Meta Paris Court Appeal: Must Pay French News Royalties for Neighboring Rights

• The Paris Court of Appeal upheld interim measures requiring Meta to be more transparent in negotiations with French news publishers.
• Meta must share data on content usage, clicks, and revenue to determine fair compensation for press publishers.
• The ruling reinforces the French Competition Authority's finding that Meta likely abused its dominant market position.
• This case stems from the 2019 European Copyright Directive, which established neighboring rights for media outlets.
• Meta had failed to reach royalty agreements with French press organizations in 2024, leading to the initial complaint.

This decision underscores the critical obligation for dominant digital platforms like Meta to engage in good faith negotiations and provide comprehensive data to ensure equitable compensation for press publishers under the European Copyright Directive's neighboring rights framework.

The Paris Court of Appeal recently rejected Meta's challenge to interim measures previously imposed by the French Competition Authority. This significant ruling mandates that the technology giant must now provide greater transparency and establish equitable compensation rates when utilizing content from French news publishers. The decision reinforces the Competition Authority's earlier finding from July 8, which indicated Meta was likely abusing its dominant market position by imposing unfair trading conditions and circumventing the law on neighboring rights, to the detriment of press publishers.

As a direct consequence of this ruling, Meta is now compelled to negotiate press royalties in good faith. This includes sharing crucial data related to the clicks, viewership, and profits generated by news articles on its platforms, all aimed at ensuring fair agreements. Furthermore, another interim measure prevents Meta from degrading the display conditions of press content. The Paris Court of Appeal explicitly stated that the necessary transparency for determining a fair price had not been met, underscoring the core issue at hand. The full details of the court's decision were not immediately made public.

This ongoing legal battle over Meta French news royalties is rooted in the concept of neighboring rights, which were introduced across the European Union in 2019 through the European Copyright Directive. This framework functions similarly to traditional copyright, empowering media outlets to seek remuneration for their content when it is disseminated across online platforms. The specific compensation amount is determined through direct negotiations between the platforms and the publishers, rather than being set by governmental bodies.

Under French law, however, the calculation of this remuneration must take into account several key factors. These include the diverse human, material, and financial investments made by publishers and press agencies in producing their journalistic work. Additionally, the contribution of press publications to political and general information, as well as the extent of their use by online public communication services, must be considered. This legal requirement highlights the importance of publishers understanding how much platforms benefit from their content to ensure fair compensation.

The current dispute escalated in 2024 when Meta failed to reach an agreement on royalties with two key French press organizations: the Alliance of the General Information Press (APIG) and Press Neighboring Rights (DVP), who are the plaintiffs in this case. Following the breakdown in negotiations, Meta reportedly decided to cease existing contracts and payments to these publishers.

This impasse prompted APIG and DVP to file complaints with the French Competition Authority in July and September 2025. The Authority subsequently imposed the interim measures against Meta, citing a "serious and immediate harm to the press sector" while it continues its investigation into the merits of the complaints. Meta's appeal against these interim measures has now been rejected, meaning the company must comply with them as the Authority's investigation proceeds.

The ruling by the Meta Paris Court Appeal neighboring rights case is not entirely unexpected, according to Brad Spitz, a lawyer and associate professor at the University of Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, who has closely followed the proceedings. Spitz noted that a similar outcome occurred in a previous case involving Google, establishing a precedent. He emphasized the legal clarity of the situation, stating that an abuse of a dominant position necessitates transparency for effective negotiation.

This decision underscores the critical obligation for dominant digital platforms like Meta to engage in good faith negotiations and provide comprehensive data to ensure equitable compensation for press publishers under the European Copyright Directive's neighboring rights framework. While Meta must now abide by the interim measures, the broader investigation into whether the company has breached competition law remains ongoing, with a final determination yet to be made.

This ruling from the Paris Court of Appeal reinforces the obligation for dominant digital platforms like Meta to negotiate in good faith and provide transparency on content usage data when determining compensation for press publishers under the European Copyright Directive's neighboring rights framework. Lawyers advising tech companies operating in the EU, particularly France, should review their content licensing and compensation strategies to ensure compliance with these transparency and fair negotiation requirements, mitigating risks of competition law breaches and interim measures.

Source: Original reporting via Courthouse News Service