Pierstone partners plead before the ECJ Grand Chamber in Streamz Case
On 6 and 7 July, the Grand Chamber of the Cour de justice de l'Union européenne held oral hearings in the much-anticipated Streamz case (C-663/24). The Grand Chamber is reserved for complex and/or important cases for the development of EU law. The Streamz case is indeed of paramount importance for EU authors and performers.
In its Act of 19 June 2022, the Belgian legislator transposed DSM Directive 2019/790, i.a. by providing a non-waivable residual remuneration right, subject to mandatory collective management, for authors and performers for the exploitation of their works through streaming and online content sharing. Following challenges brought by social media platforms, streaming platforms and record companies, the Belgian Constitutional Court referred 13 preliminary questions to the ECJ on 26 September 2024.
This week, the ECJ heard:
- Meta, Google, Sony e.a., Spotify, Streamz, Deezer and FLEGA contesting the Act
- SAJ, Vlaamse Nieuwsmedia en Magazines, Sabam, PlayRight SC/CV, SACD e.a. and SOFAM defending the Act
- the Belgian State providing further explanations on the interpretation of the Act
- 7 intervening Member States defending the Belgian mechanism, including Germany, Spain and particularly notable contributions from France (J.-L. Carré), Italy (F. Varonne) and Hungary (Zs. Biró-Tóth)
- the European Commission
Pierstone Partner Fabienne Brison appeared for PlayRight SC/CV, and Partner Alain Strowel for SACD, LaScam, deAuteurs e.a.
Notable arguments in favour of the Act included:
- Art. 18 DSM leaves the exclusive right to communicate/make available to the public intact, in line with Art. 3 InfoSoc Directive 2001/29
- Art. 17 DSM does not contain 'detailed rules for implementing those rights' (see Meta judgment of 12 May 2026 – C-797/23), hence the exercise of the substantive rule is not fully harmonised
- Art. 18 (1) DSM is also enforceable against successors in title of parties to whom authors/performers license/transfer their rights (see Arts. 19-20 DSM), and following the Meta judgment, Member States must ensure that Art. 18 is fully effective and adopt all necessary measures to this end
- Art. 18 (2) DSM leaves Member States a choice to use different mechanisms, of which the residual remuneration right chosen by the Belgian legislator is modelled on Art. 5 Rental Directive 2006/115 and in line with the EU objective of protecting creators, who tend to be in weaker contractual positions when negotiating licences/transfers
- The Belgian system is necessary, feasible (contracts were already concluded by Belgian CMOs), and effective.
The hearings are available in all EU languages on Curia Web TV : https://lnkd.in/dHmG8nzz.
AG Szpunar announced to deliver his Opinion on 19 November. The ECJ will then decide on this important case. Stay tuned!