28.1.2012
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 25/10
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 24 November 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție — Romania) — Circul Globus București (Circ & Variete Globus București) v Uniunea Compozitorilor și Muzicologilor din România — Asociația pentru Drepturi de Autor — UCMR — ADA
(Case C-283/10) (1)
(Approximation of laws - Copyright and related rights - Directive 2001/29/EC - Article 3 - Concept of ‘communication of a work to a public present at the place where the communication originates’ - Dissemination of musical works in the presence of an audience without paying the collective management organisation the appropriate copyright fee - Entry into contracts, with the authors of the works, for copyright waiver - Scope of Directive 2001/29)
2012/C 25/15
Language of the case: Romanian
Referring court
Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Circul Globus București (Circ & Variete Globus București)
Defendant: Uniunea Compozitorilor și Muzicologilor din România — Asociația pentru Drepturi de Autor — UCMR — ADA
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Inalta Curte de Casație și Justiție — Interpretation of Article 3(1) 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 (OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10) — Dissemination of musical works in the presence of an audience without paying the collective management organisation the appropriate copyright fee — Entry into contracts, with the authors of the works, for copyright waiver — Concept of ‘communication of a work to a public present at the place where the communication originates’ — Scope of Directive 2001/29
Operative part of the judgment
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 and, more specifically, Article 3(1) thereof, must be interpreted as referring only to communication to a public which is not present at the place where the communication originates, to the exclusion of any communication of a work which is carried out directly in a place open to the public using any means of public performance or direct presentation of the work.
(1) OJ C 234, 28.8.2010.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy