Wednesday 26th September 2018

Switch to multi-article view to view each article or recital from all three institutions side-by-side

View Commission's Position on Recital 42

EU Commission's Position

As adopted 14th September, 2016

Recital 42

Remuneration adjustment mechanism

Certain contracts for the exploitation of rights harmonised at Union level are of long duration, offering few possibilities for authors and performers to renegotiate them with their contractual counterparts or their successors in title.

Therefore, without prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in Member States, there should be a remuneration adjustment mechanism for cases where the remuneration originally agreed under a licence or a transfer of rights is disproportionately low compared to the relevant revenues and the benefits derived from the exploitation of the work or the fixation of the performance, including in light of the transparency ensured by this Directive.

The assessment of the situation should take account of the specific circumstances of each case as well as of the specificities and practices of the different content sectors.

Where the parties do not agree on the adjustment of the remuneration, the author or performer should be entitled to bring a claim before a court or other competent authority.

View Council's Position on Recital 42

EU Council's Position

As adopted 25th May, 2018

Recital 42

Remuneration adjustment mechanism

Certain contracts for the exploitation of rights harmonised at Union level are of long duration, offering few possibilities for authors and performers to renegotiate them with their contractual counterparts or their successors in title when the economic value of the rights turns out to be significantly higher than initially estimated.

Therefore, without prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in Member States, a remuneration adjustment mechanism should be provided for cases where the remuneration originally agreed under a licence or a transfer of rights clearly becomes disproportionately low compared to the relevant revenues derived from the subsequent exploitation of the work or fixation of the performance by the contractual counterpart of the author or performer.

The assessment of the situation should take account of the specific circumstances of each case, including the contribution of the author or performer, as well as of the specificities and remuneration practices of the different content sectors, and whether the contract is based on a collective bargaining agreement.

Where the parties do not agree on the adjustment of the remuneration, the author or performer should be entitled to bring a claim before a court or other competent authority. This mechanism should not apply to contracts concluded by entities defined in Article 3(a) and (b) of Directive 2014/26/EU or by other entities subject to the national rules implementing Directive 2014/26/UE.

EU Commission's Position

As adopted 14th September, 2016

View Council's Position on Recital 42

Recital 42

Remuneration adjustment mechanism

Certain contracts for the exploitation of rights harmonised at Union level are of long duration, offering few possibilities for authors and performers to renegotiate them with their contractual counterparts or their successors in title.

Therefore, without prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in Member States, there should be a remuneration adjustment mechanism for cases where the remuneration originally agreed under a licence or a transfer of rights is disproportionately low compared to the relevant revenues and the benefits derived from the exploitation of the work or the fixation of the performance, including in light of the transparency ensured by this Directive.

The assessment of the situation should take account of the specific circumstances of each case as well as of the specificities and practices of the different content sectors.

Where the parties do not agree on the adjustment of the remuneration, the author or performer should be entitled to bring a claim before a court or other competent authority.

EU Council's Position

As adopted 25th May, 2018

View Commission's Position on Recital 42

Recital 42

Remuneration adjustment mechanism

Certain contracts for the exploitation of rights harmonised at Union level are of long duration, offering few possibilities for authors and performers to renegotiate them with their contractual counterparts or their successors in title when the economic value of the rights turns out to be significantly higher than initially estimated.

Therefore, without prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in Member States, a remuneration adjustment mechanism should be provided for cases where the remuneration originally agreed under a licence or a transfer of rights clearly becomes disproportionately low compared to the relevant revenues derived from the subsequent exploitation of the work or fixation of the performance by the contractual counterpart of the author or performer.

The assessment of the situation should take account of the specific circumstances of each case, including the contribution of the author or performer, as well as of the specificities and remuneration practices of the different content sectors, and whether the contract is based on a collective bargaining agreement.

Where the parties do not agree on the adjustment of the remuneration, the author or performer should be entitled to bring a claim before a court or other competent authority. This mechanism should not apply to contracts concluded by entities defined in Article 3(a) and (b) of Directive 2014/26/EU or by other entities subject to the national rules implementing Directive 2014/26/UE.

EU Parliament's Position

As adopted 12th September, 2018

Update 14th September 2018: This proposal is the version adopted by the EU Parliament on 12th September 2018. Emboldened text denotes an amendment.

Recital 42

Remuneration adjustment mechanism

Certain contracts for the exploitation of rights harmonised at Union level are of long duration, offering few possibilities for authors and performers to renegotiate them with their contractual counterparts or their successors in title.

Therefore, without prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in Member States, there should be a remuneration adjustment mechanism for cases where the remuneration originally agreed under a licence or a transfer of rights is disproportionately low compared to the relevant direct and indirect revenues and the benefits derived from the exploitation of the work or the fixation of the performance, including in light of the transparency ensured by this Directive.

The assessment of the situation should take account of the specific circumstances of each case, the specificities and practices of the different content sectors as well as of the nature and the contribution to the work of the author or performer.

Such a contract adjustment request could also be made by the organisation representing the author or performer on his or her behalf, unless the request would be detrimental to the interests of the author or performer.

Where the parties do not agree on the adjustment of the remuneration, the author or performer or a representative organisation appointed by them should on request by the author or performer be entitled to bring a claim before a court or other competent authority.