In today’s data-driven society, also called the Fourth Industrial Revolution, Text and Data Mining (TDM) has become an essential tool in managing the booming Big Data in its different sizes and forms. It is also an inherent part of AI research using machine learning, where these techniques highly depend on datasets derived from TDM to self-learn and to make autonomous decisions. Through the lens of copyright and related rights, TDM may be used to train AI for the purpose of AI-driven creativity, where AI has already helped in actualizing paintings, compose music and to produce movie trailers. However, since TDM typically involves extraction and/or copying of works and other subject matter protectable by copyright and related rights – in order to create datasets relevant to each AI project – it is at risk of infringing the exclusive right of reproduction and sui generis database right under the EU acquis. Indeed, TDM used for the purpose of AI-driven creativity may not necessarily amount to an infringement, if the restricted act is covered by prima facie an available exception or limitation. Several pre-existing exceptions and limitations under the EU acquis, i.e. temporary act of reproduction, scientific research, normal use of a database, extraction of insubstantial part from a database and the mandatory exception for computer programs, have been examined as possible candidates to screen unlicensed TDM activities from copyright and related rights infringement. However, this thesis observes that due to their narrow scope and the legal fragmentation caused by the voluntary implementation of some of the exceptions, these are not fully adapted to cover unlicensed TDM and thus creating legal uncertainties for AI developers. In this regard, in order to transfers the fundamental principle of copyright and related rights into the digital age and to compete with legal systems that offer a more friendly environment for TDM (e.g. US, Japan and UK), the European legislator adopted the Digital Single Market Directive 2019/790 (DSM Directive) comprising two obligatory TDM exceptions in articles 3 and 4. However, despite the reduction of several legal uncertainties and the diverging national implementations of the pre-existing exceptions and limitations, the adopted regime has significant shortcoming that may hinder the AI development in Europe. Ultimately, this thesis concludes that despite following an approach that better fits the digital environment, the DSM Directive fails to address the new era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution to which AI belongs.

De tous les droits de propriété intellectuelle, le droit d’auteur était celui qui semblait le plus éloigné des préoccupations économiques des autorités de concurrence. Conçu à l’origine dans un souci de protection de la création littéraire et artistique, il apparaît aujourd’hui davantage comme un outil de puissance économique tourné vers la protection de l’investissement et, plus généralement, un vecteur de l’activité économique. C’est à ce titre que l’application des règles de concurrence à des pratiques mettant en cause l’exercice ou la gestion de droits d’auteur est désormais considérée comme incontournable. Cette application se doit cependant d’être mesurée. Elle bouscule parfois les principes de la propriété littéraire et artistique et conduit à s’interroger sur une définition plus appropriée des contours de la protection offerte par le droit d’auteur. En outre, la remise en cause, au nom du principe de libre concurrence, de pratiques par ailleurs conformes aux règles du droit d’auteur, n’est pas sans risque. Elle contribue à modeler les contours du droit d’auteur selon une conception propre au droit de la concurrence et peut tendre, parfois, vers un amenuisement des prérogatives des titulaires de droits ou un affaiblissement du niveau de leur protection. À terme, la création pourrait s’en trouver menacée. Il convient donc de rechercher, en toute hypothèse, un équilibre permettant de satisfaire aussi bien à l’exigence de concurrence sur les marchés qu’à l’impératif d’efficacité de la protection du droit d’auteur. / Among all intellectual property rights, copyright seemed to be initially far away from the economic concerns of competition authorities. Originally designed with a view to protecting literary and artistic creation, it now appears more as a tool of economic power turned to investment protection, and, more generally, as a vehicle of economic activity. As such, the application of competition rules to practices based on exercise or management of copyright is now regarded as unavoidable. However, such application must be performed with care and caution as it sometimes bumped into the principles of literary and artistic property and raises questions about a more appropriate definition of the protection offered by copyright. Moreover, the modification of practices complying with copyright rules, in the name of free competition, is not without risk. It leads to draw the outlines of copyright according to considerations designed for competition laws and can aim, sometimes, towards an erosion of the rights of copyright’s owners or a decline of their level of protection. Eventually, creation could be threatened. In any event, it is therefore essential to look for an equilibrium which would satisfy both the requirements and principles of free market competition and the necessity to effectively protect copyright.

This master thesis is dedicated to the press publishers’ right introduced by Article 15 of the Directive (EU) 2019/790 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market. The article became one of the most debated provisions in the whole directive. On the one hand, the discussion was driven by EU press publishers because of thecommercial crisis in the traditional press publishing and news mediasectors. Press representatives began to express concerns about the free riding of press publications by content aggregators and search engines who usually reuse such contents for profit. On the other hand, service providers argued that press publishers would lose traffic to their websites, affecting the quality of the press and constrainingfundamental rights. This conflict pushed the press publishers to bringing these issues before courts, legislators and competition authorities. Since these complaints were not resolved completely, the only way to resolve the conflict seemed to be the introduction of the EU-wide related right.