What it is
The bill proposes new rules for managing copyright
It is a government bill. Introduced by the Government. It was introduced on 10 May 2018. Introduced by: Gobierno.
Official title: Government bill amending the consolidated text of the Intellectual Property Law, approved by Royal Legislative Decree 1/1996, of 12 April, and incorporating into the Spanish legal system Directive 2014/26/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 26 February 2014, and Directive (EU) 2017/1564 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 13 September 2017 (originating from Royal Decree-Law 2/2018, of 13 April).
Source: Congreso de los Diputados, file 121/000021· updated 11 Nov
Automatic summary, not yet reviewed
- The bill would complete the transposition of two European directives by amending the consolidated text of the Intellectual Property Law: one on the collective management of copyright and one on access to works for people with disabilities.
- It would reorganize the rules on collective management entities into seven chapters and create the figure of the independent management operator, a for-profit entity that manages rights outside the traditional entities, with the duty to notify the start of its activity to the Ministry of Culture and Sport.
- Rights holders would be able to revoke their management contract with the entity, in whole or in part, with notice of at most six months, and contracts could not last more than three years, renewable for one-year periods.
- Each collective management entity would have to set up an internal control body, made up of members of the entity and, in some cases, independent outsiders, to oversee the governing bodies and report to the general assembly.
- Entities would have to distribute and pay collected rights within a maximum of nine months from January 1 of the year after collection, and keep analytical accounts so their management deductions match their real costs.
- Multi-territorial licensing would be regulated in Spain for the first time: a single authorization allowing online music services to use musical works in several EU member states.
- Published works could be reproduced, distributed and made available for the benefit of people who are blind, have a visual disability or other difficulties accessing printed texts, without the rights holder's authorization, as long as there is no profit purpose and certain conditions are met.
- The sanctioning regime would be tightened: managing rights without the required authorization would be a very serious offense, punished with disqualification or fines of between 1 and 2 percent of annual revenue, and entities would have to publish a mandatory annual transparency report.
Who it affects
- Collective management entities for intellectual property rights: They would have to adapt their bylaws, create an internal control body, meet distribution deadlines and publish an annual transparency report.
- Authors and rights holders: They could revoke their management contracts more easily and would receive more information about how their rights are managed.
- Independent management operators and foreign entities providing services in Spain: They would have to notify the Ministry of Culture and Sport of the start of their activity and meet certain transparency obligations.
- Online music service providers: They could obtain, with a single authorization, the permission to use music online in several European Union countries.
- People who are blind, have a visual disability or other difficulties accessing printed texts: They would be granted access to works in accessible formats without needing authorization from rights holders.
Words worth knowing
- Entidad de gestión (collective management entity)
- A nonprofit association authorized to manage the copyright of many creators at once, charging those who use the works and distributing the money among rights holders.
- Contrato de gestión (management contract)
- A contract by which an author entrusts a collective management entity with administering their rights, without giving up ownership of them.
- Trasposición (transposition)
- The process of incorporating a European directive into Spanish law through a domestic law.
- Licencia multiterritorial (multi-territorial license)
- An authorization allowing the online use of musical works in several EU member states under a single contract.
- Texto refundido (consolidated text)
- A single rule that gathers and organizes several laws on the same subject into one text.
It summarizes the text passed by the Senado. It is written by artificial intelligence and may contain mistakes: the official text is what counts. Read the official text · How we make summaries
Where it stands
How far did it get?
It took 7 of 7 steps. It reached BOE, and today it is passed.
- Introduced10 May 2018Someone registers the text in the Congreso.
- Admitted17 May 2018The Bureau of the Congreso accepts it and, for a members’ bill, the plenary decides whether to consider it.
- Amendments21 May 2018Groups propose changes.
- Committee12 September 2018A committee goes through the text in detail.
- Plenaryno dateAll 350 deputies vote.
- Senate27 November 2018The Senate can pass it, amend it or veto it.
- BOE21 February 2019It is published in the Official State Gazette (BOE) and comes into force.
See the 10 official steps on a timeline
21 February 2019
How did the plenary vote?
Voted on: Remaining amendments.
This law had 3 votes; this is the latest with every deputy’s vote. See them all
Source: Congreso de los Diputados, vote 4 of sitting 173· updated 10 Nov
Each dot is a seat. Tap one, or use the arrow keys, to see who it is.
Your province
How did the deputies from your province vote?
And your senators: the Senate does not link its votes to this law in its open data, so we cannot put them side by side here.
Or see how most of each province voted
- A Coruña More votes against 3 yes · 4 no
- Albacete Tie 2 yes · 2 no
- Alicante/Alacant More votes in favour 7 yes · 5 no
- Almería Tie 3 yes · 3 no
- Araba/Álava More votes in favour 3 yes · 1 no
- Asturias More votes in favour 5 yes · 3 no
- Ávila More votes against 1 yes · 2 no
- Badajoz Tie 3 yes · 3 no
- Barcelona More votes in favour 26 yes · 4 no
- Bizkaia More votes in favour 5 yes · 1 no · 1 abst.
- Burgos More votes against 1 yes · 2 no
- Cáceres Tie 2 yes · 2 no
- Cádiz More votes in favour 6 yes · 3 no
- Cantabria Tie 2 yes · 2 no
- Castellón/Castelló More votes in favour 3 yes · 2 no
- Ceuta More votes against 0 yes · 1 no
- Ciudad Real More votes against 2 yes · 3 no
- Córdoba More votes in favour 4 yes · 2 no
- Cuenca More votes against 1 yes · 2 no
- Gipuzkoa More votes in favour 5 yes · 0 no · 1 abst.
- Girona More votes in favour 6 yes · 0 no
- Granada Tie 3 yes · 3 no · 1 abst.
- Guadalajara More votes against 1 yes · 2 no
- Huelva More votes in favour 3 yes · 2 no
- Huesca More votes in favour 2 yes · 1 no
- Illes Balears More votes in favour 4 yes · 3 no
- Jaén Tie 2 yes · 2 no
- La Rioja More votes against 1 yes · 2 no
- Las Palmas More votes in favour 4 yes · 3 no
- León Tie 2 yes · 2 no
- Lleida More votes in favour 3 yes · 1 no
- Lugo More votes in favour 2 yes · 1 no
- Madrid More votes in favour 18 yes · 14 no
- Málaga More votes in favour 7 yes · 4 no
- Melilla More votes against 0 yes · 1 no
- Murcia Tie 5 yes · 5 no
- Navarra More votes in favour 3 yes · 2 no
- Ourense More votes against 1 yes · 3 no
- Palencia More votes against 1 yes · 2 no
- Pontevedra More votes in favour 4 yes · 3 no
- Salamanca More votes against 1 yes · 3 no
- Santa Cruz de Tenerife More votes in favour 4 yes · 3 no
- Segovia More votes against 1 yes · 2 no
- Sevilla More votes in favour 8 yes · 4 no
- Soria Tie 1 yes · 1 no
- Tarragona More votes in favour 4 yes · 1 no
- Teruel More votes against 1 yes · 2 no
- Toledo Tie 3 yes · 3 no
- Valencia/València More votes in favour 10 yes · 6 no
- Valladolid More votes in favour 3 yes · 2 no
- Zamora More votes against 1 yes · 2 no
- Zaragoza More votes in favour 4 yes · 3 no
More details: how each group and each province voted
The groups
Who voted in favour and who against?
In favour, most of Socialista, Vasco (EAJ-PNV), Mixto, Ciudadanos, Gcup-ec-em and GER. Against, most of Popular en el Congreso. 6 deputies voted differently from their group.
By province: in 26 most voted in favour; in 15, against.
Coloured by how most of each province’s deputies voted.
- In favour: 26
- Against: 15
- Tie: 11
| Group | Seats | How it voted |
|---|---|---|
| Socialista | 84 | 80 in favour · 1 abst. · 3 did not vote |
| Vasco (EAJ-PNV) | 5 | 5 in favour |
| Mixto | 19 | 13 in favour · 3 against · 2 abst. · 1 did not vote |
| Ciudadanos | 32 | 30 in favour · 2 did not vote |
| Gcup-ec-em | 67 | 61 in favour · 6 did not vote |
| GER | 9 | 8 in favour · 1 did not vote |
| Popular en el Congreso | 134 | 132 against · 2 did not vote |
What happens next
What happens now?
It is law, or will be once published in the BOE. It comes into force on the date its own text sets.
The same initiative in the other chamber:
Sources
Where does all this come from?
- Congreso de los Diputados, file 121/000021
Official title, type, author, dates and stage.
Retrieved 11 November 2026
- Congreso de los Diputados, vote 4 of sitting 173
The count and every seat’s vote.
Retrieved 10 November 2026
- The data comes from the open files of the Congreso, the Senate and the BOE, unaltered.
- Each deputy’s province is the one of their seat on the day of the vote.
- We only say “passed” or “rejected” when the majority needed is certain; otherwise we say which side had more votes.