IPPT20111013, CJEU, Airfield & Canal Digitaal v Sabam

Print this page 10-12-2011
IPPT20111013, CJEU, Airfield & Canal Digitaal v Sabam

COPYRIGHT

 

Indirect direct transmission of TV programs: a single, indivisible communication to the public, which may require authorisation 
• In light of the foregoing, it must be held, subject to verification by the national court, that both the indirect transmission of television programs and their direct transmission fulfill all the cumulative conditions laid down in Article 1(2)(a) and (c) of Directive 93/83 and that each of them must therefore be regarded as constituting a single communication to the public by satellite and thus as indivisible.
• That said, the indivisibility of such a communication, within the meaning of Article 1(2)(a) and (c) of Directive 93/83, does not however signify that the intervention of the satellite package provider in that communication can occur without the authorisation of the right holders concerned. 

 

Authorisation for satellite package provider required – new public
• that Article 2 of Directive 93/83 must be interpreted as requiring a satellite package provider to obtain authorisation from the right holders concerned for its intervention in the direct or indirect transmission of television programmes, such as the transmission at issue in the main proceedings, unless the right holders have agreed with the broadcasting organisation concerned that the protected works will also be communicated to the public through that provider, on condition, in the latter situation, that the provider’s intervention does not make those works accessible to a new public.

 

IPPT20111013, CJEU, Airfield & Canal Digitaal v Sabam