CJEU tells Czech spa to pay copyright fees
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ordered a Czech spa company to pay a collecting society for playing music on its premises.
In a ruling today, February 27, the CJEU said rules under Czech copyright legislation that exempt healthcare businesses from paying licensing fees conflict with EU directive 2001/29.
The case was referred from the Plzeň Regional Court in the Czech Republic.
The collecting society, OSA, argued that Léčebné lázně owes it CZK 546,995 ($27,300) for playing songs through radio and TV sets in the bedrooms of its spas from May 2008 to December 2009.
While OSA conceded that Czech copyright legislation does exempt healthcare companies from paying licensing fees, it said the legislation runs contrary to the 2001/29 directive.
Léčebné lázně denied there is such a conflict, adding that even if there was one the directive cannot be invoked in a dispute “between individuals”.
The CJEU said the 2001/29 directive does not exempt spas from paying licensing fees and, as a result, the exceptions under Czech legislation do not comply with the EU directive.
But the court said collecting societies tied up in a dispute with individuals cannot rely on the 2001/29 directive to set aside national legislation that runs contrary to the directive.
“The national court hearing such a case is required to interpret that legislation, so far as possible, in the light of the wording and purpose of the directive in order to achieve an outcome consistent with the objective pursued by the directive,” said the court.
Léčebné lázně, which runs spas internationally, also accused OSA of abusing its monopoly position in the market, arguing that its fees are “disproportionately high” compared with copyright societies’ prices in neighbouring countries. Therefore, Léčebné lázně said, its freedom to provide services is restricted.
The CJEU said such a monopoly – whereby one collecting society operates solely in a member state – is justified and compliant with EU law, because that system is “necessary in order to attain the objective of protecting intellectual property rights”.
But the court added a caveat. It said collecting society fees that are “appreciably higher” than those in other EU states or “excessive in relation to the economic value of the service provided” do indicate an abuse of a dominant position. The Czech court, where the case now returns, will have to decide that point.
