Part 1: Effectiveness
The EU’s harmonization of copyright legislation includes 10 directives that coordinate the rights of artists, producers and broadcasters across Europe (“The EU Copyright Legislation,” 2015). The new copyright legislation is meant to specifically allow better access to digital content while still affording copyright holders their protections. The new digital single market strategy will allow those who have paid for digital content to access that content anywhere in Europe, but they may be additionally charged for usage that is outside of their location (Martinez, 2015). The digital single market harmonization is seen as forward progress by many consumers, but there are still aspects of it that are a challenge to the legislation’s effectiveness.

From an economic perspective, harmonization of copyrights unifies a 500 million person market, but artists who have monetarily benefitted from the lack of harmonization may suffer. For instance, the independent film industry has increased profits in the past by selling its licensing to countries individually. New copyright legislation makes this action unnecessary, and independent film makers are worried that this change could reduce their chances of creation (Martinez, 2015).

From a legal perspective, the copyright laws of the EU are meant to be simple and flexible for businesses and consumers (“Digital Europe,” 2015). Despite the banning of geo-blocking whereby customers can view their purchased content anywhere in Europe, the fear of competition from Hollywood in the United States has led to the consideration of further regulation. For example, the European Commission is proposing that video-on-demand sites require 20 percent of their content to be European. Companies like Netflix are against such standards, as they already devote a fifth of their content to European work (Enslin, 2016). The further legislation in lieu of competition may lessen the effectiveness of new copyright law.

Part 2: Free Movement of Goods and Moral Rights
The focus of harmonization of copyright law has been a dual attempt to achieve economic and moral rights, as copyright law encompasses both subjects. The economic rights benefit the internal market of Europe much like a national market by eliminating trade restrictions such as levies. The moral rights in copyright law include the rights of the consumer but also the rights of the author or artist, which include rights of authorship, integrity, sharing, and destruction. The moral rights between countries have historically differed, so they must be harmonized in an effective single market (Sirvinskaite, 2007).

The moral rights of the consumer have been debated because of the argument that once digital media content is purchased, it belongs to the consumer and should be able to be accessed anywhere without additional fees or taxes. Others argue that the additional fees for extended use outside one’s local area can be equated to roaming charges on cellular phones, and they benefit the industry by allowing more revenue for online content. Consumers also argue that online content should be sharable, much like one can share a book or a compact disc.

The moral rights of the author or artist contradict the rights of the consumer. Digital content is easily copied with no wear and tear on the material. Therefore, used digital content is the exact same quality as new (“Copyright and the Digital Single Market,” n.d.). This limits the economic advantages for artists if sharing is enabled carte blanche, as new purchases will not be the optimal choice if exact replicas are available through sharing or borrowing. As discussed previously, the open internal market also hurts some areas of the industry, such as independent films that previously made additional income on the licensing in individual countries. The EU’s copyright law has been evolving over decades, and its efficacy will be determined and developed as the market changes from paper to digital and creates new economic and moral challenges.