BETA

Activities of Mady DELVAUX related to 2017/2007(INI)

Shadow reports (1)

REPORT on three-dimensional printing, a challenge in the fields of intellectual property rights and civil liability PDF (291 KB) DOC (61 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: JURI
Dossiers: 2017/2007(INI)
Documents: PDF(291 KB) DOC(61 KB)

Amendments (7)

Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
H. whereas it should be remembered that, contrary to the concerns expressed by some actors, not all 3D-printing production of objects is unlawful, nor are all operators in the sector producing counterfeit objects;
2018/03/01
Committee: JURI
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
M. whereas the question of liability for goods produced and forlegal consequences, beyond the damage resulting from a defective digital file, could, as regards consumers, be resolved with reference to Articles 10 and 14 of the Commission proposalin future EU legislation on certain aspects of contracts for the supply of digital content;.
2018/03/01
Committee: JURI
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas although the development of 3D printing makes industrial production possible, consideration should be given to the need to establish means of collective redress in order to provide compensation to consumers for damage;
2018/03/01
Committee: JURI
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that to anticipate problems relating to accident liability or intellectual property infringement, the EU will have to adopt new legislation or tailor existing laws to the specific case of 3D technology; stresses that, in any case, the legislative response should avoid duplicating rules and should take into account projects that are already under way, in particular the legislation on copyright currently applicable to 2D printing; adds that innovation needs to be accompanied by law, without the law acting as a brake or a constraint;
2018/03/01
Committee: JURI
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that it goes without saying that care should be taken in the 3D- printing sector, particularly with regard to the quality of the printed product and any dangers that the product may pose to users or consumers, and it would be appropriate to consider including identification means to make it possible to distinguish between objects produced in the traditional way and objects produced using 3D printingensure traceability of products;
2018/03/01
Committee: JURI
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Points out that 3D-printing technology has many economic advantages for the EU as it offers opportunities for customisation specifically meeting the requirements of European consumers, and that it could make it possible to repatriate production activities and thereby help to create new jobs that are less physically demanding and less dangerous.
2018/03/01
Committee: JURI
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Stresses the importance of creating a coherent legal framework to provide a smooth transition and legal certainty for consumers and businesses in order to promote innovation in the EU.
2018/03/01
Committee: JURI