Charlemagne’s notebook | Asterix’s village

The EU’s copyright reform is an example of “a Europe that protects”

The controversial legislation is one instance of a larger shift

By CHARLEMAGNE | BRUSSELS

REMEMBER THE village from the Asterix stories? The popular comic books by René Goscinny and Albert Uderzo centre on a small tribe of Gauls somewhere in northern France around 50BC, surrounded by Roman invaders and holding out nonetheless thanks to a magic potion endowing them with superhuman strength. That hold-out image rather sums up Europe’s self image today; at least in the eyes of some of its most powerful leaders. When this afternoon the European Parliament in Strasbourg endorsed a contentious new Copyright Directive, it was just another instance of this Asterixian thinking, which is most pronounced in Brussels, Paris and Berlin.

The directive, which passed by 348 votes to 274, seeks to update the EU’s copyright legislation in light of recent technological changes. Its most controversial elements, passed much more narrowly, are Article 11, a “link tax” requiring social networks and news aggregators to pay publishers to display snippets of their output, and most of all Article 13, an “upload filter” making larger online publishers like YouTube responsible for copyright infringements in material uploaded by their users. The directive now goes to the Council, which is expected to ratify it on April 9th.

That caps two years of fraught debates and campaigning about the new rules. Supporters include musicians and publishers who say that it will help to protect artists in an age where unauthorised copying is drastically easier than it used to be. Opponents, which include net freedom campaigners and the likes of Google, say it amounts to censorship and will curb the use of established material to make memes or other parodies. Both sides have lobbied hard in Brussels and national capitals, deploying high-profile supporters like Lady Gaga and Paul McCartney (in favour) and Tim Berners-Lee (against). The anti-Article 13 campaign was particularly vocal in Germany.

Though it attracted an unusual degree of interest for a piece of EU legislation, the Copyright Directive ought not to be viewed in isolation. By purporting to protect artists from the side effects of new technology, it represents a typical example of what Emmanuel Macron, the French president and a supporter of the reform, calls “l’Europe qui protège”, or “the Europe that protects”. Mr Macron believes that the rise of populism and public angst about globalisation demands an EU that, rather than merely welcoming the bracing winds of change, does more to shelter established interest groups from them. Though they use different language, the European Commission and the German government among others take a similar view.

Other instances include the new Franco-German push (this one at odds with the Commission) to rejig competition rules to allow takeovers shielding European industry from unfair competition from American and in particular Chinese giants; new protections for European firms deemed strategically important; a more permissive approach to certain forms of state aid; digital consumer protections like the new General Data Protection Regulation; measures to tackle Russian-backed disinformation campaigns; a crackdown on tax avoidance; and tougher controls on migration at Europe’s outer borders and the pursuit of criminals within them. The European election manifesto of Germany’s Christian Democrats, published yesterday, was typical of the genre: “our Europe strengthens: security, peace and prosperity” it proclaimed (its most striking proposal was the creation of a “European FBI” to take on cross-border crime). So too were the warnings about “respecting European unity” issued by Mr Macron and Angela Merkel at their meeting with Xi Jinping, China’s president, in Paris on Tuesday, March 26th.

All of which reflects a Europe that, seen from its most powerful capitals, looks like Asterix’s village: surrounded by threats. To the east: a malign Russia and increasingly aggressive China. To the south: a demographically churning Africa and an unstable Middle East. To the west: an unpredictable America. And within European societies: criminals and economic shifts and transformative technological developments that threaten established players and ways of life (to which, for example, the gilets jaunes protests in France might be considered one particularly prominent reaction). Europe’s core is determined to strengthen its defences against these threats. To protect an open Europe, goes the logic, Europe needs more protection against the excesses of openness.

That seems sensible. And some of the measures implemented in the name of a protective Europe are reasonable enough. But it all poses some difficult questions deserving more of a debate than they have received. Openness is supposed to be a European strength—its magic potion, to extend the Asterix metaphor—in an age when America is pulling up the drawbridge and China’s more closed model is making strides. But where do the limits of this strength lie? Which forms of protection are valid and which represent unacceptable compromises with more closed systems like the Chinese one? And where does that openness itself need protection? The Copyright Directive is one fault line in this much wider debate, one that goes to the heart of Europe’s values. The looming European election campaign is a rare chance to conduct that debate openly and on a continent-wide scale. It should not be missed.

Discover more

The new European Commission marks a victory for France

Ursula von der Leyen wants a bolder, greener and more cohesive Europe

Ursula von der Leyen is elected European Commission president

Her narrow majority betokens less personal weakness than political fragmentation


EU leaders settle on a new team to run the club

The deal comes after three days of negotiations