Directive (EU) 2019/790 — Copyright in the Digital Single M

Does our platform need upload filters — and what happens if a rightholder claims we are not doing enough to keep infringing content off?

Any online content-sharing service provider that stores and gives the public access to large amounts of user-uploaded copyright-protected works must obtain licences or demonstrate best efforts to prevent infringement — failure exposes the platform to direct liability for unauthorised communication to the public, with sanctions set by each Member State's transposition since 7 June 2021 [Art. 17].

Short Answer

The DSM Directive rewrites the liability rules for platforms that host user-uploaded content: they perform an act of communication to the public and must either obtain authorisation from rightholders or demonstrate best efforts to ensure unavailability of specifically notified works [Art. 17(4)]. It also creates a new related right for press publishers, granting them exclusive reproduction and making-available rights for online use of their publications for two years [Art. 15]. Authors and performers gain binding transparency, remuneration-adjustment, and rights-revocation mechanisms against exploiters [Art. 19–22]. Mandatory exceptions for text and data mining, digital teaching, and cultural heritage preservation apply across all Member States [Art. 3–6].

Who is affected

Online content-sharing service providers whose main or one of whose main purposes is to store and give the public access to a large amount of copyright-protected works uploaded by users, organised and promoted for profit-making purposes [Art. 2(6)]. Press publishers established in a Member State, for the new press publisher right [Art. 15]. Research organisations and cultural heritage institutions, for the TDM and preservation exceptions [Art. 3, Art. 6]. Authors and performers who license or transfer rights for exploitation in return for remuneration [Art. 19]. A start-up exemption applies to services available in the EU for less than three years with annual turnover below EUR 10 million and fewer than 5 million average monthly unique visitors [Art. 17(6)].

Deadline

The transposition deadline expired on 7 June 2021 [Art. 29(1)]. All obligations under national implementing laws are permanently enforceable. The Commission was required to report on extended collective licensing by 17 April 2022, and to carry out a comprehensive review of the Directive's functioning by 17 April 2025 [Art. 27(1)–(2)]. The two-year press publisher right runs from 6 June 2019 for each publication [Art. 15(4)].

Risk

The Directive does not prescribe harmonised sanctions; each Member State defines penalties in its national transposition law. Platform liability under Art. 17 means rightholders can seek injunctive relief and damages under national copyright law for unauthorised communication to the public. Non-compliant platforms that fail to demonstrate best efforts lose the liability shield entirely [Art. 17(4)]. Authors and performers may bring remuneration adjustment claims before courts or competent authorities [Art. 20].

Proof

Legal status

• In force
• as of 2026-04-17
• Original version as published in OJ L 130, 17.5.2019. No consolidated version with substantive amendments exists.

Primary sources

• EUR-Lex — Full text of the legal act
• European Commission — Copyright — EU copyright policy

What to do now

Legal / DPO

•Map every licence and transfer agreement with authors and performers to identify where the new transparency obligation applies — you must provide regular, comprehensive, and comprehensible revenue reporting at least once per year [Art. 19(1)].
•Review press licensing arrangements: publishers now hold their own two-year exclusive right for online reproduction and making available of press publications, and authors are entitled to an appropriate share of the revenues [Art. 15(1), Art. 15(5)].
•Ensure contracts with content-sharing platforms include mechanisms for rightholders to provide the 'relevant and necessary information' required for the platform to fulfil its best-efforts obligations under the liability framework [Art. 17(4)(b)].

Compliance

•Establish an internal process for receiving and acting on sufficiently substantiated rightholder notices to disable access to or remove specific infringing content expeditiously [Art. 17(4)(c)].
•Implement an effective, accessible complaint and redress mechanism that includes human review of every content-blocking or removal decision, with results communicated without undue delay [Art. 17(9)].
•Verify that any text and data mining activities within the organisation meet the conditions of the mandatory exceptions — scientific TDM requires lawful access and secure storage [Art. 3]; general TDM is permissible only where rightholders have not reserved their rights in a machine-readable manner [Art. 4].

IT / Security

•Deploy content-recognition technology proportionate to the service's size and type of content, in line with high industry standards of professional diligence, to prevent re-upload of works for which rightholders have provided reference material [Art. 17(4)(b)].
•Ensure that content-filtering systems do not process personal data beyond what is strictly necessary — users must not be identifiable through the filtering mechanism, and all data processing must comply with the GDPR [Art. 17(9), Recital 70].
•Maintain secure environments for retained copies made under the text and data mining research exception, preventing unauthorised access to reproduced datasets [Art. 3(2)].

Product / Engineering

•Build user-facing upload flows that inform users about permitted uses — quotation, criticism, review, caricature, parody, and pastiche must remain available and must not be blocked by automated filtering [Art. 17(7)].
•Integrate a complaint and redress workflow into the content management interface so that users whose uploads are blocked or removed can challenge the decision through a process subject to human review [Art. 17(9)].
•Implement machine-readable rights-reservation signals (e.g. metadata, robots.txt) that allow rightholders to opt out of general text and data mining, and ensure the platform respects those signals [Art. 4(3)].

Key Terms

Online content-sharing service provider: An information society service whose main or one of whose main purposes is to store and give the public access to a large amount of copyright-protected works uploaded by its users, which it organises and promotes for profit-making purposes [Art. 2(6)].
Press publication: A collection consisting mainly of literary works of a journalistic nature, constituting an individual item within a periodical or regularly updated publication under a single title, for the purpose of providing information related to news or other topics, published in any media on the initiative of a service provider under its editorial responsibility [Art. 2(4)].
Text and data mining (TDM): Any automated analytical technique aimed at analysing text and data in digital form in order to generate information which includes, but is not limited to, patterns, trends, and correlations [Art. 2(2)].
Research organisation: A university, research institute, or any other entity whose primary goal is to conduct scientific research or to do so together with the provision of educational services, on a not-for-profit basis or by reinvesting all profits in its research, or pursuant to a public-interest mission recognised by a Member State [Art. 2(1)].
Cultural heritage institution: A publicly accessible library or museum, an archive, or a film or audio heritage institution, as defined by the Directive, holding works permanently in its collection [Art. 2(3)].
Out-of-commerce work: A work or other subject matter that is not available to the public through customary channels of commerce, after a reasonable effort to determine its availability has been made [Art. 8(5)].
Communication to the public: The act of making a work available to the public by wire or wireless means, including making it available so that members of the public may access it from a place and at a time individually chosen by them — the central concept establishing platform liability under Art. 17 [Art. 3(1) Directive 2001/29/EC, applied via Art. 17(1)].

Frequently Asked Questions

Which platforms are classified as 'online content-sharing service providers' under Art. 17?

A service whose main or one of whose main purposes is to store and give the public access to a large amount of copyright-protected works or other subject matter uploaded by its users, which it organises and promotes for profit-making purposes [Art. 2(6)]. Not-for-profit online encyclopaedias, not-for-profit educational and scientific repositories, open-source software development platforms, electronic communications providers, online marketplaces, and B2B cloud services are explicitly excluded [Art. 2(6), Recital 62].

What must a platform do to avoid liability under Art. 17?

The provider must demonstrate that it (a) made best efforts to obtain authorisation, (b) made best efforts, in accordance with high industry standards of professional diligence, to ensure the unavailability of specific works for which rightholders have provided relevant and necessary information, and (c) acted expeditiously upon receiving a sufficiently substantiated notice to disable access or remove the work and made best efforts to prevent future uploads [Art. 17(4)].

Does the press publisher right apply to hyperlinking or quoting individual words?

No. The right does not extend to acts of hyperlinking, and the use of individual words or very short extracts of a press publication is outside its scope [Art. 15(1), Recital 58]. The right also does not affect private or non-commercial uses by individual users [Art. 15(1)].

What is the start-up exemption for new platforms?

Services that have been available in the EU for less than three years and have an annual turnover below EUR 10 million benefit from lighter obligations: they must only demonstrate that they made best efforts to obtain authorisation and that they acted expeditiously on takedown notices. However, if their average monthly unique visitors exceed 5 million, they must also demonstrate best efforts to prevent re-upload of notified works [Art. 17(6)].

Can rightholders opt out of text and data mining?

For the general TDM exception under Art. 4, rightholders may expressly reserve their rights in an appropriate manner, including through machine-readable means such as metadata and terms of service [Art. 4(3)]. However, they cannot override the mandatory research TDM exception under Art. 3, which applies regardless of any reservation [Art. 4(2)].

What transparency obligations do exploiters owe to authors and performers?

Any party to whom rights have been licensed or transferred must provide the author or performer with up-to-date, relevant, and comprehensive information on all modes of exploitation, all revenues generated, and remuneration due, at least once per year and in a comprehensible manner [Art. 19(1)]. Where the direct contractual partner does not hold all the necessary information, the author or performer may request additional data from any sub-licensee [Art. 19(2)].

When can an author revoke an exclusive licence?

Where an exclusive licence or transfer has been granted and the work is not being exploited, the author or performer may revoke the exclusivity, in whole or in part, after a reasonable period following the conclusion of the agreement. Member States may provide for specific conditions and timeframes [Art. 22].

Assessment Factors & Checklist

Premium

Start 7-day free trial

Questions for Your Lawyer

Premium

Start 7-day free trial

Conclusion & Summary

Premium

Start 7-day free trial

Detailed analysis with source links.

Schalten Sie die KI-Analyse frei — mit markierten Fundstellen und direkten Links zu EUR-Lex. 7 Tage kostenlos testen.

Start 7-day free trial →

Keine Kreditkarte heute. Kündigung jederzeit.