They insist that whether a snippet constitutes an original intellectual creation by its author or not should not be a criteria.
To appease them, the Presidency is proposing that every country should just decide for themselves.
Sharing “insubstantial” parts of an article should remain free, but member states get to choose whether that means snippets that lack creativity, or snippets that have “no independent economic significance”, whatever length that may be – or both (Recital 34a).
Of course, this fundamentally contradicts the aim to create a Digital Single Market with common rules, which is right there in the title of the planned law. Instead of one Europe-wide law, we’d have 28, with the most extreme becoming the de-facto standard
To avoid being sued, international internet platforms would be motivated to comply with the strictest version implemented by any member state.
It also remains open whether simple links will be affected, because they almost always contain the title of the linked-to page.
it’s not obvious that an article’s title counts as “insubstantial”. Get ready for drawn-out court cases and years of legal uncertainty around hyperlinks if this version of the text becomes the law.