The impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union’s ruling on the assignment of neighboring rights to employers without prior consent

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)‘s decision in Case C-575/23, concerning the Orchestre National de Belgique (ONB) and the Belgian State, has far-reaching consequences for the right to remuneration and protection of artists’ neighboring rights under European Union law. The ruling challenges national mechanisms that force artists to assign their neighboring rights to their employers without their prior consent, highlighting a potential conflict with EU regulations.

This article will explore the legal principles set out in this landmark decision, assess its impact on European intellectual property law, and discuss its ramifications on national systems that involve assigning rights without consent, particularly in the context of employment contracts and collective works.

Overview of the CJEU’s ruling in case C-575/23

In the case at hand, the CJEU ruled that national regulations mandating the automatic assignment of neighboring rights by artists-interpreters or performers under administrative status, particularly within public institutions such as the Orchestre National de Belgique, are contrary to EU law. The decision explicitly states that such assignment mechanisms, without prior consent from the artists, violate the principles of fair remuneration and the right of authors to control the exploitation of their creations.

The CJEU referred to multiple provisions of EU directives, particularly Directive 2019/790, which emphasizes that the consent of artists is a necessary precondition for the transfer of rights, specifically addressing the issue of fair remuneration for the exploitation of these rights.

Legal context: The Union’s regulations and the assignment of rights

The CJEU based its decision on key provisions of several EU directives regulating copyright and neighboring rights, including Directive 2001/29/EC (on copyright in the information society) and Directive 2006/115/EC (on rental and lending rights). These directives stress that:

• Artists have exclusive rights over their performances and neighboring rights, including the right to control how their performances are used.
• Any assignment of these rights requires their prior consent and must adhere to appropriate remuneration principles.

The CJEU emphasized that an assignment without consent is incompatible with the European Union’s protection standards, which are designed to guarantee fair treatment and compensation for artists.

Analysis of the ruling’s impact on national systems

4.1. The applicability of consent in assignment of rights

One of the central points of the CJEU‘s decision is the requirement for consent. It ruled that automatic assignment of rights, especially those of artists-interpreters, is not valid without prior consent. This principle is rooted in the protection of artistic freedom and the right to fair remuneration for the exploitation of their work.

In practical terms, this ruling makes it imperative for national laws to respect the artists’ right to negotiate and consent to the transfer of their rights, ensuring that they are remunerated appropriately for the use of their works. The directive 2019/790 reinforces the necessity of consent for the assignment of rights in employment settings and in the context of performing arts.

Key quote from the judgment:

“In the light of all the foregoing considerations, the answer to the questions raised is that Article 2(b) and Article 3(2)(a) of Directive 2001/29, and Article 3(1)(b), Article 7(1), Article 8(1) and Article 9(1)(a) of Directive 2006/115 must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which provides for the assignment, by means of a regulatory act, for the purpose of exploitation by the employer, of the related rights of performers engaged under an administrative law statute, in respect of the performances carried out in the context of their service to that employer, without the prior consent of those performers.”

4.2. Consequences on employment contracts and artist rights

The ruling carries significant implications for employment contracts in the creative industries, particularly in public institutions or non-profit organizations such as orchestras, theaters, and other performance arts entities. By invalidating automatic assignment provisions in employment contracts, the CJEU upholds the contractual freedom of artists, ensuring that their neighboring rights are protected under EU law.

This decision could lead to revisions in employment contracts, with employers now required to engage in explicit negotiations and ensure that artists’ rights are not only recognized but also fairly compensated.

4.3. Implications for future legislation

This ruling serves as a catalyst for potential changes in EU and national legislation. It challenges existing legal mechanisms that permitted forced assignment of rights, and it might prompt revisions in areas such as labor law and intellectual property law. Furthermore, the CJEU ruling brings clarity to the implementation of fair remuneration, which is a critical component of Directive 2019/790.

Additionally, this ruling could influence the classification of collective works and how authors’ rights are addressed in creative industries. The shift towards artist-centric regulations could mean greater control for performers and creators over the exploitation of their intellectual property.

Conclusion: A turning point for artists’ protection in the EU

The CJEU’s decision in Case C-575/23 marks a significant milestone in the protection of artists’ rights within the European Union. By invalidating the practice of automatic assignment of neighboring rights without prior consent, the Court reaffirms the EU’s commitment to ensuring that artists and performers are fairly remunerated and have control over their work. This ruling is likely to have far-reaching consequences for employment contracts, collective works, and the overall protection of intellectual property in the EU.

FAQ