Online cinemas against the use of content from foreign copyright holders without permission

Online cinemas and TV channels opposed the idea of ​​State Duma deputies to use the content of foreign copyright holders without their permission. They propose to give access to such content only to legal sites that had licenses for it before the outbreak of hostilities in Ukraine, as well as to abandon the intermediary in raising funds for its free use. But we can also talk about a complete rejection of the initiative, which was also opposed by the committee of the Federation Council on constitutional legislation.

“Kommersant” got acquainted with the letter of the “Media Communications Union” (ISS, unites Channel One, Rostelecom, MTS, Tricolor, VGTRK, Gazprom Media, etc.) to the head of the State Duma Committee on Economic Policy Maxim Topilin dated June 13. It says that the bill of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation on the use of works by foreign copyright holders without their permission violates the interests of specialized market participants and may lead to “the termination of their activities.” “It also creates the risk of using this mechanism to legalize and popularize pirated resources, which will negatively affect domestic producers and owners of exclusive rights to content,” the authors of the document write.

The bill was submitted to the State Duma in April. It provides for changes to the 46-FZ of March 4, 2022. According to the document, translation, public display, reproduction and distribution of copies of works with exclusive foreign rights to them will be allowed without permission, but with payment of remuneration. All reports on the use of works must be submitted to an authorized organization for the collection and distribution of funds.

The project also suggests that the government determine the list of owners of the exclusive right to works whose actions (inaction) lead to the inaccessibility of the work in the Russian Federation, explains Anna Sarbukova, leading legal adviser in the intellectual property practice at EBR law firm: “The government should establish a list of copyright holders who have left the Russian market and whose actions led to the unavailability of their content on the territory of the Russian Federation.

In the spring of 2022, many foreign streaming platforms left Russia, including Netflix. Universal, Disney, Sony, Warner and other Hollywood studios have suspended operations in the country and have begun revoking their film licenses. This has led to an influx of users to pirated video services.

This is not the first bill, which, according to market participants, “neutralizes the state’s efforts to combat piracy.” On June 27, the State Duma adopted amendments to the Civil Code on intellectual property rights (see Kommersant dated June 29).

They allow considering a multiple violation of the rights of several right holders as one and collecting general compensation. At that time, lawyers and industry participants argued that this measure could lead to an increase in pirate resources.

The ISS proposes a number of amendments to the bill. In particular, the union insists on the rejection of an intermediary to raise funds. In addition, if there is a license agreement concluded with a foreign copyright holder, it is the Russian licensee that should be given the right to decide whether the work is inaccessible, the document says.

Representatives of the union also propose to give access to content not to everyone, but taking into account “mandatory” license agreements in force on February 24, 2022. For example, if the content is not legally available anywhere, but it is on Kinopoisk, it cannot be distributed without permission, a Kommersant source in the industry explains: “That is, as long as the film is on at least one platform, it is forbidden to “pirate” it.”

The bill of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and the Federation Council Committee on Constitutional Legislation and State Building do not support the bill, Kommersant’s interlocutor added. The text of the committee’s response dated June 14, which Kommersant has read, says that it is not clear from the text of the CPRF bill in what form and in what order reports will be submitted to the organization for the collection and distribution of remuneration. Taking into account the committee’s position, market participants are counting on a complete rejection of the initiative.

Julia Yurasova