This provision can only come into effect by a court decision. If some online platform does not nee this mechanism, it simply will not use it. That’s all. And for some of the industrial manufacturers, digital platforms, theaters, book publishers, it is impossible to work today without such a norm. With the content that has already been purchase, it’s understandable. But what about the new releases or the music market? Will we be able to buy somewhere new films made by, for example, Universal or Disney studios, or series from Netflix?
In the territory of the Russian
Federation applies to the copyright holder and tries to obtain rights in accordance with the norms provide for by international conventions and Russian civil law. If he receives an unreasonable refusal, then compulsory licensing is possible. So I think the problem is solve. Does compulsory licensing conflict with the Berne Convention Palau B2B List for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and the International Agreement on Trade-Relate Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)? I don’t see any major contradictions. All the information that is currently circulating on the network is free interpretations of specific people.
After all, the presence of such
Even if a claim for a compulsory license is file, the right holder has every opportunity to protect his interests, including proving in court that the refusal to grant a license to this or that content is due to justifie reasons: the search for a more efficient distributor or negotiations on more Mobile Lead favorable commercial terms and etc. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that when discussions began in the Russian Federation on the mechanism of compulsory licenses, the US Treasury immediately lifte restrictions on US copyright holders relate to the protection of their rights in Russia.