The intellectual property concept of ‘communication to the public’ in Article 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive is a current issue within the EU, as the means of communication increase all the time due to the fast development of the information society. Accordingly, the CJEU has more than occasionally been instructed to rule upon this provision, as the Member States of the EU are unconfident as to how it should be interpreted. The poor guidance provided for in the preamble of the InfoSoc Directive in terms of how to construe the provision does probably contribute to this confusion. Article 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive has been subject to disputes as concerns different means of communication, that is to say broadcasting, live performances, streaming and hyperlinking. Broadcasting and streaming are generally considered as communications within the meaning of the provision whereas live performances and hyperlinking have been deemed as falling outside the scope. More in detail, the most important criteria of a ‘communication to the public’ – laid down by the CJEU – suggest that the concept should be interpreted broadly, covering all transmissions and retransmissions where equipment facilitates for communications of signs, sounds or images, regardless of the means used and the nature of the place for the communication. A public refers to an indeterminate but fairly high number of people – considering the potential number rather than the exact number – not present at the place where the communication originates. The gap between the wording of Article 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive and the developments carried out by the CJEU is considered troublesome since it decreases the legal certainty of the provision. A future recasting of these matters should thus contemplate the possibility to integrate the criteria laid down by the CJEU into the law.

Dans quelle mesure l’utilisation d’une œuvre relève‐t‐elle du droit d’exploitation au sens du droit d’auteur ? Les actes qui consistent à poser un lien envers une oeuvre, à visionner un film par le biais de la technique du streaming, relèvent-ils du champ d’application du droit d’auteur permettant à l’auteur d’exercer un contrôle sur l’utilisation de ces œuvres ? Alors que dans un monde analogique, les critères constitutifs de l’exploitation d’une œuvre semblent clairs, les contours et les caractéristiques d’une exploitation sont plus complexes à tracer dans un monde numérique en raison notamment de la dématérialisation, de la convergence accrue des techniques et de l’interactivité qui en résulte. La thèse analyse donc les critères caractérisant les droits d’exploitation, en tenant compte du droit européen, français et allemand avant de proposer de manière prospective une amélioration de l’acquis communautaire s’inscrivant ainsi dans le débat très actuel, mené en ce moment même par la Commission européenne. / Is there an infringement to an exclusive economic author right when a web user creates a link toward a protected work? Which “uses” of a work can be protected by the author and which exclusive economic rights under copyright can he rely upon to exercise control? Contrarily to the analog world, it is more complex to draw the contours and features of an exploitation in a digital world. The thesis tries to clarify the scope of the protection under current European law and National law, with a particular focus on French and German law. The comparative approach is justified by the different conceptions of the exclusive economic rights in France and Germany, a heritage of two strong legal traditions of the continental European legal system. It is prospectively that the thesis attempts to improve the acquis communautaire, following the current debate, led right now by the European Commission.

L'accès généralisé à Internet a remis en question le droit d'auteur. Au milieu des années 90, il s'en trouvait plusieurs pour annoncer la mort de cette institution vieille de quelques siècles. Force est aujourd'hui de constater que le droit d'auteur est toujours bien vivant bien qu'il ait changé. Les droits économiques, qui ont rapidement été appliqués dans l'environnement numérique, témoignent de ces changements. L'analyse de la transmission numérique des fichiers audio expose les mutations qui affectent deux droits économiques en particulier: le droit de reproduction et le droit de communication au public par télécommunication. Ces mutations résultent tantôt de l'intervention du législateur, tantôt de la façon dont on choisit d'appliquer ces droits dans ce nouvel environnement. Elles ont souvent pour effet d'étendre la portée traditionnelle de ces droits économiques. Cela se fait parfois au détriment des rationalités qui en justifient l'existence. De plus, la nouvelle interaction entre ces droits mutés entraîne des effets sur les différents acteurs du droit d'auteur qui sont parfois discutables. Le droit d'auteur a toujours sa raison d'être. Reste à savoir si la forme actuelle des droits économiques est toujours le meilleur véhicule pour atteindre les objectifs sous-jacents. À l'heure où le législateur envisage une simplification du droit d'auteur, une réflexion s'impose au sujet de la forme des droits économiques. Il est grand temps, du moins dans l'environnement numérique, d'adopter une approche qui se fonde plus sur les effets des actes posés que sur leur nature. L'examen des mutations qui affectent les droits économiques dans cet environnement fait d'ailleurs prendre conscience des limites de notre façon positiviste d'envisager ces droits. / General Internet access has shaken Copyright. In the mid-nineties, many announced the death of this institution several centuries old. We have to admit that Copyright is still quite alive though it has changed. The economic rights, which were quickly applied in the digital environment, are a testimony of these changes. The analysis of audio file digital transmission exposes mutations which affect two specifie economic rights: the reproduction right and the right of communication to the public by telecommunication. These changes result from the legislator's intervention or from how the economic rights are applied in this new environment. The traditional reach of these rights is often extended by those changes. As a result, the rationalities that justify these rights are sometimes ignored. Moreover, the new interaction between these changed rights sometimes has debatable effects on the various copyright actors. Copyright retains its raison d'être. Still, the question arises whether the current form of the economic rights remains the best vehicle to achieve the goals implied by these rights. As the legislator now considers a simplification of Copyright, reviewing the form of the economic rights is essential. It is time, at least in the digital environment, to adopt an approach based on the effects of the acts, rather than on their nature. The analysis of the changes, which affect the economic rights in a digital environment, exposes the limits of our positivist way of considering these rights. Keywords Internet, copyright, economic rights, reproduction, communication to the public by telecommunication, mutation, effect.

This diploma thesis deals with the topic of unauthorized use of copyrighted work. The aim of the thesis is to offer the reader an insight into the issue of the use of copyrighted work in general and the current possibilities of copyright protection in the Czech Republic. For this purpose, it defines basic copyright terms, by which it acquaints the readers with the content of the rights of authors and other entitled persons, as well as the claims that such persons may claim in the event of unauthorized interference with their rights. By listing the cases and the ways of fair use of the copyrighted works, the reader will, a contrario, be introduced to the issue of unauthorized use and unauthorized interventions, and consequently the claims with which one can defend against such unauthorized interventions. At the same time, the reader will be informed of the responsibilities and penalties that threaten the violators of the protected rights, whether civil, administrative or criminal. The thesis also attempts to compare the new amendment of the Copyright Act, especially in the field of collective management of copyright and related rights, based on the implementation of Directive 2014/26/EU, which substantially changed the form of Title IV of the Copyright Act. It also reports on the recent changes in...

L'accès généralisé à Internet a remis en question le droit d'auteur. Au milieu des années 90, il s'en trouvait plusieurs pour annoncer la mort de cette institution vieille de quelques siècles. Force est aujourd'hui de constater que le droit d'auteur est toujours bien vivant bien qu'il ait changé. Les droits économiques, qui ont rapidement été appliqués dans l'environnement numérique, témoignent de ces changements. L'analyse de la transmission numérique des fichiers audio expose les mutations qui affectent deux droits économiques en particulier: le droit de reproduction et le droit de communication au public par télécommunication. Ces mutations résultent tantôt de l'intervention du législateur, tantôt de la façon dont on choisit d'appliquer ces droits dans ce nouvel environnement. Elles ont souvent pour effet d'étendre la portée traditionnelle de ces droits économiques. Cela se fait parfois au détriment des rationalités qui en justifient l'existence. De plus, la nouvelle interaction entre ces droits mutés entraîne des effets sur les différents acteurs du droit d'auteur qui sont parfois discutables. Le droit d'auteur a toujours sa raison d'être. Reste à savoir si la forme actuelle des droits économiques est toujours le meilleur véhicule pour atteindre les objectifs sous-jacents. À l'heure où le législateur envisage une simplification du droit d'auteur, une réflexion s'impose au sujet de la forme des droits économiques. Il est grand temps, du moins dans l'environnement numérique, d'adopter une approche qui se fonde plus sur les effets des actes posés que sur leur nature. L'examen des mutations qui affectent les droits économiques dans cet environnement fait d'ailleurs prendre conscience des limites de notre façon positiviste d'envisager ces droits. / General Internet access has shaken Copyright. In the mid-nineties, many announced the death of this institution several centuries old. We have to admit that Copyright is still quite alive though it has changed. The economic rights, which were quickly applied in the digital environment, are a testimony of these changes. The analysis of audio file digital transmission exposes mutations which affect two specifie economic rights: the reproduction right and the right of communication to the public by telecommunication. These changes result from the legislator's intervention or from how the economic rights are applied in this new environment. The traditional reach of these rights is often extended by those changes. As a result, the rationalities that justify these rights are sometimes ignored. Moreover, the new interaction between these changed rights sometimes has debatable effects on the various copyright actors. Copyright retains its raison d'être. Still, the question arises whether the current form of the economic rights remains the best vehicle to achieve the goals implied by these rights. As the legislator now considers a simplification of Copyright, reviewing the form of the economic rights is essential. It is time, at least in the digital environment, to adopt an approach based on the effects of the acts, rather than on their nature. The analysis of the changes, which affect the economic rights in a digital environment, exposes the limits of our positivist way of considering these rights. Keywords Internet, copyright, economic rights, reproduction, communication to the public by telecommunication, mutation, effect. / "Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade Maîtrise en droit (LL. M.) Option recherche (technologies de l'information)". Ce mémoire a été accepté à l'unanimité et classé parmi les 15% des mémoires de la discipline. Commentaires du jury : "Le mémoire traite de façon originale et approfondie la problématique des droits économiques des auteurs dans l'environnement numérique. Utilisation appropriée de la documentation pertinente. L'expression est impeccable, l'appareil de citation et les références sont complètes et adéquatement rédigées".

This thesis is focused on the theme of unlawful use of a copyrighted work. The main aim of this work is to provide a fundamental insight into the current state of protection of rights belonging to the authors in the Czech Republic, emphasizing the exclusive right of exploitation. Furthermore by using the examples of selected forms of exploitation this thesis aims to delineate a certain line between a lawful and unlawful use of a copyrighted work, especially with regard to the case law of the CJEU. This thesis is composed of four chapters, which are divided into sections and subsections. Chapter One is an introductory chapter which provides definition of a copyrighted work and explains the content of exclusive rights of authors to their works. Chapter Two focuses on the right of exploitation. It describes various forms of exploitation of copyrighted works and also deals with the regulation of a license agreement and the non-contractual use of works secured by the exceptions and limitations of copyright. The legislative changes caused by the recodification of Czech civil legislation are also reflected. Chapter Three examines the means of protection provided by the Czech law in case of a copyright infringement. It contains a list of private claims which the author can use against the offender along...

The intellectual property concept of 'communication to the public of the broadcast works by radio or television receivers' in Article 23 of the Czech copyright act is a current issue especially in a relation to the exception to this right in favour of health establishments that has been called in a question in front of both Czech courts and CJEU. The most important criteria of communication to the public -- laid down by CJEU -- suggest that the concept should be interpreted broadly, covering all transmissions, regardless of the means used and the nature of the place for the communication. A public refers to an indeterminate but fairly high number of people who constitute so called new public. In order to fall within the scope of a lawful exception the criteria of the so called 'three-step test' must be met as well as the formal criteria stated in the abovementioned Article. The most recent cases discussed in this work dealt with the transmission of the protected works by means of television sets located in the bedrooms of the guests of spa establishments. Although it was held by CJEU that this exception does not comply with EU law, it is still part of the Czech law and Czech courts must cope with it.

La faculté de copie privée, admise depuis longtemps et figurant à l’article L. 122-5 du Code de la propriété intellectuelle, est présentée par la doctrine majoritaire comme une exception au droit d’auteur. Elle permet à une personne de dupliquer une œuvre pour son usage personnel sans avoir à demander l’accord préalable de l’auteur et s’illustre dans deux cas : la copie pour son usage personnel faite par le propriétaire d’un exemplaire, laquelle est facile à admettre ; et celle faite par un tiers, notamment un emprunteur de l’exemplaire, laquelle s’impose aussi. On observe que la copie privée, parce qu’elle ne réalise pas une communication au public, doit être considérée comme étant hors du champ du droit d’auteur, qui trouve ici une de ses limites. Récemment, le législateur a considéré que, du fait de l’évolution des techniques, la copie privée entraînait un préjudice pour l’auteur. Il a prévu une rémunération pour le compenser. Puis, celle-ci a été cantonnée aux seules copies de source licite, en même temps qu’ont été incriminées les copies de source illicite. Mais cette pénalisation est mal vécue et peu appliquée. Et l’absence de rémunération est injuste pour l’auteur. Il serait bon de supprimer la distinction entre copie privée licite et illicite. On étendrait alors la compensation à toutes les copies privées et on se dispenserait ainsi d’assumer la charge de la répression de la copie privée illicite. On admettrait en même temps que l’auteur limite par voie contractuelle le nombre de copies privées, notamment en utilisant des mesures techniques de protection et d’information, mais sans pouvoir interdire totalement cette faculté de copie privée à l’utilisateur. / The private copying’s faculty, admitted for a long time and contained in article L. 122-5 of the Code of Intellectual Property, is presented by the majority doctrine as an exception to copyright. It allows a person to duplicate a work for his personal use without having to seek the prior consent of the author and it is illustrated in two cases : the copy for his personal use made by the owner of a copy, which is easy to admit ; and the one made by a third party, including a borrower of the copy, which is also required. It is observed that private copying, because it does not make a communication to the public, must be considered as being outside the field of copyright, which finds here one of its limits. Recently, the legislature considered that, due to the evolution of the techniques, the private copy entailed a prejudice for the author. He has provided compensation to compensate him. Then, it was confined to the only copies of lawful source, while were reprimanded the copies of illicit source. But this penalty is poorly lived and little applied. And the lack of remuneration is unfair for the author. It would be good to remove the distinction between lawful and unlawful private copying. Compensation would then be extended to all private copies and the repression’s burden of unlawful private copying would be dispensed with. In the same time, it should be admitted that the author limits the number of private copies by contractual means, especially by using digital rights management, but without being able to totally prohibit this private copying’s faculty for the user.