Greece Copyright Law Changes 2026, Practical Guide for Businesses, Creators and Cultural Organisations

Greece copyright law changes 2026 represent the most significant overhaul of the country’s intellectual-property enforcement and cultural-heritage protection regime in over a decade. Beginning with Law 5179/2025, which introduced tiered administrative fines for online piracy and expanded liability to end users, the reform wave continued with Law 5271/2026, a dedicated framework for safeguarding artworks and cultural heritage through new criminal offences and authorisation requirements. The Ministry of Culture then unveiled its AI Strategy for Culture, Heritage and Copyright Protection in April 2026, setting out licensing expectations for organisations that use digitised collections to train artificial-intelligence models. Together, these measures create urgent compliance obligations for businesses, digital platforms, creators, collective management organisations (CMOs) and cultural institutions operating in or with Greece.

What you need to know now:

• New fines are live. Private individuals who access pirated content face a €750 fine, rising to €1,500 for repeat offences under Law 5179/2025 (Government Gazette A’ 26/20.02.2025). Operators and platforms face substantially higher penalties.
• CMO presumptions have been strengthened. Recent legislative changes expand the authority of authorised collective management organisations, shifting key rights that were once held exclusively by individual authors.
• AI training on cultural-heritage materials now requires explicit permissions. The Ministry of Culture’s April 2026 strategy foregrounds dataset licensing, heritage protection and model-use restrictions.

Who should read this guide: in-house counsel and general counsel, compliance officers, museum and archive directors, digital-platform policy teams, content owners, publishers, CMOs, and any business that uses, hosts or licenses copyrighted works in Greece.

The Compliance Decision You Must Make Now

Every organisation that creates, distributes, hosts or reuses copyrighted content in Greece must now take three immediate steps to align with the 2025–26 Greek copyright reforms:

1. Audit. Review all current uses and licences of third-party works, including digital content, images, music, software and cultural-heritage materials, against the new legal requirements.
2. Update. Revise takedown and notice-and-action processes, user-content policies and CMO licensing agreements to reflect the expanded administrative sanctions and enforcement posture.
3. Adopt. Implement AI training permissions, dataset licences and moral-rights safeguards before reusing any digitised cultural-heritage or in-copyright material for model training or commercial purposes.

Overview of the 2025–26 Greek Copyright Reform Wave

Greece’s copyright framework rests on Law 2121/1993, which has been progressively amended to transpose EU directives, including the DSM Directive (2019/790), into national law. The 2025–26 reform cycle adds three distinct streams of legislative and policy action that collectively reshape enforcement, heritage protection and digital-age permissions.

Stream 1, Law 5179/2025: online piracy enforcement and administrative fines

Published in the Government Gazette on 20 February 2025 (A’ 26/20.02.2025), Law 5179/2025 amended Article 65A of Law 2121/1993, significantly expanding the system of administrative sanctions. For the first time, end users who unlawfully access pirated content are subject to direct fines, and the penalties for operators, intermediaries and repeat offenders have been materially increased. Industry observers expect this compliance-first model to accelerate enforcement activity throughout 2026.

Stream 2, Law 5271/2026: cultural heritage and new criminal offences

On 30 January 2026, Law 5271/2026 was published, establishing a dedicated legal framework to strengthen the protection of artworks. The law creates specific criminal offences related to the misuse and unauthorised exploitation of cultural-heritage works, enhances deterrence through stricter penalties, and introduces new authorisation requirements for entities collecting copyright and related rights. Only entities authorised by the Ministry of Culture may now collect such rights, a change that directly affects museums, archives, galleries and intermediary licensing bodies.

Stream 3, Ministry of Culture AI Strategy (April 2026)

On 7 April 2026, the Ministry of Culture unveiled its AI strategy to support heritage management, digital innovation and copyright protection. The strategy sets expectations for cultural organisations regarding the licensing of digitised collections, the use of AI tools in heritage management, and the contractual safeguards required when partnering with technology platforms.

Timeline of key legislative dates

Law 5179/2025, Online Piracy, New Fines and Enforcement

Law 5179/2025 marks Greece’s shift to a compliance-first enforcement model for copyright infringement in the digital environment. By amending Article 65A of Law 2121/1993, it closes a gap that previously left end users outside the scope of administrative sanctions.

• Key takeaway 1: Private individuals, not just operators, are now directly liable for administrative fines when they access pirated content.
• Key takeaway 2: Penalties are tiered and escalate sharply for repeat offences.
• Key takeaway 3: The enforcement mechanism is administrative, faster to deploy than civil or criminal proceedings.

Who is liable?

The amended provisions extend liability across the full chain of digital piracy:

• Private individuals who access pirated content online.
• Operators and providers of platforms, websites or services that host, distribute or facilitate access to infringing content.
• Intermediaries and ISPs that fail to comply with notice-and-action obligations or blocking orders.

Fines and penalties, summary table

Enforcement and appeal steps

The administrative enforcement procedure under the amended Article 65A operates independently of civil and criminal proceedings. Enforcement is initiated by the competent authority (the Hellenic Copyright Organisation, OPI, or designated body), which issues a notice of infringement. The respondent may file an objection within the prescribed timeframe, and appeals follow the standard administrative-law process. Early indications suggest that the authorities have adopted a rapid-enforcement posture, prioritising systematic, compliance-driven action over one-off litigation.

Practical examples, ISP and platform scenarios

Consider a streaming aggregator operating from Greece that hosts user-uploaded content without a robust notice-and-takedown system. Under the pre-2025 regime, administrative fines primarily targeted large-scale commercial pirates. Under Law 5179/2025, the platform itself faces direct administrative sanctions if it fails to act on infringement notices, and individual users who knowingly access the pirated streams are independently liable for the €750 fine. Platforms that implement proactive content-identification measures and maintain auditable takedown logs will be best positioned to demonstrate compliance and defend against escalated penalties.

Public Domain 2026 Greece, What Enters, What You Can Reuse, and a Risk Checklist

A broad spectrum of artworks and creative works transitioned into the public domain within the European Union on 1 January 2026, as the standard copyright term of 70 years post mortem auctoris expired for creators who died in 1955.

• Key takeaway 1: Works by authors who died in 1955 are now free to reproduce and distribute without a copyright licence.
• Key takeaway 2: Moral rights, including rights of attribution and integrity, survive in Greece even after a work enters the public domain.
• Key takeaway 3: Digitisation and commercial reuse of public-domain works still requires careful attention to database rights, metadata ownership and photographic-reproduction copyright.

Examples and safe-reuse policies

The EUIPO has published a dedicated guide listing iconic artworks and notable figures whose works entered the public domain in 2026 across EU Member States. For Greek cultural institutions and publishers, the practical implication is that reproductions, adaptations and digital editions of these works may be produced without a copyright licence, but only if the organisation confirms that no separate rights (such as a new photographic copyright in a high-resolution scan, or sui generis database rights in a curated collection) apply. A safe-reuse checklist should include the following steps:

1. Confirm the author’s date of death and applicable term of protection under Greek law.
2. Verify whether any related rights (performer, producer, broadcaster) remain in force.
3. Check for moral-rights restrictions on alteration or decontextualised use.
4. Assess whether new intellectual-property rights attach to digitised reproductions.
5. Document the provenance and rights status of every work in a reuse register.

Collective Management Organisations (CMOs), New Presumptions and Licensing Risks

Recent legislative developments have expanded the authority and legal standing of CMOs operating in Greece, creating new presumptions in their favour that affect both licensing negotiations and dispute resolution.

• Key takeaway 1: CMOs now benefit from statutory presumptions that strengthen their mandate to license and collect remuneration on behalf of rights holders.
• Key takeaway 2: These changes impact direct licensing, businesses and cultural organisations that previously negotiated licences directly with authors must now verify whether a CMO holds a competing or overriding mandate.
• Key takeaway 3: Only entities authorised by the Ministry of Culture may collect copyright and related rights in Greece.

Checking CMO licences and author records

Any entity that uses copyrighted works, whether for broadcasting, public performance, reproduction or digital distribution, should verify the CMO landscape before entering into or renewing licences. The OPI maintains a register of authorised CMOs, and the Ministry of Culture publishes the list of entities permitted to collect rights. Before negotiating a direct licence with an individual author, check whether the author has assigned or mandated the relevant rights to a CMO, as the new presumptions may render a direct licence unenforceable or create dual-payment exposure.

When to negotiate direct licences

Direct licensing remains viable in specific contexts, particularly for bespoke commissions, exclusive digital-distribution arrangements and works not covered by any CMO mandate. However, the burden of proving that a direct licence is valid and exclusive has increased. Industry observers expect disputes between authors, CMOs and licensees to intensify as the presumption framework beds in, making pre-contract due diligence and clear contractual carve-outs more important than ever.

AI and Copyright Greece 2026, Ministry of Culture Strategy, Permissions and Museum Best Practice

The Ministry of Culture’s AI strategy, unveiled on 7 April 2026, represents Greece’s first comprehensive policy framework linking artificial intelligence, cultural heritage and copyright protection. It signals a clear expectation that cultural organisations will adopt structured licensing and governance practices before allowing AI systems to be trained on their collections.

• Key takeaway 1: Museums, archives and libraries should inventory their digital collections and classify works by rights status (in-copyright, public domain, orphan works) before engaging with AI platforms.
• Key takeaway 2: Dataset licences should include model-use restrictions, attribution requirements and provisions for moral-rights compliance.
• Key takeaway 3: The strategy supports digital innovation but foregrounds heritage protection, commercial exploitation of AI outputs derived from heritage datasets will require explicit contractual authorisation.

Using public-domain versus in-copyright works for AI training

Public-domain works may generally be included in training datasets without a copyright licence, but organisations must still consider moral rights (particularly the right of integrity if the AI model transforms or distorts the work), database rights over curated collections, and any contractual restrictions attached to digitisation partnerships. For in-copyright works, the text-and-data-mining exceptions transposed from the DSM Directive apply, but rights holders may opt out of automated mining under Article 4 of that directive, and Greek law requires compliance with such opt-out declarations.

Sample clauses for dataset licences and moral-rights considerations

When licensing digitised collections for AI training, cultural organisations should consider including the following contractual provisions:

• Scope limitation. Restrict use to specified purposes (e.g., research, non-commercial generation) and prohibit sub-licensing without written consent.
• Attribution. Require that AI outputs derived from the dataset credit the source institution and original creator where identifiable.
• Integrity safeguard. Prohibit the generation of outputs that materially distort, mutilate or misrepresent the original works.
• Audit rights. Reserve the right to audit how the dataset is stored, processed and used within the AI system.
• Termination and deletion. Include clear termination rights and require deletion of ingested data upon contract expiry.

Compliance Playbooks by Entity Type, Checklists and Templates

Copyright compliance for businesses Greece requires a tailored approach. Below are actionable checklists for four entity types, followed by a sample takedown notice template and a recordkeeping table.

1. Businesses and SMEs

1. Conduct a full IP-use audit: identify every third-party work used in marketing, software, website content and internal materials.
2. Verify that all licences are current, correctly scoped and compliant with the new CMO presumption framework.
3. Update user-content policies to address Law 5179/2025 sanctions and employee/contractor responsibilities.
4. Implement a notice-and-takedown procedure for any user-generated or third-party content hosted on company platforms.
5. Train staff on the new fine regime, particularly employees responsible for content procurement and digital marketing.
6. Maintain a licence register with expiry dates, scope notes and CMO verification records.
7. Appoint a copyright compliance contact or officer.
8. Schedule an annual compliance review aligned with the legislative calendar.

2. Digital platforms and ISPs

1. Review and upgrade content-identification and filtering systems to detect infringing uploads.
2. Implement a robust notice-and-action workflow compliant with Law 5179/2025 and the DSM Directive’s Article 17 requirements.
3. Maintain a repeat-infringer policy and document enforcement actions.
4. Establish a dedicated point of contact for rights-holder notices and OPI communications.
5. Audit existing safe-harbour reliance: assess whether current practices meet the tightened enforcement standards.
6. Review terms of service to reflect digital platform liability Greece obligations and user indemnification clauses.
7. Retain takedown logs and response-time records for a minimum of five years.
8. Monitor OPI and Ministry of Culture guidance for secondary legislation and enforcement circulars.

3. Creators and publishers

1. Register works with the relevant CMO or confirm opt-out status in writing.
2. Verify that CMO mandates accurately reflect the rights you wish to license collectively versus directly.
3. Review existing publishing and distribution contracts for compatibility with the new CMO presumptions.
4. Include explicit AI training opt-out or opt-in clauses in new contracts.
5. Monitor public-domain entries annually to update catalogue metadata and reuse policies.
6. Maintain records of all licensing revenues, CMO statements and dispute correspondence.
7. Consider moral-rights enforcement strategies for works entering the public domain.

4. Cultural organisations (museums, archives, libraries)

1. Inventory all digital collections by rights status: in-copyright, public domain, orphan, unknown.
2. Obtain or renew Ministry of Culture authorisation for any rights-collection activities.
3. Adopt dataset-licence templates for AI partnerships that include scope, attribution, integrity and audit clauses.
4. Implement a moral-rights policy for public-domain works, especially for digitisation, alteration and commercial reuse.
5. Review contracts with digitisation partners to confirm ownership of new photographic or database rights.
6. Train curatorial and digital staff on the requirements of Law 5271/2026.
7. Establish a permissions workflow for external requests to use collection materials.
8. Maintain a comprehensive rights-and-reuse register (see template below).

Sample takedown notice template

The following is a simplified template for internal use. Legal advice should be obtained before issuing formal notices.

NOTICE OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
To: [Platform/ISP name and contact]
From: [Rights-holder name and contact]
Date: [Date]
Re: Infringing content at [URL]

I, [Name], am the owner (or authorised representative of the owner) of the copyright in [description of the work]. The content accessible at the URL identified above infringes my exclusive rights under Law 2121/1993, as amended. I request that the content be removed or access to it disabled without delay, in accordance with the administrative-enforcement procedures under Law 5179/2025. I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the information in this notice is accurate and that I am authorised to act on behalf of the rights holder.

[Signature / electronic signature]

Recordkeeping table, rights and reuse register

Timeline of Key Dates and Comparison Table, Greece Copyright Law Changes 2026

Who to contact for guidance:

• OPI (Hellenic Copyright Organisation): official registers of CMOs, enforcement guidance, legislative updates.
• Ministry of Culture: authorisation applications, AI strategy implementation, heritage-protection queries.
• Qualified IP counsel: for bespoke compliance audits, contract drafting and dispute resolution.

Conclusion and Next Steps

The Greece copyright law changes 2026, spanning Law 5179/2025, Law 5271/2026 and the Ministry of Culture’s AI strategy, impose concrete, time-sensitive compliance obligations on a wide range of organisations. The practical effect is that every entity creating, distributing, hosting or reusing copyrighted content in Greece must act now: audit current uses and licences, upgrade notice-and-takedown processes, verify CMO mandates and implement AI-training permissions before enforcement accelerates further.

Compliance is not a one-time exercise. The legislative landscape is expected to continue evolving as secondary legislation and ministerial decisions flesh out the framework established by these primary laws. Organisations should establish annual review cycles, monitor OPI and Ministry of Culture publications, and engage qualified Greek IP counsel for bespoke audits, contract drafting and dispute resolution. Early, proactive compliance will be the most effective defence against the tiered administrative sanctions and criminal penalties now in force.

Sources

1. OPI (Hellenic Copyright Organisation), New Law No. 5271/2026
2. Kyriakou Law, New Legislation on Online Piracy in Greece
3. Lexology, Year in Review: Intellectual Property in Greece
4. EUIPO, Copyright: Artworks Entering the Public Domain in 2026
5. GTP Headlines, Greece Rolls Out AI Strategy for Culture, Heritage and Copyright Protection
6. Bernitsas Law, Recent Developments in Intellectual Property Legislation Regarding Law 5271/2026
7. Chambers and Partners, TMT 2026: Greece
8. Ballas Pelecanos, Administrative Copyright Fines in Greece: A New Era of Rapid Enforcement