CJEU: Message on social media may be used due to legislation about press representations of current affairs

The journalist published on the website of the online daily newspaper Gândul an article entitled ‘An original message from a teacher for parents who are thinking of giving her gifts at the start of the school year’. In the standfirst, the entire text published by the applicant in the main proceedings was reproduced. Concept of a ‘work’ – Short text shared on Facebook and reproduced in the online press – Article 5(3)(c) – Exceptions and limitations – Exception linked to the objective of the reporting of current events – Degree of harmonisation.

 

Case C‑598/24

The applicant is 'CY'. She requested the court of first instance to declare that the defendants 'Gândul Media Network SRL' and 'HO' infringed her copyright by unauthorized reproduction of her work. CY had posted a message on Facebook to the parents of students in her class, making it clear that she did not wish to receive gifts from them. This message was then shared on the Gândul Media Network website, which quoted the message in its entirety in the article.

The question is whether a message posted on a social networking site can be considered a 'work' protected by copyright within the meaning of Article 2(a) of Directive 2001/29. Furthermore, the court doubts whether the national legislation, which permits only short excerpts from a work to be used for reporting current events, violates Directive 2001/29. Under Article 5(3)(c) of the Directive, Member States may provide for exceptions or restrictions to the rights referred to in Article 2 in respect of press representations of current affairs.

Preliminary questions:

(1)      Must the provisions of Article 2(a) of [Directive 2001/29] be interpreted as meaning that a text posted on a social network expressing an opinion relating to social practices regarded as inappropriate may be considered to be a work protected by copyright?

 

(2)      Must the provisions of Article 5(3)(c) of [Directive 2001/29] be interpreted as precluding a provision of national law that permits the use, for the purposes of providing information on topical issues, of only short extracts from a work but not of the work as a whole, in particular where it is of short length, and only on condition that there is no direct or indirect commercial or economic advantage?

CJEU:

Article 5(3)(c) in fine of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as meaning that:
–        it is sufficient, in order for it to be applied, that the work at issue be used in order to provide information on an event which, at the time at which that information is provided, is of interest to the public;
–        it does not preclude legislation of a Member State which restricts the authorised use in connection with the reporting of current events to short extracts of works, provided that the length of the extract the use of which is authorised is sufficient to achieve the purpose of providing information;
–        it precludes legislation of a Member State which prohibits any indirect commercial or economic advantage being derived from the use of works in connection with the reporting of current events.

IPPT version will follow any time soon
ECLI:EU:C:2025:1002 and Case C‑598/24