MLex: The EU and Thailand hope to wrap up talks on a free trade agreement by the end of 2026, with a final tenth negotiation round due to begin on 28 September 2026, the Ambassador of Thailand to the EU has said. The EU has agreed a series of trade deals in recent months, including with South America’s Mercosur bloc, India and Australia as well as an interim agreement with Mexico, as it seeks to offset increased trade tensions with the US and China.

Copyright refers to a collection of rights afforded to the authors of creative works, such as literary, dramatic, artistic, and musical works, broadcasts, databases, sound recordings and typographical arrangements. Copyright includes economic rights first owned by the author of a work, but can also refer to additional, personal, rights afforded to authors and performers, known as moral or neighbouring rights. Moral rights are not generally harmonised at EU level and are not specifically addressed in this Practice Note. EU copyright framework Copyright is not fully harmonised across the EU. However, the regulatory framework for copyright and neighbouring rights consists of a number of directives and regulations that has evolved over the past three decades, together with a large body of case law applying this legislation. The result is a high, if not complete, level of harmonisation that has increased over time. Copyright remains a national IP right, to be enforced in national courts. The body of copyright EU case law has arisen from referrals made by national courts to the Court of Justice of the European

Copyright refers to a collection of rights afforded to the creators of creative works, including, literary, dramatic, artistic, and musical works, broadcasts, databases, sound recordings and typographical arrangements. Copyright includes economic rights first owned by the creator, or author of a work, but can also refer to additional, personal, rights afforded to authors and performers, known as moral rights, or neighbouring rights. Moral rights are not generally harmonised at EU level and their infringement is not specifically addressed in this Practice Note. For information on the subsistence of copyright in the EU, see Practice Note: EU—Copyright subsistence. EU copyright legislation Copyright is not fully harmonised across the EU. However, the regulatory framework for copyright and neighbouring rights consists of a number of directives and regulations that has evolved over the past three decades, together with a large body of case law applying this legislation. The result is a high, if not complete, level of harmonisation that has increased over time. Copyright remains a national IP right, to be enforced in national courts. The body of copyright EU case law

Copyright refers to a collection of rights afforded to the creators of creative works, including, literary, dramatic, artistic, and musical works, broadcasts, databases, sound recordings and typographical arrangements. Copyright includes economic rights first owned by the creator, or author of a work, but can also refer to additional, personal, rights afforded to authors and performers, known as moral rights, or neighbouring rights. Moral rights are not generally harmonised at EU level and are not specifically addressed in this Practice Note. Copyright protection arises automatically and does not need to be registered in the EU. Copyright subsistence means the criteria required for copyright protection to arise and apply to a work. This generally refers to the nature of the work, how it was created and who created it. Copyright is a national right, and national copyright regimes lay down the specific formalities for copyright to subsist in that jurisdiction. Some of the criteria for copyright subsistence are harmonised concepts under EU law and these are set out in this Practice Note. For information about infringement of copyright under

EU Law analysis: This case concerns the calculation of the indemnity payment due to commercial agents upon termination of an agency contract. Article 17(2) of Directive 86/653/EEC on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents (EU Commercial Agents Directive) requires EU Member States to legislate to ensure that commercial agents, in certain circumstances, are entitled to an indemnity payment upon termination or expiry of the agency contract. This judgment concerns the scope of what commissions should be included when calculating this indemnity. The Court of Justice has clarified that the calculation of the indemnity should factor in commissions the agent would have continued to earn had the contract not been terminated. These commissions are due where: the agent has brought in new customers or has significantly increased the volume of business with existing customers prior to termination, and the principal continues to derive substantial benefits from the business with such customers; and the payment is equitable having regard to all the circumstances, and in particular, the ‘commission lost’ by the commercial agent on the business transacted with such customers. Under the EU Commercial Agents Directive, a ‘commercial agent’ is defined as a self-employed intermediary who has continuing authority to negotiate the sale or purchase of goods on behalf of another person. The Directive notably does not apply to services although it has been expressly extended to apply to services in some Member States (although not in the UK). Written by Victoria Hobbs, partner at Bird & Bird LLP.

In the EU, copyright protection arises automatically, without any registration requirement, provided the work meets the criteria for protection. For copyright to subsist, the work must be an original intellectual creation of its creator, and such original creation must be expressed in a manner which makes it identifiable with sufficient precision and objectivity (although that expression does not necessarily need to be in permanent form). Ideas, therefore, cannot benefit from copyright protection. For further information, see Practice Note: EU—Copyright subsistence. Authors of works in which copyright subsists are granted exclusive rights to do, or authorise others to do, various acts, known as ‘restricted acts’, for the duration of protection. These include the right of reproduction, right of communication or making available to the public, distribution right and rental and lending right. Third parties may be able to exploit a work during the term of copyright protection without infringing the author’s exclusive rights in certain situations. For more detail, see Practice Note: EU—Copyright exceptions and defences. Where no exception exists and a third party undertakes a restricted

Arbitration analysis: The Court of Justice held that Turkish economic operators cannot rely on national law provisions implementing Directive 2014/25 concerning public procurement, as Turkey lacks a reciprocal agreement with the European Union (EU) granting its operators access to EU public procurement markets. This ruling creates havoc on EU public procurement markets as it creates uncertainty concerning the rules under which EU Member States should handle public procurement projects involving third-country operators. Additionally, although the Kolin judgment does not mention investment protection treaties between EU Member States and third countries, it provokes a fresh conflict between EU law and such treaties, which provide for several substantive guarantees which third-party operators could invoke in the EU public procurement context. Written by Wojciech Sadowski, partner at Queritius; and Maria Paschou, associate at Queritius.

The EU has adopted its 20th package of sanctions against Russia, widening restrictions across energy, trade, financial services and crypto while adding new legal protections for EU operators. For arbitration practitioners, the package is relevant not simply as another sanctions development, but because it may shape disputes strategy and enforcement risk. The measures allow Member State courts to fine Russians who bring abusive proceedings before Russian courts, enable EU firms to seek damages where abusive judgments are enforced in third countries, and permit restrictions on third-country actors involved in that enforcement. The package also activates, for the first time, the EU’s anti-circumvention tool and expands restrictions affecting banks, payment channels, crypto services, tanker sales and shadow-fleet operations. In practice, that may affect arbitrations involving Russian parties, sanctioned supply chains or third-country intermediaries by complicating contract performance, payment mechanics and enforcement planning. It may also affect arbitral awards, because tighter restrictions on payments and cross-border enforcement could make the payment, recognition or enforcement of awards more difficult.

MLex: The EU’s landmark artificial intelligence law (AI) today moved closer to final approval, after passing a key legislative stage. Ambassadors representing EU national governments signed off on the final version of the legislation, after weeks of doubts that it would pass muster with France and Germany. The agreement was unanimous, a spokesman for the Belgian government said. The European Parliament will also vote on it in the coming weeks. Lawyers from Ashurst, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, Covington & Burling LLP and Gowling WLG discuss the potential benefits and drawbacks of the EU AI Act.

MLex: Artificial intelligence (AI) providers and operators in the EU might in fact not see the arrival of specific rules on AI liability. The proposed Directive regulating AI liability is currently under review by the European Parliamentary Research Service and could be dropped as the European Parliament and Council of the EU raise questions about its necessity alongside national legislation and the EU Product Liability Directive. Now that the EU AI Act has been officially adopted and will come into force in July 2024, all eyes will be on its implementation and the necessary secondary legislation.

MLex: The EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive is ready to enter into force after the European Parliament approved the text today with 374 votes in favour, 235 against and 19 abstentions. The law will oblige large companies—with more than 1,000 employees and a worldwide turnover higher than €450m—to mitigate the negative impact of their activity and their value chain’s activity on human rights and the environment. The Council of the EU will formally endorse the text, which will enter into force 20 days after its publication in the Official Journal.

MLex: The EU recently passed the EU Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act), a comprehensive law regulating artificial intelligence based on its capacity to cause harm. One of the key categories envisaged encompasses unacceptable uses of this technology, which are forbidden in the EU. The bans will start to apply on 2 February 2025, but public enforcement of the regulation will not begin until August 2025, leaving the initial enforcement of the rules in the hands of private litigation.