Bulgaria has implemented the Press review (Art. 5.3(c) 1st part InfoSoc) exception in Article 24, para 1, p.5 of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law (Член 24, ал.1, т.5 от Закона за авторското право и сродните му права). The national exception is slightly more restrictive than the EU exception.
Implementation summary:
This exception allows for the re-use of articles on current economic, political, and religious topics solely by way of reproduction and by mass media only. The exception does not extend to the rights of performers, phonograms producers, film producers, and broadcasting organisations. The author’s opt-out option is very broadly interpreted by courts.
Implementation details:
Beneficiaries:
- mass media
Purposes:
- informatory purpose
Usage:
- reproduction
Subject Matter:
- articles on current economic, political and religious topics
Compensation:
- no compensation required
Attribution:
- indicating the source and the name of the author is required, unless impossible
Other Conditions:
- articles must be already made available to the public
- authors can explicitly forbid use under the exception (opt-out option)
Introduced/last updated: 01 January 2003
Remarks: In terms of beneficiaries, no definition or express a judicial interpretation of ‘mass media’ is available, but Courts generally include all websites in. Although the exception covers reproduction only, all available case law concerns making it available by websites and online news providers, and no distinction is made by courts between the two types of use.
The exception covers copyrighted works only. It does not extend to performers (art. 84), phonograms producers (art. 90), film producers (art. 90v), and broadcasting organisations (art. 93). The respective referencing provisions do not reference this particular exception. Possible rationale: While no legal definition of “articles” exists, the constant interpretation suggests that the exception covers literary works exclusively.
Subject matter further limited by case-law – 'articles' must be journalistic and 'creative elements should not prevail' - some articles on current events found 'too' creative to fall under the exception by Courts.
The indication of both the source and the name of the author are cumulative conditions for the application of the exception.
Very liberal interpretation of the Opt-Out option by Courts - the rightsholder can express their disagreement to free use of their article post factum, by the act of filing a claim for copyright infringement. Opt-out by the publisher is sufficient. No deliberation as to how the publisher exercises the author’s Opt-Out option is available.
