Avtalslicensens förhållande till konkurrensrätten
När strider utövandet av en avtalslicens mot konkurrenslagstiftningen?
CopyrightLicensing agreements chapter 3a 42 a § URLCompetition lawAbuse of dominant positionArticle 102 TFEURestrictive agreementsArticle 101 TFEUUpphovsrättAvtalslicens 3 a kap 42 a § URLKonkurrensrättMissbruk av dominerande ställning artikel 102 FEUFKonkurrensbegränsande avtal artikel 101 FEUF
AbstractCopyright is designed to not interfere with society's general and overriding interest of effective competition. An effective market competition benefits consumers by lowering prices, raising the quality and expands the range of goods and services.The purpose of the paper is to investigate if the collecting societies licensing violates competition laws. On the basis of the investigation regarding the bill for a new Swedish copyright law (URL), mainly the new wording that regulates the license agreement, corresponds to the EU competition rules and customs within the area.The collecting societies licensing violates the competition laws in the following cases? Discrimination of members because of nationality? Authors transferring their sole rights to global exploitation? The collecting society have the right to manage the rights after the author have left as a member? Users that are established abroad do not get access to the repertoire of the collecting societies, the same goes for concerted practice if this is the purpose or result? Parallel behaviours that cannot be explained objectively? Dividing the market? Fixed Prices? Refusal to sign multi-territorial licenses? Apply different conditions for equivalent transactions resulting in competition disadvantages for a company that cannot be justified by reasonable causesCurrently there are no indications that the new bill to a new URL violates EU law. The author of the paper thinks this may change if the collective management extends, so that other member states get the extended license agreements, then the single market is affected by the competition restriction that the new bill to the URL mean. The author of the paper thinks that the bill for a new URL should be changed so that a collective society will not get monopoly to sign licenses with extended license agreements.