In the UK Lord Freyberg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerian_Freyberg,_3rd_Baron_Freyberg) has been doing some campaigning in this area.
He secured a debate in the House of Lords last month on the question, which includes some data https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2018-09-12/debates/A4C8C41E-6523-4052-B1...
Unfortunately, most of those speaking on the other side of the debate, despite presumably having been briefed by institutions with which they were connected, were very short on data, typically going no further than saying museums and galleries need income from all the different sources they can get.
Here are a couple of older reports from November last year, when Freyberg first put down some questions on the subject:
https://www.arthistorynews.com/articles/4891_UK_art_historians_call_for_abol...
https://www.theartnewspaper.com/news/museums-right-to-charge-image-fees-is-c...
He has been continuing to ask written questions to drag out some more hard data:
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-st...
(see eg 16 October 2018)
... though so far the DCMS seems to have avoided giving him very much back.
He's somebody who it may be worth being in contact with, if we're doing work in this area, as he's clearly plugged in to a broader campaign in the UK, and may be able to get some information from the UK IPO as to how discussions are going, and what position the UK have been taking. (As a rule the UK IPO, coming from a patent background, can be a bit more liberal on IP policy issues, aware of IP bringing both costs and benefits; the DCMS tend to be somewhat less so; but I think it is the UK IPO that has the policy lead on the Copyright Directive negotiations.)
-- James.
--- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com