Publishing and digital

Meta-newspapers: EU lawyer agrees with publishers

Fair compensation for the digital use of journalistic content by web giants

by Giovanni Negri

11 July 2025

2' min read

Key points

The Advocate General's Opinion

2' min read

The conclusions of the Attorney General of the European Court of Justice, filed yesterday, sound like a point in favour of Italian publishers and their right to see an equal remuneration for the digital use of their content by web giants such as Meta. The Court was asked, by the Tar del Lazio, to rule on the compatibility with the principles of Community law of the Italian legislation transposing the directive oncopyright in the digital single market. The directive introduces a right in favour of newspaper publishers for online uses of their publications by providers of information society services.

Meta, which manages the social network Facebook, has appealed to the Regional Administrative Court to request the annulment of the resolution with which the Communications Authority determined the criteria for determining fair compensation for the online use of content of a journalistic nature. Meta contests the compatibility of the resolution and the Italian regulations with Community law, in particular with the directive and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

The Advocate General's conclusions

Three key points and one condition constitute the central elements of the Advocate General's conclusions, admittedly not absolutely decisive for the future judgment, but capable of significantly guiding its reflection. First of all, Community law does not stand in the way of the attribution to newspaper publishers of the right to obtain a fair remuneration in return for the authorisation of the use of their publications by information society service providers,

Secondly, neither does it conflict with the principles of Community law to impose on the same service providers, who, like Meta, intend to use journalistic content of others, obligations regarding negotiations with publishers, disclosure of information and good faith in negotiations.

Finally, yes of the Advocate General also to therecognition to a public body of the power of regulation, supervision and sanctioning, including the possibility of proposing criteria to determine the remuneration due to publishers or the amount of remuneration.

The condition, underlined in the conclusions, has as much to do with publishers as with the different web platforms: as to the former, the different national provisions do not deprive them of the possibility of refusing to grant an authorisation to use content or of granting it free of charge; as to the latter, no compulsory payment in the absence of a link with the actual use of the journalistic content, respecting the contractual freedom of the parties but with the awareness by the Advocate General of the fragmentation of the regulation ofcopyright in the countries of the Union.