IRIS 2013-10 INTERNATIONAL Berlin Administrative Court Bans Regional Advertising on National Channel ................................... ..14 COUNCIL OF EUROPE WDR Broadcasting Council Approves Original Live European Court of Human Rights: Belpietro v. Italy .... ... 3 Streaming Services ......................................14 European Court of Human Rights: Von Hannover no. 3 Act Against Dubious Business Practices in Force ....... ..15 v. Germany ............................................ ...4 Parliamentary Assembly: Resolution on National Secu- FR-France rity and Access to Information ......................... ...4 Novel’s Copyright Allegedly Infringed by a Television Se- ries ......................................................15 EUROPEAN UNION CSA Charges France Télévisions with Allowing Excessive Court of Justice of the European Union: National Courts’ Air-time for the Promotion of Works by their Presenters ..16 Jurisdiction for Copyright Infringement in other Member Adoption of Legislation Reforming the Public Audiovisual States ................................................. ...5 Sector ................................................. ..16 General Court: Funding for France Télévisions Validated ... 5 Codicil to the Collective Agreement for the Cinema Sec- European Commission: Public consultation on Crowd- tor Concluded in Favour of the Most Fragile Productions ..17 funding in the EU ...................................... ...6 Under Threat, HADOPI Defends its Achievements ...... ..17 UNITED NATIONS GB-United Kingdom Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination: New General Recommendation Combating Racist Hate Ofcom Issues Determinations in Two ODPS Appeals .... ..18 Speech ................................................ ...7 Ofcom Considers Broadcast of Offensive Material not Justified by its Context ...................................19 Banned Advertisement for Short-term Lender was ‘So- NATIONAL cially Irresponsible’ says ASA .......................... ..19 AT-Austria IE-Ireland New ORF Facebook Ban Temporarily Suspended ....... ...8 Federal Communications Board on Labelling of Split- Pirate Bay Blocked and Three-Strikes Protocol Continues..20 Screen Advertising........................................8 Recent Broadcasting Complaints Decisions ............ ..21 BA-Bosnia And Herzegovina IT-Italy Regulatory Agency Proposes Limitation of Advertising in Council of State Upholds RAI’s Obligation to Provide Pro- Public Service Broadcasting...............................9 grammes Free-to-air to all Distribution Platforms....... ..21 BG-Bulgaria LU-Luxembourg Reports on the Activity of the Council for Electronic Me- dia in 2012 ............................................ ...9 Act on the Creation of a New Media Authority .......... ..22 CY-Cyprus LV-Latvia Amendments Proposed for Law on Public Service Broad- Electronic Media Council Suggests Amendments to Me- caster ................................................. ..10 dia Act...................................................23 Extensive Amendments Proposed for Act on Radio Tele- vision Organisations ................................... ..10 NL-Netherlands Collecting Society VEVAM Cannot Claim Compensation DE-Germany from Cable Companies...................................24 Rhineland-Palatinate Administrative Court of Appeal Finds “Hasseröder Männercamp” Product Placement In- RO-Romania admissible ...............................................11 Audiovisual Media Licence Suspension upon Insolvency Berlin-Brandenburg Administrative Court of Appeal De- Proceedings ........................................... ..24 nies Right to Information on MPs’ Use of Spending Al- Modification and Completion of Law on Romanian Public lowance ............................................... ..11 Broadcaster ........................................... ..25 Schleswig-Holstein Administrative Court Lifts Facebook Fan Page Ban ............................................12 US-United States Administrative Court of Appeal Approves Registration Anti-Revenge Porn Bill and Right to Be Forgotten intro- Data Comparison for Licence Fee Collection ........... ..13 duced in California.......................................26 Editorial Informations Translations: Michelle Ganter, European Audiovisual Observatory (co- Publisher: ordination) Brigitte Auel Katharina Burger France European Audiovisual Observatory 76, allée de la Robertsau Courrèges Paul Green Katherine Parsons Marco Polo Sàrl F-67000 STRASBOURG Erwin Rohwer Roland Schmid Nathalie Sturlèse Tél. : +33 (0) 3 90 21 60 00 Fax : +33 (0) 3 90 21 60 19 Corrections: E-mail: [email protected] www.obs.coe.int Michelle Ganter, European Audiovisual Observatory (co- Comments and Contributions to: ordination) Francisco Javier Cabrera Blázquez, European [email protected] Audiovisual Observatory Annabel Brody, Institute for Executive Director: Information Law (IViR) at the University of Amsterdam (The Susanne Nikoltchev Netherlands) Johanna Fell, European Representative BLM, Editorial Board: Munich (Germany) Amélie Lépinard, Master - International Francisco Javier Cabrera Blázquez, Editor (European and European Affairs, Université de Pau (France) Julie Audiovisual Observatory) Mamou Candelaria van Strien-Reney, Law Faculty, Michael Botein, The Media Center at the New York Law School National University of Ireland, Galway (Ireland) Martin (USA) Media Division of the Directorate of Human Rights of Rupp, Institute of European Media Law (EMR), Saarbrücken the Council of Europe, Strasbourg (France) Andrei Richter, (Germany) Faculty of Journalism, Moscow State University (Russian Distribution: Federation) Peter Matzneller, Institute of European Media Markus Booms, European Audiovisual Observatory Law (EMR), Saarbrücken (Germany) Harald Trettenbrein, Tel.: Directorate General EAC-C-1 (Audiovisual Policy Unit) of +33 (0)3 90 21 60 06; the European Commission, Brussels (Belgium) Tarlach E-mail: [email protected] McGonagle, Institute for Information Law (IViR) at the Web Design: University of Amsterdam (The Netherlands) Coordination: Cyril Chaboisseau, European Audiovisual Council to the Editorial Board: Observatory Development and Integration: www.logidee.com Amélie Blocman, Victoires Éditions Layout: www.acom-europe.com and www.logidee.com Documentation/Press Contact: ISSN 2078-6158 Alison Hindhaugh 2013 European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg Tel.: +33 (0)3 90 21 60 10; (France) E-mail: [email protected] members of the judiciary as defamatory of Lo Forte INTERNATIONAL and Caselli. Belpietro made an application to the Strasbourg COUNCIL OF EUROPE Court, alleging that his conviction for defamation had amounted to a violation of his freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 10 of the Convention. After re- iterating extensively the general principles of its rel- European Court of Human Rights: Belpietro evant case law on the issue, including the balance v. Italy that has to be found between the prosecutors’ right to his reputation based on Article 8 and the newspaper editor’s right to freedom of expression based on Arti- cle 10, the European Court is of the opinion that the The European Court of Human Rights has delivered Italian authorities did not breach Article 10 in finding a new judgment against Italy for interfering with the Belpietro liable for publishing the defamatory article freedom of expression and public statements related of Senator R.I. Although the Court recognises that the to the “war” between judges, prosecutors and the po- article concerned an issue of importance to society lice in the context of combating the Mafia (see also that the public had the right to be informed about, Perna v. Italy (GC), see IRIS 2003-8/2). The judgment it emphasises that some of the allegations against reflects a tension between the freedom of parliamen- Lo Forte and Caselli were very serious, without suf- tary speech on the one hand, and the restrictions and ficient objective basis. Furthermore, the Court refers obligations on the media reproducing or publishing to the obligation of an editor of a newspaper to control statements by politicians covered by their parliamen- what is published, in order to prevent the publication tary immunity on the other hand (see also Cordova of defamatory articles in particular. This duty does no.1 and no.2 v. Italy, see IRIS 2003-7/2). not disappear when it concerns an article written by a member of parliament, as otherwise, according to the Court, this would amount to an absolute freedom The applicant in this case is Maurizio Belpietro, who of the press to publish any statement of members of at the relevant time was editor of the national daily parliament in the exercise of their parliamentary man- newspaper Il Giornale. In court in Strasbourg he com- date, regardless of its defamatory or insulting charac- plained about his conviction for defamation after pub- ter. The Court also refers to the fact that Senator R.I. lishing an article by an Italian Senator, R.I. The article had already been convicted in the past for defamation by the Senator was a robust opinion piece analysing of public officials and to the fact that the newspaper the lack of results in combating the Mafia in Palermo. had given a prominent place to the Senator’s article The Senator more particularly criticised the Italian ju- in the newspaper. However, as the Court considers diciary and especially accused some members of the the sanction of imprisonment and the high award of public prosecutors’ office in Palermo of using