Copyright issues surrounding the use of services like Google Instant Preview

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

2 BASICS

2.1 Technical framework

2.1.1 Basic function of search engines

2.1.2 Function of a website preview

2.2 Basics of Copyrights and Author’s Rights

2.2.1 Differences and similarities of the two concepts

2.2.2 Territoriality principle of copyright

2.2.3 International treaties

2.2.4 European legislation

3 WORK IN EUROPEAN COPYRIGHT

3.1 Legal provisions defining original work

3.2 The Infopaq Decision

3.3 Requirement of an original work

4 COPYRIGHT PROTECTION OF WEBPAGES

4.1 Technical basics of a webpage

4.2 Copyright protection as a computer program

4.2.1 Definition of computer program

4.2.2 Can a website be defined as a computer program

4.2.3 Graphical interface of a website

4.3 Copyright protection as a literary or artistic work

4.3.1 Website as an original work

4.3.2 Creativity requirement

4.4 Copyright protection as a database

4.4.1 Definition of a database

4.4.2 Website as a database

4.4.3 Website protection under the sui generis right

4.5 Copyright protection of parts of a website

4.5.1 Copyright protection of independent works

4.5.1.1 Copyright protection of texts

4.5.1.2 Copyright protection of images

4.5.1.3 Copyright protection of computer programs

4.5.1.4 Copyright protection of video files

4.5.1.5 Copyright protection of audio files

4.5.2 Effect of works integrated in a website

5 CACHING OF WEBSITES

5.1 Copyright infringement of caching

5.1.1 Infringement in the context of computer programs

5.1.2 Infringement in the context of a literary or artistic work

5.1.3 Infringement in the context of databases

5.2 Cached link

5.2.1 Communication and making available

5.2.2 The public

6 THE WEBSITE PREVIEW

6.1 Creation of the preview

6.1.1 Direct or indirect reproduction

6.1.2 Temporary or permanent reproduction

6.1.3 Reproduction by any means and in any form

6.1.4 Reproduction in whole or in part

6.2 Recall of the website preview

6.2.1 Making available to the public

6.2.2 Downsizing of the preview image

6.2.2.1 Reproduction as smaller image

6.2.2.3 Making available as a smaller image

7 LIMITATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS

7.1 Caching of the website

7.1.1 Exceptions for the reproduction of computer programs

7.1.2 Exceptions for the reproduction of databases

7.1.3 Exceptions for the reproduction of literary or artistic works

7.1.3.1 Article 5 I InfoSoc

7.1.3.2 Article 5 II (c)

7.1.3.3 Article 5 III (c)

7.1.3.4 Article 5 III (d)

7.1.3.5 Further exceptions

7.2 Making available of the website preview

7.3 Implied consent

7.4 Other measures

8 CONCLUSION

Objectives and Research Themes

This thesis examines the legal challenges posed by "Google Instant Preview" under European copyright law, specifically focusing on whether the automatic generation and display of website previews constitute copyright infringement and whether existing exceptions are sufficient to permit such services.

• Legal requirements for copyright protection of websites (as programs, databases, or creative works).
• Copyright implications of search engine crawling and caching processes.
• Evaluation of "making available to the public" in the context of search result snippets and visual previews.
• Analysis of the "Infopaq" decision and its impact on the definition of original works in the EU.
• Assessment of potential limitations and exceptions within European copyright directives.

Excerpt from the Book

Summary of Chapters

1 INTRODUCTION: This chapter introduces the legal controversy surrounding "Google Instant Preview" and outlines the research objective regarding copyright protection in the digital environment.

2 BASICS: This section provides the technical groundwork for how search engines function and outlines the core differences between common law and civil law copyright traditions.

3 WORK IN EUROPEAN COPYRIGHT: This chapter analyzes the definition of an "original work" in EU law, specifically focusing on the implications of the "Infopaq" decision.

4 COPYRIGHT PROTECTION OF WEBPAGES: This chapter explores whether websites can be protected as computer programs, databases, or artistic works, and evaluates the status of individual components like text and images.

5 CACHING OF WEBSITES: This chapter addresses the legal implications of search engine caching and whether these processes constitute copyright infringement.

6 THE WEBSITE PREVIEW: This chapter investigates the legal nature of creating and displaying website preview images, and whether they infringe on the reproduction or communication rights.

7 LIMITATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS: This section critically examines whether existing exceptions in European law, such as temporary reproduction or quotation, offer a defense for search engine activities.

8 CONCLUSION: The final chapter summarizes the findings, arguing that current EU copyright law is too narrow to address the benefits and realities of advanced search engine features like Instant Preview.

Keywords

Copyright Law, European Union, Search Engines, Google Instant Preview, Computer Programs, Databases, Infopaq Decision, Originality, Reproduction Right, Making Available to the Public, Caching, Exceptions and Limitations, Fair Use, Implied Consent, Web Crawler.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the primary focus of this thesis?

The work focuses on the copyright issues raised by Google's "Instant Preview" function and whether such features are compatible with European copyright directives.

Which central topics are addressed?

It covers the definition of original works, the categorization of websites, the legality of caching, and the scope of copyright exceptions for search engines.

What is the main research question?

The research asks if current European legislation is sufficiently equipped to handle modern search engine technologies or if a new interpretative approach is required.

Which scientific methods are applied?

The author uses a legal-dogmatic analysis, examining European Directives, international treaties, and relevant case law from the European Court of Justice and national courts.

What is covered in the main section of the paper?

The main section moves from the technical basics of search engines to a detailed legal analysis of whether websites and their components deserve copyright protection, leading into a discussion on infringement and potential legal exemptions.

What are the key terms that characterize this work?

Key terms include "original work," "author's own intellectual creation," "reproduction right," "caching," and "implied consent."

How does the Infopaq decision influence the author's argument?

The Infopaq decision is pivotal because it establishes a harmonized definition of "original work" across the EU, emphasizing the "author’s own intellectual creation" standard which the author applies to website design.

Why does the author consider implied consent problematic?

The author argues that while implied consent is a practical solution for search engine functionality, it lacks legal certainty and often conflicts with the requirement for explicit permission in copyright law.