Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

När medier publicerar upphovsrättsligt skyddade alster - En utredning om konflikten och avvägningen mellan upphovsrätt och yttrande- och informationsfrihet vid nyhetsrapportering

Stenvall, Wilhelm LU (2020) JURM02 20201
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
När medier publicerar upphovsrättsligt skyddat material uppstår ett intressant och mångsidigt juridiskt problem. Upphovsinnehavaren har å ena sidan ensamrätt på hur alstret får utnyttjas. Media är å andra sidan ett kontrollorgan med uppgiften att informera allmänheten, särskilt i politiska sammanhang. Följaktligen har det införts upphovsrättsliga inskränkningar som i vissa fall ger medier rätt att återge skyddade alster. Yttrande- och informationsfriheten som grundläggande fri- och rättigheter aktualiseras också, då upphovsrätten inskränker dessa friheter. Denna uppsats syftar till att utreda rättsläget angående konflikten och avvägningen mellan upphovsrätt och yttrande- och informationsfrihet vid nyhetsrapportering. Frågorna som ställs är... (More)
När medier publicerar upphovsrättsligt skyddat material uppstår ett intressant och mångsidigt juridiskt problem. Upphovsinnehavaren har å ena sidan ensamrätt på hur alstret får utnyttjas. Media är å andra sidan ett kontrollorgan med uppgiften att informera allmänheten, särskilt i politiska sammanhang. Följaktligen har det införts upphovsrättsliga inskränkningar som i vissa fall ger medier rätt att återge skyddade alster. Yttrande- och informationsfriheten som grundläggande fri- och rättigheter aktualiseras också, då upphovsrätten inskränker dessa friheter. Denna uppsats syftar till att utreda rättsläget angående konflikten och avvägningen mellan upphovsrätt och yttrande- och informationsfrihet vid nyhetsrapportering. Frågorna som ställs är under vilka förutsättningar skyddade alster kan användas vid nyhetsrapportering, om inskränkningsregeln i infosocdirektivet är korrekt implementerad i svensk lag samt vilken betydelse grundläggande fri- och rättigheter har.

De upphovsrättsliga inskränkningarna har funnits sedan den nu gällande lagstiftningens tillkomst. Vid implementeringen av infosocdirektivet ansågs dessa bestämmelser vara förenliga med motsvarande regel i direktivet, varför de förblev oförändrade. Direktivets inskränkning vid nyhetsrapportering saknar dock ett flertal rekvisit som den svenska lagstiftningen innehåller. I ljuset av ny praxis från EU-domstolens kan det hävdas att den svenska lagstiftningens detaljerade utformning riskerar att underminera en enhetlig tillämpning inom unionen, vilket kan tala för att implementeringen är felaktig. Med tanke på att direktivets bestämmelse lämnar ett betydande utrymme för skönsmässig bedömning vid införlivandet är det emellertid inte självklart. Något entydigt svar kan inte ges förrän EU-domstolen har prövat den svenska lagstiftningen.

Yttrande- och informationsfriheten är varandras spegelbilder och oumbärliga för demokratin. Särskilt mediernas verksamhet skyddas av dessa friheter. De är emellertid inte absoluta. Upphovsrätten är en inskränkning, och domstolarna har hittills aldrig ogillat ett upphovsrättsligt anspråk med hänvisning till dessa grundläggande friheter, varken i tvistemål eller brottmål. De grundläggande fri- och rättigheterna inom EU kan inte medge fler inskränkningar från ensamrätten än vad som följer av direktivet. Svensk grundlag verkar inte heller kunna leda till detta. Avvägningen har huvudsakligen hanterats inom det upphovsrättsliga regelverket.

Europadomstolens praxis problematiserar dock denna ordning. Europakonventionen tycks kräva att en distinktion mellan kommersiella och politiska sammanhang görs. I det förra åtnjuter konventionsstaterna en betydande bedömningsmarginal. I det senare är bedömningsmarginalen inte lika stor, och den politiska kontexten ska beaktas. Detta har inte fått genomslag i svensk rättstillämpning. Rättsläget avseende Europakonventionens betydelse för ämnet är dock något oklart. Trots en ganska riklig praxis från Europadomstolen om mediernas vikt för demokratin, finns bara ett prejudikat om konflikten och avvägningen mellan upphovsrätt och yttrande- och informationsfrihet. Det är osäkert hur stor bedömningsmarginalen är i ett medialt sammanhang. Vidare är det oklart vilka kriterier som avvägningen ska utgå ifrån, samt i vilken utsträckning konventionsstaterna har en positiv förpliktelse att tillförsäkra yttrande- och informationsfriheten mellan enskilda vid konflikten med upphovsrätt. Frågorna är ännu obesvarade av Europadomstolen. Som tidigare nämnt är inte heller samtliga frågor om implementeringen av infosocdirektivet besvarade. Rättslägets utveckling är således ännu inte avslutad. (Less)
Abstract
Media usage of copyright protected material creates an interesting and versatile legal problem. On the one hand, right holders have an exclusive right to the usage of their work. On the other hand, the importance of media freedom in a democratic society cannot be overstated. Journalists have a right and duty to inform on matters of public interests, especially political ones. Consequently, there are limitations to right holders’ exclusive right which allows dissemination of their material during reporting of news (current events). Fundamental freedoms such as freedom of expression and information also apply since copyright is a limitation to these rights. The purpose of this essay is to inquire the law regarding the conflict and balance... (More)
Media usage of copyright protected material creates an interesting and versatile legal problem. On the one hand, right holders have an exclusive right to the usage of their work. On the other hand, the importance of media freedom in a democratic society cannot be overstated. Journalists have a right and duty to inform on matters of public interests, especially political ones. Consequently, there are limitations to right holders’ exclusive right which allows dissemination of their material during reporting of news (current events). Fundamental freedoms such as freedom of expression and information also apply since copyright is a limitation to these rights. The purpose of this essay is to inquire the law regarding the conflict and balance between copyright and freedom of expression and information in connection with news reporting. The questions asked are under what circumstances can protected material be used in news reporting, whether the limitation in the infosoc directive is correctly implemented, and what importance fundamental rights and freedoms have.

Copyright limitations regarding news services have existed since the initial enactment of the copyright act. When implementing the infosoc directive, the Swedish government considered the statues providing these limitations to be in conformity with the corresponding statute in the directive, making a change of the copyright act unnecessary in that regard. However, the Swedish statues contain conditions that are absent from the directive’s provision. In the light of new precedents from the European Court of Justice, the Swedish legislation could be viewed to jeopardize the harmonization and unity of EU law. Therefore, the implementation of the relevant limitation in the directive could be erroneous. However, his is not certain, especially since the directive’s provision does not constitute a full harmonization, leaving significant discretion to the member states when striking a fair balance between these competing interests. A clear answer cannot be given until the Swedish legislation has been put under the scrutiny of the European Court of Justice.

Freedom of expression and information are two sides of the same coin, and fundamental for democracy. These freedoms protect the media especially, yet they are not absolute. Copyright regulation restricts these freedoms, and so far, the courts have been reluctant on dismissing copyright-based claims when the defendant invokes freedom of expression or limitation, both in civil and criminal trials. The fundamental rights protected by EU law cannot justify a derogation from the author’s exclusive rights. The Swedish constitution does not seem to enable such a derogation either. The balance between these competing interests has mainly been a matter of limitations in copyright law.

Precedents from the European Court of Human Rights complicate things, though. The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms requires that the nature of speech or information at issue is taken into account. Although the states as a starting point enjoy a particularly wide margin of appreciation, that does not seem to be case when a contribution to a debate of general interest has been made. This distinction has not impacted Swedish law. The case law regarding the Convention is not completely fleshed out, though. Despite several cases establishing the fundamental importance of media freedom, there is only one precedent about the conflict and balance between copyright and freedom of expression and information. It is not entirely clear exactly how wide or small the margin of appreciation would be in a journalistic context, nor what criteria should be used when striking a fair balance between these competing interests. Moreover, the extent to which freedom of expression and information can be used in a civil copyright dispute is also uncertain. Several questions remain unanswered by the European Court of Human rights. As previously stated, so are some questions regarding the Swedish implementation of the infosoc directive. Consequently, the development of this legal problem has yet to be finalized. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Stenvall, Wilhelm LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Media usage of copyright protected material - A legal inquiry regarding the conflict and balance between copyright and freedom of expression and information in connection with news reporting
course
JURM02 20201
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
civilrätt, EU-rätt, immaterialrätt, statsrätt, upphovsrätt, yttrandefrihet, informationsfrihet, nyhetsrapportering, nyhetsförmedling, media, journalism, pressfrihet, mediefrihet, Spiegel Online, Funke Medien, Mobilfilmen, järnrörsskandalen
language
Swedish
id
9010425
date added to LUP
2020-06-16 10:57:28
date last changed
2020-06-16 10:57:28
@misc{9010425,
  abstract     = {{Media usage of copyright protected material creates an interesting and versatile legal problem. On the one hand, right holders have an exclusive right to the usage of their work. On the other hand, the importance of media freedom in a democratic society cannot be overstated. Journalists have a right and duty to inform on matters of public interests, especially political ones. Consequently, there are limitations to right holders’ exclusive right which allows dissemination of their material during reporting of news (current events). Fundamental freedoms such as freedom of expression and information also apply since copyright is a limitation to these rights. The purpose of this essay is to inquire the law regarding the conflict and balance between copyright and freedom of expression and information in connection with news reporting. The questions asked are under what circumstances can protected material be used in news reporting, whether the limitation in the infosoc directive is correctly implemented, and what importance fundamental rights and freedoms have. 

Copyright limitations regarding news services have existed since the initial enactment of the copyright act. When implementing the infosoc directive, the Swedish government considered the statues providing these limitations to be in conformity with the corresponding statute in the directive, making a change of the copyright act unnecessary in that regard. However, the Swedish statues contain conditions that are absent from the directive’s provision. In the light of new precedents from the European Court of Justice, the Swedish legislation could be viewed to jeopardize the harmonization and unity of EU law. Therefore, the implementation of the relevant limitation in the directive could be erroneous. However, his is not certain, especially since the directive’s provision does not constitute a full harmonization, leaving significant discretion to the member states when striking a fair balance between these competing interests. A clear answer cannot be given until the Swedish legislation has been put under the scrutiny of the European Court of Justice. 

Freedom of expression and information are two sides of the same coin, and fundamental for democracy. These freedoms protect the media especially, yet they are not absolute. Copyright regulation restricts these freedoms, and so far, the courts have been reluctant on dismissing copyright-based claims when the defendant invokes freedom of expression or limitation, both in civil and criminal trials. The fundamental rights protected by EU law cannot justify a derogation from the author’s exclusive rights. The Swedish constitution does not seem to enable such a derogation either. The balance between these competing interests has mainly been a matter of limitations in copyright law. 

Precedents from the European Court of Human Rights complicate things, though. The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms requires that the nature of speech or information at issue is taken into account. Although the states as a starting point enjoy a particularly wide margin of appreciation, that does not seem to be case when a contribution to a debate of general interest has been made. This distinction has not impacted Swedish law. The case law regarding the Convention is not completely fleshed out, though. Despite several cases establishing the fundamental importance of media freedom, there is only one precedent about the conflict and balance between copyright and freedom of expression and information. It is not entirely clear exactly how wide or small the margin of appreciation would be in a journalistic context, nor what criteria should be used when striking a fair balance between these competing interests. Moreover, the extent to which freedom of expression and information can be used in a civil copyright dispute is also uncertain. Several questions remain unanswered by the European Court of Human rights. As previously stated, so are some questions regarding the Swedish implementation of the infosoc directive. Consequently, the development of this legal problem has yet to be finalized.}},
  author       = {{Stenvall, Wilhelm}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{När medier publicerar upphovsrättsligt skyddade alster - En utredning om konflikten och avvägningen mellan upphovsrätt och yttrande- och informationsfrihet vid nyhetsrapportering}},
  year         = {{2020}},
}