Reply to post:

"A decision to put hyperlinks beyond the reach of copyright would place the European Union in breach of its Berne Convention obligations."

Really?

Let's take a real world example.

I copy a document that's somebody else's copyright. Unless I'm covered by fair use that's a breach of copyright. I post that copy somewhere public, maybe by displaying it on my front gate, maybe stick it on an advertising hoarding, wherever. That's definitely a breach of copyright.

Someone then spreads the word that there's a document there. Just that. It doesn't say what the document contains*. It doesn't say whether it's a copy of something that's somebody else's copyright. It just says that there's a document there. How is that, in itself, a breach of copyright? It's a simple statement of fact. Or is it even that? If I remove the document but the word is still being spread and is now erroneous.

*The name of the document in the link might be arbitrary, something like image_$1.jpeg or it migh hint what the document contains, something like elReg_vulture_icon.jpeg, but even that doesn't guarantee that the document actually matches the description.