104 Amendments of Sabine VERHEYEN related to 2014/2256(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1
Citation 1
– having regard to Articles 4, 26, 34, 114, 118 and 11867 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2
Citation 2
– having regard to Articles 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 22 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that the European cultural markets are naturally heterogeneous because of the European cultural and linguistic diversity, notes that this diversity should be considered as a benefit rather than an obstacle to the Single Market;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)
Paragraph 1 e (new)
1e. Recalls that the European cultural markets are heterogeneous representing the European cultural and linguistic diversity, notes that this diversity should be considered as a benefit rather than an obstacle to the Single Market;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 g (new)
Paragraph 1 g (new)
1g. Stresses that the copyright framework and its effective enforcement, that attain and safeguard a fair remuneration for artists, creators and rightholders play a vital role in encouraging creativity, fostering cultural diversity and ensuring the creation of new creative and cultural content across the Union;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
– having regard to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, and expressly to the Three Steps Test,
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
– having regard to the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions of the 20th October 2005,
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
– having regard to the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS),
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Believes that the modernisation of copyright rules in the EU would be incomplete without an update of Directive 2000/31/EC on electronic commerce and suggests that the European Commission should consider actions in this direction;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Recalls that there is nothing within the current legal framework to prohibit the use of multi-territorial and pan- European licences, calls for an easier access to those optional licences; emphasizes that multi-territorial and pan- European licenses should ensure the fair remuneration of artists, creators and right-holders;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 h (new)
Paragraph 1 h (new)
1h. Emphasizes that any reform of the copyright framework should take as a basis a high level of protection, since rights are crucial to intellectual creation and provide a stable, clear and flexible legal base that fosters investment and growth in the creative and cultural sector, whilst removing legal uncertainties and inconsistencies that adversely affect the functioning of the internal market;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9
Citation 9
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Stresses that any reform on copyright needs to find the best balance between an efficient protection that provides for a proper remuneration for creators and the objective of the public interest for access to cultural goods and knowledge, and which enables users to access services but at the same time can generate sufficient benefits to promote Europe's cultural content and to generate more content;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)
Citation 12 a (new)
- having regard to Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the enforcement of intellectual property rights,
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Recalls that the Union, as well as the Member States, are parties to international treaties on copyright that involve a certain number of obligations and guarantees that should be respected;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13
Citation 13
– having regard to Council Directive 92/100/EEC of 19 Nov2006/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 19922006 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property7, __________________ 7, which amends Council Directive 92/100/EEC7, __________________ 7 OJ L 346, 27.11.1992, p. 61. OJ L 346, 27.11.1992, p. 61.
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 g (new)
Paragraph 1 g (new)
1g. Acknowledges the high interest of all stakeholders, including consumers, rightholders and other stakeholders in the copyright reform, as indicated by the responses to the public consultation conducted by the Commission;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13 a (new)
Citation 13 a (new)
- having regard to Directive 2001/84/EC on the resale right for the benefit of the author of an original work of art,
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)
Paragraph 1 e (new)
1e. Acknowledges the high interest of all stakeholders, including consumers, rightholders and other stakeholders in the copyright reform, as indicated by the responses to the public consultation conducted by the Commission;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Supports the initiatives aimed at enhancing the portability, within the Union, of online services of legally acquired and legally made available content, whilst fully respecting copyrights and the interests of right-holders;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 f (new)
Paragraph 1 f (new)
1f. Supports the initiatives aimed at enhancing the portability, within the Union, of online services of legally acquired and legally made available content, whilst fully respecting copyrights and the interests of right-holders;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights the fact that Member States’ provisions on copyright and related rights vary considerably, and that the exclusivity which copyright grants its owner is, in principle, limited to the territorial boundaries of the Member State where the right has been granted, which may leads to market fragmentation across the EU;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 f (new)
Paragraph 1 f (new)
1f. Notes that several studies have demonstrated that the cultural and creative sectors, often copyright intensive, already account for up to 4.5% of GDP and up to 8.5 million jobs in the Union and are not only essential for cultural diversity but also significantly contribute to social and economic development;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
Citation 17 a (new)
- having regard to the Green Paper of the Commission on the online distribution of audiovisual works in the European Union: opportunities and challenges towards a digital single market (COM(2011)427)),
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Believes that common effort should be made in combatting copyright infringements in the EU in order to ensure the protection of copyright and fair remuneration for authors of copyrighted online content;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 b (new)
Citation 17 b (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 11 September 2012 on the online distribution of audiovisual works in the European Union (2011/2313(INI)),
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 18 a (new)
Citation 18 a (new)
- having regard to the Memorandum of Understanding of 20 September 2011 on key principles on the digitisation and making available of out-of-commerce works, with a view to facilitating the digitisation and making available of books and learned journals for European libraries and similar establishments,
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the ability to link one resource to another is one of the fundamental building blocks of the Internet, but stresses that under certain circumstances, embedding and linking should notcan be considered as acts of communication to thea new public and thus should not be subject to Article 3 of the directiveerefore can constitute an infringement to copyrights;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that under certain circumstances embedding and linking should notcan be considered as acts of communication to thea new public and thus should not be subject to Article 3 of the directiveemphasizes the importance to protect the internet from any abuse and illegal sites providing links to infringing content;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that territorial fragmentation may require users aspiring to offer content- related services across the EU to secure multiple licenses; emphasises the factnotes that differences in limitations and exceptions may create additional legal costs and legal uncertainty; recalls that consumers may be denied access to certain content services on geographical grounds;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises the need to update the concept of ‘reproduction of works’at further analysis is necessary to identify measures not enable the current legal framework to the demand for online content by taking into account the possibilities offered by digital technologies in terms of communication to the publicwhile ensuring adequate protect to rightholders;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that there is a need to further improve cross-border access and the portability of services which are essential for consumers to be able to get the services they want, where and when they want them in a legal and authorised manner;
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Urges the Commission to promote a flexiblehigher level of harmonisation that does not weaken copyright protection and balanced framework for exceptions and limitations that does not cause any harm to right holders and that conforms with consumer expectations; emphasises the important role that exceptions and limitations agreed on for public-interest reasons, for the purpose of education and teaching, play in providing access to knowledge as well as in encouraging cultural and societal participation; urges the Commission and the Member States to consider e-books as part of public lending schemes, provided that all necessary agreements with the relevant right holders have been reached beforehand;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas Directive 2001/29/EC on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society was aimed at adapting legislation on copyright and related rights to reflect technological developments, while providing for a high level of protection of intellectual property to foster investment in creativity and innovation and creative developments, and to safeguard employment and encourage job creation;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the objective of Directive 2001/29/EC on the harmonisation ofwas to adapt the legal framework for certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society was aimed at adapting legislation on copyright and related rights to reflect technological developmentso as to take account of technological developments, while ensuring a high level of intellectual property protection and thus guaranteeing the autonomy of creators and performers;
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recalls that no Member State has applied, or expressed the desire to apply, all the exceptions listed within the 2001/29/EC Directive, recalls that the facultative list of exceptions results from the variety of national cultural policies and provides a necessary flexibility to the Member States;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses that when Member States provide for exceptions and limitations they should ensure that rightholders receive fair compensation and that the exceptions or limitations do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work or subject-matter and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rightholder;
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Acknowledge that Text and data Mining is an emerging and promising practice, in particular for the research field, recalls that innovative licensing solutions are established, but that any preferential treatment should only be applied for non-commercial use;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that exceptions and limitations are properly implemented; calls on Member States, at the same time, to provide all possible information concerning best practices and the obstacles encountered in the implementation of those exceptions and limitations, in order to promote equal access to cultural diversity across borders within the internal market and to improve legal certainty;
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 f (new)
Paragraph 5 f (new)
5f. Where exceptions and limitations are provided for, stresses the need for them to be targeted and narrow whilst reflecting modern digital use, and for clarity to the user with regards to the scope and limits of these exceptions and limitations in order to avoid consumer confusion and ensure legal certainty;
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights the importance of promoting greater interoperability for software, as lack of interoperability hampers innovation and reduces competition in the EU; believes that lack of interoperability may lead to market dominance of one particular product, which in turn stifles competition and limits consumer choice in the EU; recognises that a number of these issues are linked to competition law and highlights that healthy competition along with the protection of intellectual property rights are essential for doing business with legal content.
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Notes the need to carry out an in-depth study of exceptions for research and education purposes before contemplating any changes to the relevant Community rules;
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5d. Recalls that the Marrakech Treaty will require the Union to have a mandatory exception to copyrights for the non- commercial uses to the benefit of persons with a disability, which are directly related to the disability, to the extent required by the specific disability;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights protects the freedom of expression, thefreedom of information, freedom of the arts and scientific researchce, the right to education and the freedom to conduct a business, guarantees protection of personal data and protection of intellectual property, and calls for respect for cultural diversity;
Amendment 93 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights the fact that a general flexible exception should be introduced to offer a broader interpretation of the current exceptions based on the analogue model, while taking into account the freedom of expression and information, freedom of the arts and sciences and cultural, religious and linguistic diversity, as referred to in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Unionis not adapted to the European legal system and would undermine the legal certainty necessary for both the consumers and the creative and cultural sectors;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights protects the freedom of expression, the freedom of the arts and scientific research, the right to education and, the freedom to conduct a business, the right to property and the protection of intellectual property;
Amendment 98 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses the fact that exceptions and limitations should be applied whilst taking account of the specific individual features of digital and analogue environments and should neither conflict with the normal exploitation of the work nor unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author or rightholder; they are established for very specific reasons and should be strictly interpreted by the Member States;
Amendment 99 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Encourages the Commission to safeguard the fair balance between all key actors in the creative process and supply chain in the copyright framework whilst fully respecting the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 103 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that digital levies should be moadernised in light of the development of digital technologies more transparent and optimised to safeguard rightholder and consumer rights and by taking into account Directive 2014/26/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on collective management of copyright and related rights and multi-territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online use in the internal market;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 116 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Recognizes that commercial copyright infringing activities pose a serious threat to the functioning of the digital single market and to the development of the legal offer of diversified cultural and creative content online;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. Whereas measures that contribute to the further development of cultural interchange and improve legal certainty in the sector need to be considered;
Amendment 119 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Points out that the rapid rate of technological development in the digital market calls for a technologically neutral legislative framework for copyrights;
Amendment 121 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas the Directive 2011/77/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2011 and the Directive 2006/116/EC of 12 December 2006 on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights harmonised the terms of protection of copyright and neighbouring rights by establishing a complete harmonisation of the period of protection for each type of work and each related right in the Member States;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative ofin having conductinged a consultation on copyright, which attracted great interest from civil society with more than 9 500 replies, 58.7 % of which came from end users11, from all creative and cultural sectors, as represented by authors, performers, publishers, producers, broadcasters, collective rights management bodies and other rightholders, and from most of the Member States; __________________ 11 Commission, DG MARKT, Report on the responses to the Public Consultation on the Review of the EU Copyright Rules, July 2014, p. 5. (It would be quite one-sided to refer only to users.)
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative of conducting a consultation on copyright, which attracted great interest from civil society with more than 9 500 replies, 58.7 % of which came from end users11 all relevant stakeholders; __________________ 11 Commission, DG MARKT, Report on the responses to the Public Consultation on the Review of the EU Copyright Rules, July 2014, p. 5.
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes with concern that the vast majority of end-user respondents report facing problems when trying to access online services across the Member States, particularly where technological protection measures are used to enforce territorial restrictioninterest the diversity of uses that technological development offers to consumers which may require further assessment to put forward measures for improving the flexibility of the current legal framework to respond to sustainable and actual demand on online content available across Member States;
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes with concern that the vast majority of end-user respinterest the increased range of condtents report facing problems when trying to access online services across the Member States, particularly where technological protection measures are used to enforce territorial restrictions that has been available to users lawfully since the implementation of Directive 2001/29/EC;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2c. Emphasizes that any reform of the copyright framework should take as a basis a high level of protection, since rights are crucial to intellectual creation and provide a stable, clear and flexible legal base that fosters investment and growth in the creative and cultural sector, whilst removing legal uncertainties and inconsistencies that adversely affect the functioning of the internal market;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2d. Alongside the important task of expanding functioning structures for the digital Single Market, steps must also be taken to ensure that the analogue Single Market continues to function properly;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Points out that SMEs in the cultural and creative sectors are helping to make the EU more competitive and that they have considerable potential for creating jobs and growth;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Emphasises that a reform of the EU's copyright acquis should continue to strengthen Europe's cultural and creative industries by improving legal certainty in the digital sphere for all involved parties, including rightholders, businesses and users, and by setting incentives for innovative licensing schemes online and new business models for online distribution of content, thus allowing the sector to benefit from the digital revolution while safeguarding a balanced value chain;
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Recognizes that commercial copyright infringing activities pose a serious threat to the functioning of the digital single market and to the development of the legal offer of diversified cultural and creative content online;
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Deems it indispensable to strengthen the position of authors and creators and improve their remuneration with regard to the digital distribution and exploitation of their works;
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Acknowledges the necessity for authors and performers to be provided with legal protection for their creative and artistic work; recognises the role of producers and publishers in bringing works to the market, and the need for appropriate remunerfair compensation for all categories of rightholders; calls for improvements to the contractual position of authors and performers in relation to other rightholders and intermediaries;
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. ConsidersPoints out that the fintroduction of a single European Copyright Title on the basis of Article 118 TFEU that would apply directly and uniformly across the EU, in accordance with the Commission’s objective of better regulation, as a legal means to remedy the lack of harmonisation resulting from Directive 2001/29/ECancing of creative work and the sharing of risks are underpinned by exclusive rights and freedom of contract; underscores the fact that territorial criteria, including local language use and cultural preferences, are fundamental in terms of potential to attract investment in film and television production and coproduction, and that this ‘ecosystem’ works on the principle of exclusive territorial licensing;
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 256 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 296 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that exceptions and limitations in the digital environment shouldcannot be enjoyed without any unequal treatment as compared with those gin the same way in the digital environment and in the analogue environment; calls for exceptions and limitations to be tailored to the environment in which they apply; (The two markets do not operanted in the analogue world;same way at all.)
Amendment 297 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that technological changes have led to renewed interest in exceptions and limitations, especially their role in the digital environment should be enjoyed without any unequal treatment as compared withand considers that the rights enjoyed by the creators of work in the digital world should be identical to those enjoyed in the analogue world, subject to the exceptions and limitations set out. Recognises that further analysis of the exceptions and limitations is sought so as to consider how thoese granted in the analogue worldcan serve the public in the digital age;
Amendment 317 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Views with concern the increasing impact of differences among Member States in the implementation of exceptions, which creates legal uncertainty and has direct negative effects onNotes the importance of European cultural diversity, which provides opportunities rather than obstacles to the Single Market, and notes that the possible differences in the implementation of exceptions may be handled on a case-by- case basis and market driven solutions , to avoid legal uncertainty and to protect the functioning of the digital single market, in view of the development of cross-border activities;
Amendment 323 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Supports the initiatives aimed at enhancing the portability, within the EU, of online services of legally acquired and legally made available content, whilst fully respecting copyrights and the interests of right-holders;
Amendment 325 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 d (new)
Paragraph 10 d (new)
10d. Recalls that the European cultural markets are naturally heterogeneous because of the European cultural and linguistic diversity, notes that this diversity should be considered as a benefit rather than an obstacle to the Single Market;
Amendment 326 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 e (new)
Paragraph 10 e (new)
10e. Takes note of the importance of territorial licenses in the EU, particularly with regards to audiovisual and film production which is primarily based on broadcasters pre-purchase or pre- financing systems;
Amendment 343 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to make mandatoryensure the proper implementation of all the exceptions and limitations referred to in Directive 2001/29/EC, to allowand to provide all necessary information to promote an equal access to cultural diversity across borders within the internal market and to improve legal certainty, while ensuring respect for the principle of subsidiarity, cultural diversity and evidence of clear cross-border impact;
Amendment 361 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes with interest the development of new forms of use of works on digital networks, in particular transformative uses, and stresses that these should be subject to the same level of copyright protection while keeping the best balance between an efficient protection that provides for a proper remuneration for creators and the objective of the public interest for access to cultural goods and knowledge;
Amendment 373 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 375 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. CRecalls for the adoption of an open norm introducing flexibility in the interpretation of exceptions and limitations in certain special cases that dothat the exceptions and limitations should not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author or rightholder, while keeping the interpretation of exceptions and limitations on the level of Member States to permit the adaptation of the copyright system to different national circumstances and social needs;
Amendment 390 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Urges the European legislator to ensure the technological neutrality and future- compatibility of exceptions and limitations by taking due account of the effects of media convergence; considers, in particular, that the exception for quotation should expressly include audio- visual quotations in its scope;
Amendment 392 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Urges the European legislator to ensure the technological neutrality and future- compatibility of exceptions and limitations by taking due account of the effects of media convergence; considers, in particular, that the exception for quotation should expressly include audio- visual quotations in its swhile serving the public interest by fostering incentives to create, finance and distribute new works and to make those works available to the public in new, innovative and compelling ways;
Amendment 407 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. StressNotes that the ability to freely link from one resource to another is one of the fundamental building blocks of the internet; calls on the EU legislator to make it clear that reference to works by means of a hyperlink is not subject to exclusive rights, as it does not consist in a communication to a new public12 ; __________________ 12 Order of the Court of Justice of 21 October 2014 in Case C-348/13, BestWater International GmbH v Michael Mebes and Stefan Potsch (request for a preliminary ruling from Germany’s Bundesge and underlines that any further legislation must accurately reflect the existing definitions and principles set in the European case law stating that when the hyperlink allows the recipients to circumvent the restrictions on access to the protected work so that can access the protected work which was otherwise unavailable to them, then this constitutes a communication to a new public and it is subject to exclusive ricghtshof).. __________________ 12
Amendment 411 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Suggests a review of the liability of service providers and intermediaries in order to clarify their legal status and liability with regards to copyrights, to guarantee that due diligence is exercised throughout the creative process and supply chain, and to ensure a fair remuneration for creators and rightholders within the European Union.
Amendment 422 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls onInvites the EU legislator to ensurrecognise that the use of photographs, video footage or other images of works which are permanently located in public places is permitted; shall considered to be in the public domain, where that use is for a non-commercial purpose or scale.
Amendment 439 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Emphasises that the existing limitation on the exception for caricature, parody and pastiche should apply regardless of the purposemust be kept to strike a fair balance between the interests and rights of the creators and original characters and the freedom of expression of the user of a protected work who is relying ofn the parodic use; exception for parody, and to avoid uncontrolled abuse12 a ; __________________ 12 a Order of the Court of Justice of 3 September 2014 in Case C-201/13 (J. Deckmyn)
Amendment 441 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses the need to enable automated analytical techniques for text and data (e.g. ‘Encourages solutions such as the licensing model for text and data mining’) for all purposes, provided that permission to read the work has been acquiredscientific research purposes;
Amendment 443 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. StreInvites the Commission to assess the need to enable automated analytical techniques for text and data (e.g. ‘text and data mining’) for all purposeswhether data analysis activities could be covered by the exception for scientific research contained in Article 5.3.a) of the current Directive, which provides for an exception to the right of reproduction (Article 2) when the protected work is used, and whether it enables automated analytical techniques for text and data, provided that permission to read the work has been acquired;
Amendment 452 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Acknowledges that Text and data Mining is an emerging and promising practice, in particular for the research field, recalls that innovative licensing solutions are established, but that any preferential treatment should only be applied for non-commercial use.
Amendment 469 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls for a broad exception for research and education purposes, which should cover not only educational establishments but any kind oflso educational or research activity, including non-formal educationies linked to an educational establishment or institution recognised by national authorities or legislation or within the purview of an educational programme;
Amendment 478 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls for the adoption of a mandatory exception allowing libraries to lend books to the public in digital formats, irrespective of the place of accesRecognizes the importance of libraries for access to knowledge and encourages the rightholders to identify appropriate market-based solutions to enable libraries to realise their potential in the digital environment while respecting the interests of all stakeholders included consumers;
Amendment 495 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the EU legislator to preclude Member States from introducing statutory licences for thInvites the Commission to analyse the necessity of measures, if any, to be implemented by Member States so as to provide compensation tof rightholders for the harm caused by acts made permissible by an exception while they should ensure that rightholders receive fair compensation and that the exceptions or limitations do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work or subject-matter and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rightholder;
Amendment 514 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. CRecalls for the adoption of harmonised criteria for defining the harm caused to rightholders in respect of reproductions made by a natural person for private use, and for harmonised transparency measures as regards the private copying levies put in place in some Member States13the European Parliament resolution of February 2014 which underlined the importance of the system of remuneration for private copying in seeking to strike a balance between the interests of consumers and those of rightholders; __________________ 13 As stated in António Vitorino’s recommendations of 31 January 2013 resulting from the latest mediation process conducted by the Commission in respect of private copying and reprography levies.
Amendment 517 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls for Notes that further adoption of harmonised criteria for defining the harm caused tonalysis is necessary on the viability of measures to the fair compensation of rightholders in respect of reproductions made by a natural persons for private use, and for harmonised transparency measures as regards the private copying levies put in place in some Member States13 ; __________________ 13 As stated in António Vitorino’s recommendations of 31 January 2013 resulting from the latest mediation process conducted by the Commission in respect of private copying and reprography levies.in particular in regard to more transparency and better optimalisation for the existing measures as digital levies to safeguard rightholder and consumer rights;
Amendment 524 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)
Paragraph 22 b (new)
22b. Stresses that digital levies should be made more transparent and optimised to safeguard rightholder and consumer rights and by taking into account Directive 2014/26/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on collective management of copyright and related rights and multi-territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online use in the internal market;
Amendment 538 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Points out that the rapid rate of technological development in the digital market calls for a technologically neutral legislative framework for copyrights;
Amendment 548 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 556 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 e (new)
Paragraph 24 e (new)
24e. Calls on the Commission and the legislature to consider solutions for the displacement of value from content to services; stresses the need to adjust the definition of the status of intermediary in the current digital environment;