Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 July 2009 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Højesteret - Denmark) - Infopaq International A/S v Danske Dagblades Forening
(Copyright - Information society - Directive 2001/29/EC - Articles 2 and 5 - Literary and artistic works - Concept of 'reproduction' - Reproduction 'in part' - Reproduction of short extracts of literary works - Newspaper articles - Temporary and transient reproductions - Technological process consisting in scanning of articles followed by conversion into text file, electronic processing of the reproduction, storage of part of that reproduction and printing out)
Language of the case: Danish
Referring court
Højesteret
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Infopaq International A/S
Defendant: Danske Dagblades Forening
Re:
Preliminary ruling - Højesteret - Interpretation of Articles 2 and 5(1) and (5) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10) - Company the principal activity of which consists in drawing up summaries of newspaper articles by means of scanning - Storage of an extract from an article consisting of a search word and the five words both preceding and following it - Temporary acts of reproduction
Operative part of the judgment
1. An act occurring during a data capture process, which consists of storing an extract of a protected work comprising 11 words and printing out that extract, is such as to come within the concept of reproduction in part within the meaning of Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, if the elements thus reproduced are the expression of the intellectual creation of their author; it is for the national court to make this determination;
2. The act of printing out an extract of 11 words, during a data capture process such as that at issue in the main proceedings, does not fulfil the condition of being transient in nature as required by Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29 and, therefore, that process cannot be carried out without the consent of the relevant rightholders.
____________1 - OJ C 64, 8.3.2008.