EIT: Tekijänoikeusjärjestön velvoittaminen solmimaan lisenssisopimukset radioasemien kanssa kohtuullisella rojaltilla ei loukannut omaisuuden suojaa tai oikeutta oikeudenmukaiseen oikeudenkäyntiin

Euroopan ihmisoikeustuomioistuin (EIT) on tänään antamassaan tuomiossaan katsonut, että latvialaiset tuomioistuimet olivat ottaneet huomioon riittävällä tavalla niin tekijänoikeuksien haltijoiden kuin radioasemienkin intressit, kun ne olivat määränneet tekijänoikeusjärjestö SIA AKKA/LAA:n (SIA “Autortiesību un komunicēšanās konsultāciju aģentūra/Latvijas Autoru apvienība” – Copyright and Communication Consulting Agency ltd./Latvian Authors Association) tekemään sopimukset sellaisten radioasemien kanssa, joiden kanssa sopimusta ei ollut voimassa.

EIT:n lehdistötiedotteesta:

In today’s Chamber judgment in the case of SIA AKKA/LAA v. Latvia (application no. 562/05) the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been:

no violation of Article 1 of Protocol (protection of property) to the European Convention on Human Rights, and
no violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to fair hearing) of the European Convention.

The case concerned a complaint about the restriction on the copyright of authors’ musical work. SIA AKKA/LAA, an organisation responsible for managing the copyright of the musical works of a large number of Latvian and international authors, complained about decisions by the national courts ordering the applicant organisation and two radio companies to enter into a licence agreement and to set an equitable royalty rate. The applicant organisation notably alleged that those decisions had restricted the exclusive rights of the authors they represented to freely conclude licence agreements for the use of their musical works.

The Court found in particular that the Latvian authorities had struck a fair balance between the demands of the public interest (namely, the radio companies’ interest in obtaining a licence allowing them to legally broadcast work as well as the general public’s interest in having access to musical works), on the one hand, and the rights of the applicant organisation to obtain equitable remuneration from the use of musical work, on the other. Indeed, the effort to maintain a balance between the competing interests could be seen in their decisions, which had observed that protected works were being broadcast without a valid licence over an extended period of time and that that situation had to a certain extent been due to the applicant organisation’s limited efficiency in carrying out negotiations with the radio companies.

Koko lehdistötiedote, missä myös linkki koko tuomioon, löytyy täältä: here