+1 to Mathias's point here. EU access-to-document type cases don't necessarily impact the ownership of IP / question of whether something is PD.While I've not fully analysed the copyright question for this particular scenario - or even had time to fully digest the new CJEU ruling (and what follows cannot be considered WMF's position on anything), I see that the deletion discussion was already closed as a Speedy Keep. So since things are moving pretty quickly, I'll just note for now that the European Commission seems to take the position that the mere inclusion of international standards (drafted by third parties, not by or for the European Commission) into EU law does not result in that standard being released to the PD. This is discussed here [1].I have found an example: inclusion of IFRS accounting standards into EU law; see Recital 14 here [2] ("The copyright, the database rights, and any other intellectual property rights in the IFRS and related interpretations issued by the International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee are owned by the IFRS Foundation. A copyright notice should therefore be included in the Annex to this Regulation."). The copyright notice that it refers to appears in the Annex to that law[3], and is worded: "Reproduction allowed within the European Economic Area. All existing rights reserved outside the EEA, with the exception of the right to reproduce for the purposes of personal use or other fair dealing. Further information can be obtained from the IASB at www.iasb.org"[3] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2023.237.01.0001.01.ENG#d1e91-4-1Regards,Phil_______________________________________________On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 at 11:51, Mathias Schindler <mathias.schindler@gmail.com> wrote:Hi,Thanks for sharing the link. Contrary to the subject line, I get the impression that the court did not answer the question on the public domain (as in copyright) status of those harmonized standards that are referenced by EU law. It only answered a specific question on the EU access to documents law and left the second question unanswered. If someone had more time looking at the decision, I would be happy to see a clarification if I am mistaken.Mathias_______________________________________________On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 2:25 PM Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki@gmail.com> wrote:The CJEU today ruled for Carl Malamud against the European Commission in
C‑588/21 (Public.Resource.Org and Right to Know v. European Commission):
https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=283443&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=6375509
https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/p1_4324488/en/
I've therefore opened a discussion on Commons:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Public_domain_status_of_European_harmonised_standards
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:EN_301_549_V3.2.1_(2021-03).pdf
Some relevant snippets from the ruling:
«a harmonised standard, adopted on the basis of a directive [...] forms
part of EU law»
«the rule of law, which requires free access to EU law for all natural
or legal persons of the European Union»
«there is an overriding public interest [...] justifying the disclosure
of the requested harmonised standards»
«As is apparent [...] the Commission should have acknowledged [...] the
existence of an overriding public interest»
Best,
Federico
_______________________________________________
Publicpolicy mailing list -- publicpolicy@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to publicpolicy-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Publicpolicy mailing list -- publicpolicy@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to publicpolicy-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Publicpolicy mailing list -- publicpolicy@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to publicpolicy-leave@lists.wikimedia.org