Oral hearing in case DPCMO vs. LinkedIn

LinkedIn was founded with a vision to create economic opportunities and a commitment to build a trustworthy platform. Inspired by Microsoft's leadership focus should be on privacy, security, safety, fairness and accountability. But LinkedIn has overlooked copyright. DPCMO has an agreement with Microsoft, but LinkedIn has unfortunately declined a negotiation. That is why DPCMO had to file a complaint to the Copyright Licence Tribunal.

The Tribunal has now decided to conduct an oral hearing in DPCMO’s case vs. LinkedIn. The case is a matter of principle. DPCMO claims that LinkedIn must 1) provide DPCMO with all relevant and necessary information at their disposal on the use of DPCMO repertoire on LinkedIn, 2) DPCMO shall receive appropriate remuneration for the use of our rights; a preliminary tariff of 5% of LinkedIn’s domestic revenue. The CRM – and DSM – directive states that transparency is key and that it observes the principles enshrined in the EU Charter as IPR.

LinkedIn places significant emphasis on the importance of trustworthy news, understanding its role in shaping informed professionals and maintaining the integrity of information on its platforms. Thus, LinkedIn allows its users to upload and share news content because it’s advantageous for their brand and profitable for the business. LinkedIn is big business, a gatekeeper under the DMA, a VLOP under the DSA. Our case demonstrates that LinkedIn says one thing and does another.

The Tribunal is chaired by a supreme court judge and consists of two expert IP lawyers. DPCMO may not win the case, but we will – together with publishers and authors across the globe – continue to stand up for transparency, accountability, fairness and keep striving with commitment, curiosity, and cooperation. More to come on YouTube, TikTok, Meta, X, and OpenAI.