

The discretion for the member states to elaborate the right to a fair compensation has resulted in differences between... (More)
Since the implementation of the Infosoc-directive Sweden must, in relation to the private copying exception, secure that a fair compensation is given to the copyright and neighbouring right holders. However the directive does not contain specific rules regarding in which way the compensation shall be collected, brought out or divided; only general guidelines are given in the directive and in case law. The right for right holders to receive fair compensation is in Sweden elaborated as a levy charged on devices especially suitable for private copying. Similar systems are used in most of the European Union member states.

The discretion for the member states to elaborate the right to a fair compensation has resulted in differences between the countries´ regulations, which creates barriers to trade and distortions competition on the internal market. Different countries apply the levies to different types of devices and the level of compensation varies considerably. The European commission has done several attempts to harmonize the systems, but without success.

In addition to the distortions created on the internal market, the right to fair compensation has other problems connected with it. The system with private copying levies has been criticized and debated both nationally and internationally. The main purpose of this essay is to scrutinize the criticism and analyse the system of private copying levies in Sweden. Is there a need for a fair compensation? Has the Swedish legislator done a correct and suitable implementation of the right to a fair compensation? Are there alternative solutions?

In summary, the need for a fair compensation has been reduced, since the right holders today use different alternatives to ensure compensation, such as licensing and programs reducing the amount of copies (DRM-system). Nevertheless the member states have to ensure fair compensation to the right holder as long as the private copying is not insignificant.

Sweden has mainly done a correct and adequate implementation of the Infosoc-directive. Notwithstanding, some of the applicable rules are already obsolete due to the fast technical development. Certain alterations of the law would also make the regulation better connected with current practice, elucidate the law and make it less complex.

In other countries, such as Great Britain, Germany and Norway, systems different from the private copying levies have been implemented to fulfil the requirement to fair compensation for the right holders. The system with the least disadvantages is the system in Norway, which involves state-funded levies. However even though this system may be a better alternative, the question is whether such a cost is possible within the Swedish national budget. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Lundgren, Sara LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Copyright levy, an obsolete legal system within the swedish law?
course
JURM02 20121
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Immaterialrätt, upphovsrätt
language
Swedish
id
2431152
date added to LUP
2012-05-29 16:03:53
date last changed
2012-05-29 16:03:53
@misc{2431152,
  abstract     = {Since the implementation of the Infosoc-directive Sweden must, in relation to the private copying exception, secure that a fair compensation is given to the copyright and neighbouring right holders. However the directive does not contain specific rules regarding in which way the compensation shall be collected, brought out or divided; only general guidelines are given in the directive and in case law. The right for right holders to receive fair compensation is in Sweden elaborated as a levy charged on devices especially suitable for private copying. Similar systems are used in most of the European Union member states.

The discretion for the member states to elaborate the right to a fair compensation has resulted in differences between the countries´ regulations, which creates barriers to trade and distortions competition on the internal market. Different countries apply the levies to different types of devices and the level of compensation varies considerably. The European commission has done several attempts to harmonize the systems, but without success.

In addition to the distortions created on the internal market, the right to fair compensation has other problems connected with it. The system with private copying levies has been criticized and debated both nationally and internationally. The main purpose of this essay is to scrutinize the criticism and analyse the system of private copying levies in Sweden. Is there a need for a fair compensation? Has the Swedish legislator done a correct and suitable implementation of the right to a fair compensation? Are there alternative solutions? 
 
In summary, the need for a fair compensation has been reduced, since the right holders today use different alternatives to ensure compensation, such as licensing and programs reducing the amount of copies (DRM-system). Nevertheless the member states have to ensure fair compensation to the right holder as long as the private copying is not insignificant. 

Sweden has mainly done a correct and adequate implementation of the Infosoc-directive. Notwithstanding, some of the applicable rules are already obsolete due to the fast technical development. Certain alterations of the law would also make the regulation better connected with current practice, elucidate the law and make it less complex.

In other countries, such as Great Britain, Germany and Norway, systems different from the private copying levies have been implemented to fulfil the requirement to fair compensation for the right holders. The system with the least disadvantages is the system in Norway, which involves state-funded levies. However even though this system may be a better alternative, the question is whether such a cost is possible within the Swedish national budget.},
  author       = {Lundgren, Sara},
  keyword      = {Immaterialrätt,upphovsrätt},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Privatkopieringsersättning, ett förlegat rättsystem i den svenska rätten?},
  year         = {2012},
}