Editor's note: Verwertungsgesellschaft Rundfunk Is a copyright collective management organization, The beneficiaries include several Austrian broadcasters, The group is taking a hotel in Austria Edelweiss Take to court. Why exactly? Please look down!

[background] Verwertungsgesellschaft Rundfunk Is a copyright collective management organization, The beneficiaries include several Austrian broadcasters, The organization is bringing together a family located in Grossarl (Austria) The hotel of Edelweiss, Take to court. European Court of Justice (Court of Justice) Made preliminary rulings on issues related to the case. The plaintiff filed a suit at the Commercial Court in Vienna, Held that the defendant's conduct constituted the dissemination of a broadcast program to the public in a public place requiring payment of admission, The corresponding expenses shall be paid. For this reason, The plaintiff petitioned the court to require the defendant to provide information about radio and television programs broadcast in his hotel room, And the number of rooms. The plaintiff argues that, Due to the provision of TV services directly affect the room rate, So hotel room rates are Austrian law and "Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright-related leases and related rights in the field of intellectual property (The first 2006/115/EC No) " (Hereinafter referred to as "European Union regulation 2006/115/EC Number instruction" ) The first 8. 3 prescribed "Admission fee (entrance fee) " . but, The hotel considers the above provisions "Pay the entrance fee (payment of an entrance fee) " , Admission fees are charged specifically for the purpose of communicating a program to the public, Hotel room rates include services other than TV viewing services, Other services are included, So you can't equate house prices with "Admission fee" . In view of this, The commercial Court in Vienna decided to seek clarification from the European Court of Justice "Pay the entrance fee" Concept of, determine "European Union regulation 2006/115/EC Number instruction" The first 8. 3 And whether the relevant legal provisions of the Member States can regulate the conduct of the accused.

[conclusion] First of all, The European Court of Justice cites typical cases "SGAE v Rafael Hoteles" (2006 years 12 month 7 day, Case number: C-306/05) Relevant identification of, That is, hotels provide TV signals to customers who rent rooms, composition "Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the harmonization of the specific content of copyright and related rights in the information society (The first 2001/29/EC No) " The first 3. 1 prescribed "Communicate to the public (communication to the public) " , Its specific use of signal transmission technology or room private attributes do not affect the above identification. The court also cited "Phonographic Performance Ireland" case (Case number: C-162/10) judgment, Determined to provide hotel guests with sound and/Or the behavior of video playback devices and discs, It also constitutes communication to the public. The European Court of Justice went on to note, In European Union law "Communicate to the public" The concept is unified, It does not change because of the difference in the situation of the owner of the specific case. but, In this case, The right of broadcasting to the public is special and limited, because "European Union regulation 2006/115/EC Number instruction" The first 8. 3 Article provision, The act of transmission must take place in a place where the public has to pay an entrance fee to enter. To determine "Pay the entrance fee" Meaning of, The European Court of Justice held that the provisions of the directive should be derived from the textual source (The World Intellectual Property Organization "Protection of performers, Rome Convention on Producers of Audiovisual Products and Broadcasting Organizations" and "Convention for the Protection of Producers of Phonograms against Unauthorized Reproduction of their Phonograms" ) Understand from perspective. Although the WiPO guidelines are not legally binding, But the European Court of Justice can use the guide to understand both conventions, The guidelines state that "Pay the entrance fee" A fee specially charged for the purpose of broadcasting television to the public. correspondingly, For example, paying for meals or drinks at a restaurant, Is not subject to the provisions of the clause "Pay the entrance fee" Category of. Therefore, European court of justice, Television broadcasts are distributed through devices such as televisions and radios installed in hotel rooms, It does not constitute the act of communicating to the public in a public place that requires payment of admission fee.

[comment] What's interesting about the controversy in this case, Not just on the main issue of the case——namely, Is the hotel room rate equal to "Pay the entrance fee" , It is about the economic shock that could result from a ruling to the contrary. If you decide that the room rate is equal to "Pay the entrance fee" , Would trigger a wave of claims from broadcasters across the EU against all hotels, No one knows whether other similar entities will be affected.

compile: Liu Dan, Esabarry Legal Counsel source: Esabaril (ELZABURU)