Günther Oettinger talks in Brussels about the modernisation of EU copyright rules | Thierry Tronnel/Corbis via Getty Images Europe’s copyright cop-out The Commission promised to drag copyright into the digital age. Critics say its vision is retrograde.

Fifteen years of bitter battles between old media and disruptive digital upstarts over copyright have led the European Commission’s long-awaited reforms of the system down a blind alley.

Instead of a coherent vision that produces winners and losers, the draft proposals on the so-called copyright directive fudge crucial questions about how artists can earn money in the digital age, and whether generations of internet users can avoid committing a crime for unwittingly accessing protected intellectual property.

"It’s almost as if the Commission is trying to kill off copyright, the press, and the internet, all in one proposal," said Remy Chavannes, a copyright lawyer at the firm Brinkhof.

Streamlining and modernizing a patchwork of copyright laws is a cornerstone of the Commission’s digital single market strategy, which aims to pump €415 billion into Europe’s economy annually by breaking digital barriers across the EU. A final version of the proposal is due to be proposed by the Commission on September 21, and then goes to the European Parliament and EU states for approval, which will likely be highly contentious.

Critics say the draft proposals short-change the overhaul needed.

Initially touted as one of the most ambitious policy initiatives Brussels has undertaken this year, it is far from the shoot-the-lights out package modernizers were hoping for. Critics say the draft proposals obtained by POLITICO short change the overhaul needed for the sprawling legal framework underpinning the media and entertainment industries.

"The leaked EU copyright ‘reform’ proposal confirms Europe's 19th century vision of the online world," tweeted Kostas Rossoglou, head of public policy at Yelp, which compiles online reviews of local businesses.

While the modernizers are on the back foot, representatives of "old media" aren’t jumping for joy either. Even news publishers, set to benefit from plans to compensate them when their content shows up in online searches, were circumspect about how much leverage the proposals give them over giants like Google. If this is a victory, it may turn out to be only a symbolic one, said one British newspaper executive.

'Link tax'

Arguably the most controversial inclusion is the so-called "neighboring right" that makes it possible for news publishers to seek payment from aggregators like Google and Reddit who link to their content.

In the newspaper publishers’ view, their business has been devastated by the recycling of their articles on the internet, taking away readers and siphoning the value of their journalism without sharing in the cost of producing it. The proposal will give the same legal protection that other media sectors already enjoy when publishers' output is re-used online without permission. It could help a struggling news industry generate more revenue, the publishing lobbyists argue, and won’t stop readers from sharing articles freely on social networks.

Consumer advocates argue, however, that the proposal amounts to a “link tax” that will give publishers a veto over the free sharing of articles online. “The planned EU-wide ancillary copyright for press publishers would make most ways of sharing even 20-year-old news articles illegal, and thereby limit Europeans’ freedom of expression and access to information,” said German Pirate Party MEP Julia Reda.

One British publishing executive said it was “great news that the Commission has recognized the investment [we make] in journalists,” but added that the neighbouring right won’t necessarily be a financial boost for beleaguered newspapers.

“The right does not automatically mean Google will have to come to a deal with publishers,” the executive said. “The right gives publishers leverage, but the sheer size and dominance of Google means that coming to an agreement on levies is likely to be tough unless publishers are able to negotiate as a bloc. This is not clear at the moment.”

TV broadside

While news publishers emerge from the copyright reforms with something to celebrate, there is concern among TV companies about plans to stitch together Europe's fragmented broadcast market for online video-on-demand services like the BBC's iPlayer, Sky Plc's SkyGo service and Italy's state broadcaster online platform Rai.tv.

Critics say it undermines the value of premium content like the English Premier League or Formula One racing by allowing citizens to shop around for broadcasts and events. On the face of it, this should benefit consumers by easing access to entertainment, but it could have the opposite effect, with rights holders not selling their products to markets they deem less profitable.

"It is an innovative proposal and one that effectively attacks territoriality rights under the copyright system for broadcasting," said Fredrik Erixon, director of the European Centre for International Political Economy. "It affects the price they can sell at to customers/broadcasters abroad."

Instead of allowing Germans to buy access to Estonian soccer, or giving Italians the right to purchase Romanian soap operas, citizens will buy content they already like — such as Spanish football's La Liga — in EU countries where that content is sold more cheaply because of lower purchasing power.

Media executives said the implications of the Commission’s proposals will be far-reaching and complicated, and they are still working through the detail to determine what impact it will have on their business and their customers.

“It’s just too early to be sure what it means,” said one U.K. TV executive, speaking on condition of anonymity. “We are dealing with complex value chains that are sensitive to small changes but equally can evolve to sustain themselves, and we don’t like to overreact, although that’s not to say this isn’t a significant moment.”

Paying performers

The Commission wants artistic works to reach more eyeballs, but it also wants to put more cash in performers' wallets. Its proposals would compel the likes of Google to disclose how much they pay large record labels and recording studios to showcase their work on platforms such as YouTube.

That could encourage Google, Vimeo and others to renegotiate with artists, who would also be given access to a dispute resolution mechanism if they still feel they're getting a raw deal.

Copyright reform hasn't been attempted since 2001, when people still listened to music on CDs and piracy was for bootleggers.

Google employs an army of engineers to sift through the 400 hours of content uploaded to YouTube every minute to weed out copyrighted material. The Commission broadly supports such recognition technologies, which at a cost to Google of $60 million since 2007 could price out rival startup platforms.

"To obligate internet platforms to scan all user uploads for copyright infringements will be the death knell for any European competition to YouTube or Facebook, who will be unable to comply with this costly burden," said MEP Reda.

Dim panorama

Reforming something as complicated as copyright across 28 different markets was always going to be messy and thankless. That's why it hasn't been attempted since 2001, when people still listened to music on CDs and piracy was for bootleggers. As part of the reforms, Jean-Claude Juncker's Commission merged the two teams handling copyright and digital law into one, under the authority of the Digital Commissioner Günther Oettinger.

That decision may have doomed the reforms from the start. The officials in charge of drafting the changes found themselves among the gung-ho digital reformers in the Commission's DG CONNECT — but under the control of a famously analog German.

This skirmish is just the first in succession of battles to come. There are new drafts emerging daily, with incremental changes. The Commission's impact assessment and draft directive have taken a hammering from all sides and there are still a few weeks to go before the executive officially unveils the legal vision. It's likely the final version will change.

Ryan Heath contributed to this article.