- within Intellectual Property topic(s)
To answer this question, we reviewed, with the support of artificial intelligence, the judgment of the Court of Justice of the Andean Community in joined proceedings No. 01 and 02-AI-2018, working through some of the most relevant questions about its content, scope, and implications. These are the main conclusions of that exercise.
In this ruling, the Court of Justice of the Andean Community declared that Colombia had failed to comply with the Andean regime on copyright and related rights.
The reason? Several measures required subscription television operators to retransmit certain free-to-air television signals without the authorization of the broadcasting organizations and without allowing those organizations to claim any payment.
Decision 351 grants broadcasting organizations the exclusive right to authorize or prohibit the retransmission of their broadcasts.
Although Colombia justified these measures on grounds such as access to information and pluralism, the Court held that those aims could not override that right.
The Court also clarified that a State may indeed impose must-carry (mandatory retransmission) obligations, but it must do so through mechanisms compatible with the Andean regime and, where appropriate, must guarantee equitable remuneration.
Accordingly, Colombia must adopt measures to ensure the effective exercise of these rights within 90 days of being served notice of the judgment.
In short: a free-to-air signal may be received free of charge, but that does not mean it may be retransmitted free of charge.
Source: Judgment of the CJAC in joined proceedings No. 01 and 02-AI-2018.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]