AVRUPA BİRLİĞİ HUKUKUNDA BASIN YAYINCILARINA TANINAN BAĞLANTILI HAKLAR

Abstract

Basın yayıncıları, daha önce yatırımlarının karşılığını gazete ve dergi gibi basılı materyal satışından ve reklam gelirinden sağlamaktaydı. Ancak son yıllarda haberin dijitalleşmesi, okuyucunun ve gelirin dijitale kaymasına yol açtı ve bu gelirin büyük bir kısmı basın yayıncılarına dönmedi. Google ve Facebook gibi bilgi toplumu hizmet sağlayıcıları (information society service providers), içerik üretmek yerine başkalarının içeriklerini kullanarak doğrudan veya dolaylı gelir elde etmektedir. Bu “başkaları” arasında basın yayıncıları da vardır. Dijital çağda gazeteler daha çok okunmakla birlikte basın yayıncılarının reklam gelirleri dramatik bir şekilde düşmekte ve bunlar yatırımlarının dönüşünü alamamaktadır. Tespit edebildiğimiz kadarıyla ilk kez Almanya’da 2009 yılında dijital tehdide karşı çare aranmaya başlanmış olup önce Almanya’da (2013), daha sonra İspanya’da (2014) konuya ilişkin düzenlemeler yapıldı. Anılan düzenlemeler sonuç vermeyince konu Avrupa Birliği (AB) düzeyinde ele alındı. Bu bağlamda AB, telif hukukunu dijital çağa uydurmak için kabul ettiği 2019/790 sayılı Dijital Tek Pazar Yönergesiyle (DSM Directive) basın yayıncılarına (press publicatior) bağlantılı hak statüsü tanıdı (m. 15). Yeni hakların (çoğaltma ve umuma erişimi sağlama/making avaliable to the public) konusu, basın yayınlarıdır (press publications). Anılan haklar, bu yayınları çevrimiçi (online) kullanan bilgi toplumu hizmet sağlayıcılarını hedef aldı. Bu gelişme telif hukuku tarihinde yeni bir aşamayı ifade ediyor. Basın yayıncılarının karşılaştıkları sorunların çözümü bağlamında AB’de tanınan yeni bağlantılı haklar, ilgili çevrelerde yoğun tartışmalara yol açtı. Bu tartışmaların gölgesinde bir yandan dünyada hukuki düzenlemeler (Avustralya gibi) yapılırken, diğer yandan bilgi toplumu hizmet sağlayıcıları, basın yayıncılarıyla görüşmeler yaparak sorunun çözümü için çaba sarf etmeye başladı. Henüz toplu hak takibi gibi temel telif problemlerini çözemeyen ülkemizde, konuya ilişkin ne bir mevzuat ne de uygulama vardır. Çalışmamızda, gerek Almanya ve İspanya tecrübesi ve gerekse AB’deki düzenleme ve bu düzenlemeyi hayata geçiren Fransa tecrübesi dikkate alınarak ülkemizde sorunun çözümüne yönelik öneriler getirilecektir.

Keywords

• Telif Hakları
• Bağlantılı Haklar
• Basın Yayıncıları
• Bilgi Toplumu Hizmet Sağlayıcıları
• Çoğaltma Hakkı
• Umuma Erişimi Sağlama Hakkı

RELATED RIGHTS GIVEN TO THE PRESS PUBLISHERS IN EUROPEAN UNION LAW

Abstract

Before the digital age, press publishers received return on their investments from the sale of printed materials such as newspapers and magazines, and from advertising revenue. However, the digitization of news in recent years led to the shifting of readership and revenue to digital environment, and a large portion of this revenue did not return to press publishers. Information society service providers such as Google and Facebook earn direct or indirect income by using the content of others instead of producing content. These “others” include press publishers. Although newspapers are read more in the digital age, the advertising revenues of press publishers are falling dramatically and they are not getting a return on their investments. Our research shows that a solution to the problem was sought for the first time in Germany in 2009, and legal arrangements were made in Germany (2013) and then in Spain (2014). However, since these laws did not produce results, the issue was opened to discussion at the European Union (EU) level. In this context, the EU adopted the Digital Single Market Directive (DSM Directive) No. 2019/790 in order to adapt copyright law to the digital age and granted related rights status to press publishers (Article 15). The new rights (reproduction and making available to the public) concern press publications. These rights target information society service providers that use these publications online. This development represents a watershed moment in the history of copyright law. The new rights granted in the EU to solve the problems faced by press publishers caused intense debates in the relevant circles. In the course of these discussions, various legal arrangements were made in some countries (such as Australia) while information society service providers started to meet with press publishers to solve the problem. There is neither legislation nor application on the subject in Turkey, which has not yet solved basic copyright problems such as collective rights management. This article makes suggestions for the solution of the problem in Turkey taking into account the experience of Germany and Spain, the EU regulation as well as the experience of France, which implemented the DSM Directive.

Keywords

• Copyright
• Related Rights
• Press Publishers
• Newspapers
• Magazines
• Information Society Service Providers
• Right of Reproduction
• Right of Making Available to the Public

References

1. ACCC (AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONCUMER COMMISSION), Digital Platforms Inquiry - Final Report, Australia, June 2019 - (Çevrimiçi) https://www.accc.gov.au/publications/digital-platforms-inquiry-final-report, E.T. 13.1.2022.
2. AKSU, Mustafa, “Avrupa Adalet Divanının Bazı Kararları Işığında Link Vermeden Dolayı Sorumluluğun Umuma İletim Hakkı Çerçevesinde Değerlendirilmesi”, İKÜHFD, Y.2019, C.18, S.1, s. 33-62.
3. APLIN, Tanya/BENTLY, Lionel, Global Mandatory Fair Use - The Nature and Scope of the Right to Quote Copyright Works, Cambridge University Press, 2020.
4. ARMSTRONG, Elizabeth, Before Copyright: French Book - Privilege System 1498-1526, Cambridge University Press, 1990.
5. ATHEY, Susan/MUBIUS, Markus/PAL, Jeno, The Impact of Aggregators on Internet News Consumption, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, USA, 2021, (Çevrimiçi) https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w28746/w28746.pdf, E.T. 11.9.2021.
6. AYİTER, Nuşin, Hukukta Fikir ve Sanat Ürünleri, 2. Bası, Sevinç Matbaası, İstanbul, 1981.
7. BARABASH, Igor, “Ancillary Copyright for Publishers: The End of Search Engines and News Aggregators in Germany?”, EIPR, Y. 2013, Vol.35, No.5, s. 242-245.
8. BENTLY, Lionel/KRETSCHMER, Martin/DUDENBOSTEL, Tobias/MORENO, Clatrava Maria del Carmen/RADAUER, Alfred, Strengthening the Position of Press Publishers and Authors and Performers in the Copyright Directive, European Parliament, Study for the JURI Committee, Brussels, 10 September 2017, (Çevrimiçi)https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596810/IPOL_STU%282017%29596810_EN.pdf, E.T. 27.3.2021 , s. 31(Bently ve diğerleri).

9. BONADIO, Enrico / LUCCHI, Nicola, Non-Conventional Copyright, Edward Elgar, UK, 2018.
10. CEIPI (by Christophe GEIGER/Oleksandr BULAYENKO/Giancarlo FROSIO), Opinion of the CEIPI on the European Commission’s Copyright Reform Proposal, with a Focus on the Introduction of Neighbouring Rights for Press Publishers in EU Law, Strasbourg, 2016 - (Çevrimiçi) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2921334, E.T. 17.1.2022.
11. COLANGELO, Giuseppe, Enforcing Copyright Through Antitrust? A Transatlantic View of the Strange Case of News Publishers Against Digital Platforms, Stanford-Vienna TTLF Working Paper No. 66, 2020.
12. COLANGELO, Giuseppe / TORTI, Valerio: “Copyright, Online News Publishing and Aggregators: A Law and Economics Analysis of the EU Reform”, IJSR, Y. 2019, Vol. 27, No.1, s. 75-90.
13. CZARNY-DROZDZEJKO, Elzbieta, “The Subject-Matter of Press Publishers’ Related Rights under Directive 2019/790 on Copyright and Related Rights in the Digital Single Market”, IIC, Y.2020, Vol.51, No.5, s. 624-641.
14. ÇONKAR, M. Halil, “Dijital Tek Pazarda Telif Hakkı ve Bağlantılı Haklar”, Türk Hukukunun Avrupa Birliği Hukukuna Uyumu Özel Hukuk, Eds. Arslan KAYA/Baki İlkay ENGİN/Ali PASLI/Şehriban İpek AŞIKOĞLU/Elif OĞUZ, İstanbul, İstanbul Üniversitesi, 2020, s. 682-714.
15. DANBURY, Richard, Is an EU Publishers’ Right a Good Idea? Final Report on the AHRC Project: Evaluating Potential Legal Responses to Threats to the Production of News in a Digital Era, Cambridge: Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (June 15, 2016), (Çevrimiçi) https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/sites/www.law.cam.ac.uk/files/images/www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/documents/copyright_and_news/danbury_publishers_right_report.pdf, E.T. 21.9.2021.
16. DREIER, Thomas, “Copyright in the Times of the Internet - Overcoming the Principle of Territoriality within the EU”, ERA Forum, Y. 2017, Vol.18, No.1, s. 7-19.
17. DUSOLLIER, Séverine: “The 2019 Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market: Some Progress, A Few Bad Choices, and An Overall Failed Ambition”, CMLR, Y. 2020, Vol. 57, No. 4, s. 979-1030.
18. EPC (European Policy Center) (by Fabian ZULEEG/Iva TASHEVA), Discussion Paper - Rewarding Quality Journalism or Distorting the Digital Single Market? The Case for and Against Neighbouring Rights for Press Publishers, 29.5.2017- (Çevrimiçi) http://aei.pitt.edu/87760/1/pub_7712_rewardingqualityjournalismordistortingthedsm.pdf, E.T. 31.7.2021.
19. VAN EECHOUD, Mireille M.M., A Publisher’s Intellectual Property Right: Implications for Freedom of Expression, Authors and Open Content Policies, Research Paper for Open Forum Europe, 2017 – (Çevrimiçi) http://www.openforumeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/OFE-Academic-Paper-Implications-of-publishers-right_FINAL.pdf, E.T. 31.7.2021.
20. EUROPEAN COMMISSION, “Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Copyright in the Digital Single Market”, Brussels, 14.9.2016 COM(2016) 593 final 2016/0280 (COD) - (Çevrimiçi) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52016PC0593, E.T. 30.7.2021, (Explanatory Memorandum).
21. EUROPEAN COMMISSION, “Impact Assessment on the Modernization of EU Copyright Rules”, Bruxelles, 14 September 2016 SWD(2016) 301 final, (Çevrimiçi) https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/10102/2016/EN/SWD-2016-301-F1-EN-MAIN-PART-1.PDF, E.T. 30.7.2021 (Impact Assessment/Etki Analizi Dokümanı).
22. FERRI, Federico, “The Dark Side(s) of the EU Directive on Copyright and Related Rights in the Digital Single Market”, China-EU Law Journal, Y.2021, Vol.7, No.1-4, s. 21-38.
23. FLEISCHER, Rasmus, “Protecting the Musicians and/or the Record Industry? On the History of ‘Neighbouring Rights’ and the Role of Fascist Italy”, QMJIP, Y. 2015, Vol. 5, No. 3, p. 327-343.
24. FURGAL, Ula, “Ancillary Right for Press Publishers: An Alternative Answer to the Linking Conundrum?”, JIPLP, Y. 2018, Vol.13, No.9, s. 700-710 (Ancillary Right).
25. FURGAL, Ula, “The EU Press Publishers’ Right: Where do Member States Stand?”, JIPLP, Y. 2021, Vol. 16, No. 8, s. 887-893 (Press Publisher).
26. GERADIN, Damien, Complements and/or Substitutes? The Competitive Dynamics between News Publishers and Digital Platforms and What It Means for Competition Policy - TILEC Discussion Paper, February 2019 - (Çevrimiçi) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3338941, E.T. 25.12.2021.
27. GHIDINI, Gustavo/BANTERLE, Francesco, “Copyright, News, and ‘Information Products’ under the New DSM Copyright Directive” - (Çevrimiçi) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342707640_Copyright_news_and_information_products_under_the_new_DSM_Copyright_Directive, E.T. 9.4.2021.
28. GINSBURG, Jane C.,“News Aggregation: Discord Among Common Law Jurisdictions” (12 January 2011) – (Çevrimiçi) https://www.mediainstitute.org/2011/01/12/news-aggregation-discord-among-common-law-jurisdictions/, E.T. 1.1.2022.
29. VAN GOMPEL, S.J., “The Proposed Publishers’ Right in Press Publications: An Evidential Mistake”, Better Regulation for Copyright: Academics Meet Policy Makers, Ed. J. REDA, Wed 6 Sept 2017 University of Southampton - (Çevrimiçi) https://juliareda.eu/events/better-regulation-for-copyright/, E.T. 27.3.2021.
30. GÖNÜLAL, Ece, “Dijital Tek Pazarda Telif Hakkı ve Bağlantılı Haklar Yönergesi ile Beraberinde Getirdiği Tartışmalar”, GalatasaryÜHFD, Y. 2019, S.2, s. 783-808.
31. GRAY, Joanne Elizabeth., Google Rules - The History and Future of Copyright under the Influence of Google, Oxford University Press, USA, 2020.
32. HOPPNER, Thomas/KRETSCHMER, Martin/XALABARDER, Raquel, “Create Public Lectures on the Proposed EU Right for Press Publishers”, EIPR, Y. 2017, Vol.39, No.10, s. 607-622 (EIPR).
33. HÖPPNER, Thomas, EU Copyright Reform: The Case for A Related Right for Press Publishers - CREATe Working Paper 2017/08 (April 2017) - (Çevrimiçi) https://www.create.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/CREATe-Working-Paper-2017-08.pdf?x26300, E.T. 22.1.2022, (CREATe).
34. HUGENHOLTZ, P. Bernt, “Neighbouring Rights are Obsolete”, IIC, Y. 2019, Vol. 50, No.8, s. 1006-1011.
35. JUTTE, Bernd Justin, “CJEU Permits Sampling of Phonograms under A De Minimis Rule and the Quotation Exception”, JIPLP, Y. 2019, Vol.14, No.11, s. 827-829.
36. KARAPAPA, Stavroula, “The Press Publishers’ Right in the European Union: An Overreaching Proposal and the Future of News Online”, Non-Conventional Copyright, Eds. Enrico Bonadio / Nicola Lucchi, Edward Elgar, UK, 2018, s. 316-339.
37. KIANZAD, Behrang, “De Minimis Exception When Using Applied Art in Marketing Materials”, GRUR International, Y. 2020, Vol. 69, No.1, s. 91-105.
38. KRETSCHMER, Martin/DUSOLLIER, Séverine/GEIGER, Christophe/HUGENHOLTZ, P. Bernt, “The European Commission's Public Consultation on the Role of Publishers in the Copyright Value Chain: A Response by the European Copyright Society”, EIPR, Y. 2016, Vol.38, No.10, s. 591-595 (Kretschmer ve diğerleri).
39. KUCHARCZYK, Jakob, “A ‘Legal’ Snippet in Germany could Mean… Seven Words, Maximum”, 27.10.2015- (Çevrimiçi) http://www.project-disco.org/european-union/102715-a-legal-snippet-in-germany-could-mean-seven-words-maximum/, E.T. 1.8.2021.
40. LAZAROVA, Ana, “Re-Use The News: Between The EU Press Publishers’ Right’s Addressees And The Informatory Exceptions’ Beneficiaries”, JIPLP, Y.2021, Vol. 16, No.3, s. 236-246.
41. MARGONI, Thomas, “The Protection of Sports Events in the EU: Property, Intellectual Property, Unfair Competition and Special Forms of Protection”, IIC, Y.2016, Vol.47, s. 386-417.
42. MAZZIOTTI, Giuseppe, “What is the Future of Creators’ Rights in an Increasingly Platform-Dominated Economy?”, IIC, Y.2020, Vol.51, No.9, s. 1027-1032.
43. MOSCON, Valentina, “Neighbouring Rights: in Search of A Dogmatic Foundation. The Press Publishers’ Case”, Online Distribution of Content in the EU, Eds. Taina PIHLAJARINNE / Juha VESALA / Olli HONKKILA, UK, Edward Elgar, 2019, s. 40-61.
44. MPI, Eds. Reto M. HILTY/Valentina MOSCON, Modernisation of the EU Copyright Rules - Position Statement of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich, 2017 - (Çevrimiçi) https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_2470998_12/component/file_2479390/content, E.T. 19.11.2021.
45. MURRAY, Andrew, Information Technology Law, 2. Ed, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2013.
46. NETANEL, Neil Weinstock, “Mandating Digital Platform Support for Quality Journalism”, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, Y. 2021, V. 34, No. 2, s.473-545.
47. OHLY, Ansgar, “The Broad Concept of ‘Communication to the Public’ in Recent CJEU Judgments and the Liability of Intermediaries: Primary, Secondary or Unitary Liability?”, JIPLP, Y. 2018, Vol.13, No.8, s. 664-675.
48. ÖZDEN MERHACI, Selin/ERKAN, Vehbi Umut, “Anglo-Amerikan Hukukundan Kıta Avrupası Hukukuna- Özel Hukukta De Minimis Kuralı”, İnÜHFD, Y.2018, C. 9, S. 2, s. 49-70.
49. ÖZKAN, Zehra/POLAT AKGÜN, Deniz, “Basın Yayıncılarına Bağlantılı Hak Tanınması Sorunsalı”, Terazi, Y.2018, C. 13, S. 140, s. 49-63.
50. QUINTAIS, João Pedro, “The New Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive: A Critical Look”, EIPR, Y. 2020, Vol.42, No.1, s. 28-41.
51. PAPADOPOULOU, Maria-Daphne/MOUSTAKA, Evanthia-Maria, “Copyright and the Press Publishers Right on the Internet: Evolutions and Perspectives”, EU Internet Law in the Digital Era, Eds. Tatiana-Eleni SYNODINOU/Philippe JOUGLEUX/Christiana MARKOU/Thalia PRASTİTOU, Springer, Switzerland, 2020, s. 99-136.
52. PASSINKE, Diana, An Analysis of Articles 15 and 17 of the EU Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market: A Boost for the Creative Industries or the Death of the Internet?, Stanford-Vienna European Union Law Working Paper, No. 49, Vienna, 2020.
53. PEUKERT, Alexander, An EU Related Right for Press Publishers Concerning Digital Uses. A Legal Analysis, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 22/2016 – (Çevrimiçi) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2888040, E.T. 7.3.2021.
54. PIHLAJARINNE, Taina/VESALA, Juha, “Proposed Right of Press Publishers: A Workable Solution?”, JIPLP, Y. 2018, V.13, No.3, s. 220-228.
55. PODSZUN, Rupprecht: “Searching the Future of Newspapers: With a Little Help from Google and IP Law?”, IIC, Y. 2013, Vol.44, No.3, s.259-262.
56. RAMALHO, Ana, “Beyond the Cover Story - An Enquiry into the EU Competence to Introduce a Right for Publishers”, IIC, Y. 2017, Vol. 48, No. 1, s. 71-91.
57. RAUE, Benjamin, “Free Flow of Data? The Friction between the Commission’s European Data Economy Initiative and the Proposed Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market”, IIC, Y. 2018, Vol. 49, No.4, s. 379-383.
58. REUTERS INSTITUTE (Nic NEWMAN ve diğerleri), Reuters Institute Digital News Report 10th Ed., 2021, - (Çevrimiçi) https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2021, E.T. 23.1.2022. RICCIO, Giovanni Maria, Position Paper - Ancillary Copyright and Liability of Intermediaries in the EU Directive Proposal on Copyright, University of Salerno, Italy, March 2018 – (Çevrimiçi) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3149363, E.T. 31.7.2021.
59. RICKETSON, Sam/GINSBURY, Jane C., International Copyright and Neighbouring Rights, V. I, 2. Ed., Oxford University Press, 2006.
60. ROSATI, Eleonora, Copyright in the Digital Single Market: Article-by-Article Commentary to the Provisions of Directive 2019/790, Oxford University Press, 2021, (Commentary).
61. ROSATI, Eleonora, “Neighbouring Rights for Publishers: Are National and (Possibly) EU Initiatives Lawful?” IIC, Y. 2016, Vol. 47, No. 5, p. 569-594 (IIC).
62. ROSATI, Eleonora, “Linking and Copyright: Easier at Last? First National Applications of the CJEU GS Media Judgment”, EU Internet Law in the Digital Era, Eds. Tatiana-Eleni SYNODINOU/Philippe JOUGLEUX/Christiana MARKOU/Thalia PRASTITOU, Switzerland, Springer, 2020, s. 61-78. (Linking).
63. ROSATI, Eleonora, “The German ‘Google Tax’ Law: Groovy or Greedy?”, JIPLP, Y. 2013, Vol.8, No.7 (Google Tax).
64. SAMUELSON, Pamela, “Questioning a New Intellectual Property Right for Press Publishers”, Communications of the ACM, Y. 2019, Vol.62, No.3, s. 20-23.
65. SCALZINI, Silvia, “The New Related Right for Press Publishers: What Way Forward?”, The Routledge Handbook of EU Copyright Law, Ed. Eleonora ROSATI, London, Taylor & Francis Group, 2021, s. 101-119 (Press Publishers).
66. SCALZINI, Silvia, “Is There Free-Riding? A Comparative Analysis of the Problem of Protecting Publishing Materials Online in Europe”, JIPLP, Y. 2015, Vol.10, No.6, s. 454-464 (Free Riding).
67. SENFTLEBEN, Martin/KERK, Maximilian/BUITEN, Miriam/HEINE, Klaus, “New Rights or New Business Models? An Inquiry into the Future of Publishing in the Digital Era”, IIC, Y. 2017, Vol. 48, No. 5, s. 538-561 (Senftleben ve diğerleri).
68. SOYSAL, Tamer, “Basılı Yayınların Telif Hukuku Kapsamında Bağlantılı Hak Niteliği ve Bu Yayınların Avrupa Birliği’nin Dijital Tek Pazarda Telif Hakları Direktifi Çerçevesinde Korunması”, TFM, Y. 2019, C. 5, S. 2, s. 268 vd. (Basılı Yayınlar).
69. SOYSAL, Tamer, “Avrupa Birliği’nin Dijital Tek Pazarda Telif Hakları Direktifi Çerçevesinde Müzik Sektöründe ‘Değer Boşluğu’ Kavramı ve Düzenlemenin İnternet İçerik Paylaşım Sitelerine Etkileri”, ABD, Y. 2019, S. 4, s. 139-206 (Değer Boşluğu).
70. SPINDLER, Gerald, “The Regulation of Big Tech Companies in the Digital Era: The German and EU Viewpoints”, Periscope, June 2021 - (Çevrimiçi) https://periscopekasaustralia.com.au/briefs/the-regulation-of-big-tech-companies-in-the-digital-era-the-german-and-eu-viewpoints/, E.T. 18.10.2021.
71. STAMATOUDI, Irini/TORREMANS, Paul, “The Digital Single Market Directive”, EU Copyright Law, Eds. Irini STAMATOUDI/Paul TORREMANS, UK, Edward Elgar, 2021.
72. STOKES, Simon, Digital Copyright - Law and Practice, 5th Ed., Hart, Oxford, 2019.
73. SULUK, Cahit/KARASU, Rauf/NAL, Temel, Fikri Mülkiyet Hukuku, 5. Baskı, Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara, 2021.
74. SULUK, Cahit/ORHAN, Ali, Uygulamalı Fikri Mülkiyet Hukuku C. II Fikir ve Sanat Eserleri, Arıkan Yayıncılık, İstanbul, 2005.
75. TALKE, Armin, “The Ancillary Right’ for Press Publishers: The Present German and Spanish Legislation and the EU Proposal” - (Çevrimiçi) http://library.ifla.org/1849/1/119%20talke%20en.pdf, E.T. 7.3.2021. TEKİNALP, Ünal, Fikri Mülkiyet Hukuku, 5. Bası, Vedat Kitapçılık, İstanbul, 2012.
76. TOPAL, Cansu, “Dijital Medyanın Google ile Savaşı ve Bilgi Toplumu”, Fikri Mülkiyet Yıllığı 2012, Ed. Tekin MEMİŞ, Ankara, Yetkin, 2013, s. 465-495.
77. VESTERDORF, Bo, “The Effect of Failure to Notify the Spanish and German Ancillary Copyright Laws”, EIPR, Y. 2015, Vol. 37, No. 5, s. 263-266.
78. VUCKOVIC, Romana Matanovac, “The Effectiveness of the Press Publishers’ Related Right”, IIC, Y. 2021, Vol.52, No.8, s. 1050-1068.
79. XALABARDER, Raquel, The Remunerated Statutory Limitation for News Aggregation and Search Engines Proposed by the Spanish Government - Its Compliance with International and EU Law, 2014 – (Çevrimiçi) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2504596, E.T. 31.7.2021 (News Aggregation).
80. XALABARDER, Raquel, Press Publisher Rights in the New Copyright in the Digital Single Market Draft Directive, CREATe Working Paper, December 2016/15 - (Çevrimiçi) https://www.create.ac.uk/publications/press-publisher-rights-in-the-new-copyright-in-the-digital-single-market-draft-directive/, E.T. 22.1.2022, (Working Paper).