164 Amendments of Dario TAMBURRANO related to 2016/0280(COD)
Amendment 14 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Rapid technological developments continue to transform the way works and other subject-matter are created, produced, distributed and exploited. New business models and new actors continue to emerge. The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework remain sound. However, legal uncertainty remains, for both rightholders and users, as regards certain uses, including cross-border uses, of works and other subject-matter in the digital environment. As set out in the Communication of the Commission entitled ‘Towards a modern, more European copyright framework’26 , in some areas it is necessary to adapt and supplement the current Union copyright framework. This Directive provides for rules to adapt certain exceptions and limitations to digital and cross-border environments, as well as measures to facilitate certain licensing practices as regards the dissemination of out-of- commerce works and the online availability of audiovisual works on video- on-demand platforms with a view to ensuring wider access to content. In order to achieve a well-functioning marketplace for copyright, there should also be rules on rights in publications, on the use of works and other subject-matter by online service providers storing and giving access to user uploaded content and on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts. _________________ 26 COM(2015) 626 final. COM(2015) 626 final.
Amendment 18 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) New technologies enable the automated computational analysis of information in digital form, such as text, sounds, images or data, generally known as text and data mining. Those technologies allow researchercitizens, startups, researchers and journalists to process large amounts of information to gain new knowledge and discover new trends. Whilst text and data mining technologies are prevalent across the digital economy, there is widespread acknowledgment that text and data mining can in particular benefitalso benefit citizen science, business, the research community and journalism and in so doing encourage innovation. However, in the Union, research organisations such as universities and research institutesindividuals and legal entities having lawful access to content are confronted with legal uncertainty as to the extent to which they can perform text and data mining of contentthereof. In certain instances, text and data mining may involve acts protected by copyright and/or by the sui generis database right, notably the reproduction of works or other subject- matter and/or the extraction of contents from a database. Where there is no exception or limitation which applies, an authorisation to undertake such acts would be required from rightholders. Text and data mining may also be carried out in relation to mere facts or data which are not protected by copyright and in such instances no authorisation would be required.
Amendment 22 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Union law already provides certain exceptions and limitations covering uses for scientific research purposes which may apply to acts of text and data mining. However, those exceptions and limitations are optional and not fully adapted to the use of technologies in scientific research. Moreover, where researcherindividuals and legal entities have lawful access to content, for example through subscriptions to publications or open access licences, the terms of the licences may exclude text and data mining. As both research isand business are increasingly carried out with the assistance of digital technology, there is a risk that the Union's competitive position as a research area will suffer unless steps are taken to address the legal uncertainty for text and data mining.
Amendment 28 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) This legal uncertainty should be addressed by providing for a mandatory exception to the right of reproduction and also to the right to prevent extraction from a database, including raw data. The new exception should be without prejudice to the existing mandatory exception on temporary acts of reproduction laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29, which should continue to apply to text and data mining techniques which do not involve the making of copies going beyond the scope of that exception. Research organisationLegal entities should also benefit from the exception when they engage into public-private partnerships.
Amendment 30 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Article 5(3)(a) of Directive 2001/29/EC allows Member States to introduce an exception or limitation to the rights of reproduction, communication to the public and making available to the public for the sole purpose of, among others, illustration for teaching or scientific research. In addition, Articles 6(2)(b) and 9(b) of Directive 96/9/EC permit the use of a database and the extraction or re-utilization of a substantial part of its contents for the purpose of illustration for teaching. The scope of those exceptions or limitations as they apply to digital uses is unclear. In addition, there is a lack of clarity as to whether those exceptions or limitations would apply where teaching is provided online and thereby at a distance. Moreover, the existing framework does not provide for a cross-border effect, nor allow the application of such exceptions or limitations to private study purposes. This situation may hamper the development of digitally- supported teaching activities and distance learning, scientific research and private study. Therefore, the introduction of a new mandatory exception or limitation is necessary to ensure that educational establishments benefit from full legal certainty when using works or other subject-matter in digitall teaching activities, scientific research and private study, including digital,online and across borders.
Amendment 40 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) While distance learning and cross- border education programmes are mostly developed at higher education level, digital tools and resources are increasingly used at all education levels, in particular to improve and enrich the learning experience. The exception or limitation provided for in this Directive should therefore benefit all educational establishments in primary, secondary, vocational and higher education to the extent they pursue their educationalSuch tools are also used in scientific research and private study activities. The exception provided for in this Directive should therefore benefit all educational, scientific and private study activityies for a non-commercial purpose. The organisational structure and the means of funding of an educational establishment are not the decisive factors to determine the non-commercial nature of the activity.
Amendment 43 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The exception or limitation should cover digitall uses of works and other subject-matter such as the use of parts or extracts of works to support, enrich or complement the teaching, including the related learning activities. The use of the works or other subject-matter under the exception or limitation should be only in the context of teaching and learning activities carried out under the responsibility of educational establishments, including during examinations, and be limited to what is necessary for the purpose of such activities. The exception or limitation should cover both uses through digital means in the classroom and online uses through the educational establishment's secure electronic network, the access to which should be protected, notably by authentication procedures. The exception or limita, the scientific research and private study. The exception should be understood as covering the specific accessibility needs of persons with a disability in the context of illustration for teaching or scientific research, as well as private study.
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Different arrangements, based on the implementation of the exception provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC or on licensing agreements covering further uses, are in place in a number of Member States in order to facilitate educational uses of works and other subject-matter. Such arrangements have usually been developed taking account of the needs of educational establishments and different levels of education. Whereas it is essential to harmonise the scope of the new mandatory exception or limitation in relation to digitall uses and cross- border teaching activities, the modalities of implementation may differ from a Member State to another, to the extent they do not hamper the effective application of the exception or limitation or cross-border uses. This should allow Member States to build on the existing arrangements concluded at national level. In particular, Member States could decide to subject the application of the exception or limitation, fully or partially, to the availability of adequate licences, covering at least the same uses as those allowed under the exception. This mechanism would, for example, allow giving precedence to licences for materials which are primarily intended for the educational market. In order to avoid that such mechanism results in legal uncertainty or administrative burden for educational establishments, Member States adopting this approach should take concrete measures to ensure that licensing schemes allowing digital uses of works or other subject-matter for the purpose of illustrascientific research and private study, the modalities of implementation may differ from a Member State to another, to the extent they do not hamper in any way the effective application of the exception for teaching are easily available and that educational establishments are aware of the existence of such licensing schemcross- border uses.
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 69 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
Amendment 74 #
Proposal for a directive
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
Having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and in particular Articles 11, 14, 16, 17, 38 thereof,
Amendment 75 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
Amendment 76 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The directives which have been adopted in the area of copyright and related rights provide for a high level of protection for rightarmonised legal framework, which contributes to the good functioning of the internal market. This legal framework shoulders and create a framework wherein the exploitation of work however be updated, taking into account new digital technologies that pose new challenges in finding the right balance between the protection of intellectual property rights and other protected subject-matter can take place. This harmonised legal framework contributes to the good functioning of the internal market; it stimulate new possibilities for consumers and businesses to create, innovate, access and exchange copyright-protected works and other subject matter. Furthermore, it should be acknowledged that there is an increasing number of cases where copyright hampers innovation, and creativity, investment and production of new content, also rather than fostering them. An updated legal framework would contribute to the general public goal of increasing access to, and favouring the digital environment. The protection provided by this legal framework also contributesssemination of, creative content, information and knowledge, and to the Union's objective of respecting and promoting cultural diversity while at the same time bringing the European common cultural heritage to the fore. Article 167(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union requires the Union to take cultural aspects into account in its action.
Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Rapid technological developments continue to transform the way works and other subject-matter are created, produced, distributed and exploitnjoyed. New business models and new actors continue to emerge. The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework remain sound. However, changing tremendously the market, contributing to stimulating competition with the established players and fostering creativity and innovation. The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework need to be updated and adapted in order to increase access to and dissemination of content, information and knowledge within the internal market. Indeed, legal uncertainty remains, for both rightholders and users, as regards certain uses, including cross-border uses, of works and other subject-matter in the digital environment. As set out in the Communication of the Commission entitled ‘Towards a modern, more European copyright framework’26 , in some areas it is necessary to adapt and supplement the current Union copyright framework. This Directive provides for rules to adapt certain exceptions and limitations to digital and cross-border environments, as well as measures to facilitate certain licensing practices as regards the dissemination of out-of- commerce works and the online availability of audiovisual works on video- on-demand platforms, and the use of works and other subject matters belonging to the public domain, with a view to ensuring wider access to content. In order to achieve a well-functioning and fair marketplace for copyright, there should also be rules on rights in publications, on the use of works and other subject-matter by online service providers storing and giving access to user uploaded content and on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts. _________________ 26 COM(2015) 626 final. COM(2015) 626 final.
Amendment 83 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Rapid technological developments continue to transform the way works and other subject-matter are created, produced, distributed and exploited. New business models and new actors continue to emerge. The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework remain sound. However, legal uncertainty remains, for both rightholders and users, as regards certain uses, including cross-border uses, of works and other subject-matter in the digital environment. As set out in the Communication of the Commission entitled ‘Towards a modern, more European copyright framework’26 , in some areas it is necessary to adapt and supplement the current Union copyright framework. This Directive provides for rules to adapt certain exceptions and limitations to digital and cross-border environments, as well as measures to facilitate certain licensing practices as regards the dissemination of out-of- commerce works and the online availability of audiovisual works on video- on-demand platforms with a view to ensuring wider access to content. In order to achieve a well-functioning marketplace for copyright, there should also be rules on rights in publications, on the use of works and other subject-matter by online service providers storing and giving access to user uploaded content and on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts. _________________ 26 COM(2015) 626 final. COM(2015) 626 final.
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38
Recital 38
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In the fields of research, education and, preservation of cultural heritage and public lending of literary works, digital technologies permit new types of uses that are not clearly covered by the current Union rules on exceptions and limitations. In addition, the optional nature of exceptions and limitations provided for in Directives 2001/29/EC, 2006/115/EC, 96/9/EC and 2009/24/EC in these fields may negatively impact the functioning of the internal market and the access to creative content, information and knowledge. This is particularly relevant as regards cross-border uses, which are becoming increasingly important in the digital environment. Therefore, the existing exceptions and limitations in Union law that are relevant for scientific research, teaching and, preservation of cultural heritage and public lending of literary works, should be reassessed in the light of those new uses. Mandatory exceptions or limitations for uses of text and data mining technologies in the field of scientific research, illustration for teaching and scientific research in the digital environment and for, preservation of cultural heritage, public lending of literary works, and out-of-commerce works should be introduced. For uses not covered by the exceptions or the limitation provided for in this Directive, the exceptions and limitations existing in Union law should continue to apply. Directives 96/9/EC, 2001/29/EC and 2001/296/115/EC should be adapted.
Amendment 94 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The exceptions and the limitation set out in this Directive seek to achieve a fair balance between the specific rights and interests of authors and other rightholders on the one hand, and of users on the other. They can be applied only in certain special cases which do not conflict with the normal exploitation of the works or other subject- matter and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rightholders. The public goal of favouring the creation, dissemination and access to content, information and knowledge within the internal market should be also duly taken into account in the balance of the different interests at stake.
Amendment 103 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Amendment 107 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) Consumers are not only users but are increasingly, in particular in a digital environment, also creators and distributors of works created by themselves, albeit for non-commercial purposes.
Amendment 109 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Amendment 109 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The protection of technological measures established in Directive 2001/29/EC remains essentialimportant to ensure the protection and the effective exercise of the rights granted to authors and to other rightholders under Union law. This protection should be maintained while ensuring that the use of technological measures does not prevent or hinder in any way the enjoyment of the exceptions and the limitation established in this Directive, which are particularly relevant in the online environment. Rightholders should have the opportunity to ensure this through voluntary effective measures. They should remain free to choose the format and the modalities to provide the beneficiaries of the exceptions and the limitation established in this Directive with the means to effectively benefit from them provided that such means are appropritransparent, non-discriminatory and proportionate. In the absence of voluntary effective measures, Member States should take appropriate measures in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 6(4) of Directive 2001/29/EC.
Amendment 115 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
Amendment 117 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) New technologies enable the automated computational analysis of information in digital form, such as text, sounds, images or data, generally known as text and data mining. Those technologies allow researchercitizens, startups, researchers and journalists to process large amounts of information to gain new knowledge and discover new trends. Whilst text and data mining technologies are prevalent across the digital economy, there is widespread acknowledgment that text and data mining can in particular benefitalso benefit citizen science, business, the research community and journalism and, in so doing, encourage innovation. However, in the Union, research organisations such as universities and research institutesindividuals and legal entities having authorised access to content are confronted with legal uncertainty as to the extent to which they can perform text and data mining of contentthereof. In certain instances, text and data mining may involve acts protected by copyright and/or by the sui generis database right, notably the reproduction of works or other subject- matter and/or the extraction of contents from a database. Where there is no exception or limitation which applies, an authorisation to undertake such acts would be required from rightholders. Text and data mining may also be carried out in relation to mere facts or data which are not protected by copyright and in such instances no authorisation would be required.
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Union law already provides certain exceptions and limitations covering uses for scientific research purposes which may apply to acts of text and data mining. However, those exceptions and limitations are optional and not fully adapted to the use of technologies in scientific research. Moreover, where researchers have lawfulindividuals and legal entities have authorised access to content, for example through subscriptions to publications or open access licences, the terms of the licences may exclude text and data mining. As both research isand business are increasingly carried out with the assistance of digital technology, there is a risk that the Union's competitive position as a research area will suffer unless steps are taken to address the legal uncertainty for text and data mining.
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and, Article 11(1) of this Directive, and Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 2009/24/EC for reproductions and extractions made by research organisationpersons or legal entities in order to carry out text and data mining of works or other subject-matter to which they have lawful access for the purposes of scientific research.
Amendment 144 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Rightholders shall not be allowed to apply measuretechnological measures to prevent or hinder beneficiaries from benefiting from the exception provided for in paragraph 1, unless to ensure the security and integrity of the networks and databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted. Such measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and shall not go beyond what is necessary to achieve that objective.
Amendment 146 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) This legal uncertainty should be addressed by providing for a mandatory exception to the right of reproduction and also to the right to prevent extraction from a database, including raw data. The new exception should be without prejudice to the existing mandatory exception on temporary acts of reproduction laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29, which should continue to apply to text and data mining techniques which do not involve the making of copies going beyond the scope of that exception. Research organisations shLegal entities could also benefit from the exception when they engage into public-private partnerships.
Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) It should be noted that technological innovation can make legal rules obsolete and to counter this, it would be advisable to simplify and modernise the legal framework for copyright and related rights by introducing an open standard concerning the interpretation of exceptions and limitations.
Amendment 149 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall encourage rightholders and research organisationbeneficiaries to define commonly-agreed best practices concerning the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 3across the Union concerning the development of technologies implementing the exception provided for in paragraph 1 as well as the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 3. These best practices shall be made easily and effectively accessible to the public.
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 411(1) of this Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 114(1) of this Directive 2009/24/EC in order to allow for the digital use of works and other subject- matter for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching or scientific research, including private study, to the extent justified by the non- commercial purpose to be achieved, provided that the use: is accompanied by the indication of the source, including the author's name, unless this turns out to be impossible.
Amendment 160 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In view of a potentially high number of access requests to and downloads of their works or other subject- matter, rRightholders should be allowed to apply measures where there is risk that the security and integrity of the system or databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted wcould be jeopardised. Those measures should be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and not exceed what is necessary to pursue the objective of ensuring the security and integrity of the system and should not undermine in any way the effective application of the exception.
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Any contractual provision contrary to the exception provided for in paragraph 1 shall be unenforceable.
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 171 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Article 5(3)(a) of Directive 2001/29/EC allows Member States to introduce an exception or limitation to the rights of reproduction, communication to the public and making available to the public for the sole purpose of, among others, illustration for teaching or scientific research. In addition, Articles 6(2)(b) and 9(b) of Directive 96/9/EC permit the use of a database and the extraction or re-utilization of a substantial part of its contents for the purpose of illustration for teaching. The scope of those exceptions or limitations as they apply to digital uses is unclear. In addition, there is a lack of clarity as to whether those exceptions or limitations would apply where teaching is provided online and thereby at a distance. Moreover, the existing framework does not provide for a cross-border effect, nor allow the application of such exceptions or limitations to private study purposes. This situation may hamper the development of digitally- supported teaching activities and distance learning, scientific research and private study. Therefore, the introduction of a new mandatory exception or limitation is necessary to ensure that educational establishments benefit from full legal certainty when using works or other subject-matter in digitall teaching activities, includingscientific research and private study, including digital, online and across borders.
Amendment 176 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The use of works and other subject- matter for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching through secure electronic networksor scientific research, including private study, undertaken in compliance with the provisions of national law adopted pursuant to this Article shall be deemed to occur solely in the Member State where the educational establishmentbeneficiary is established.
Amendment 178 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. 4. Member States may provide for fair compensation for the harm incurred by theany unreasonable prejudice to the legitimate interests of rightholders due to the use of their works or other subject-matter pursuant to paragraph 1.
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) While distance learning and cross- border education programmes are mostly developed at higher education level, digital tools and resources are increasingly used at all education levels, in particular to improve and enrich the learning experience. Such tools are also used in scientific research and private study activities. The exception or limitation provided for in this Directive should therefore benefit all educational establishments in primary, secondary, vocational and higher education to the extent they pursue their educational activity for a non-commercial purpose, scientific and private study activities for a non- commercial purpose. Access to works and other subject matter should take place through a secure electronic network. The organisational structure and the means of funding of an educational establishment are not the decisive factors to determine the non-commercial nature of the activity.
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11
Article 11
Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The exception or limitation should cover digital usall uses, including digital and online ones, of works and other subject-matter such as the use of parts or extracts of works to support, enrich or complement the teaching, including the related learning activities. The use of the works or other subject-matter under the exception or limitation should be only in the context of teaching and learning activities carried out under the responsibility of educational establishments, including during examinations, and be limited to what is necessary for the purpose of such activities. The exception or limitation should cover both uses through digital means in the classroom and online uses through the educational establishment's secure electronic network, the access to which should be protected, notably by authentication procedures. The exception or limita, the scientific research and private study. The exception should be understood as covering the specific accessibility needs of persons with a disability in the context of illustration for teaching or scientific research, as well as private study.
Amendment 202 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Different arrangements, based on the implementation of the exception provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC or on licensing agreements covering further uses, are in place in a number of Member States in order to facilitate educational uses of works and other subject-matter. Such arrangements have usually been developed taking account of the needs of educational establishments and different levels of education. Whereas it is essential to harmonise the scope of the new mandatory exception or limitation in relation to digitall uses and cross-border teaching activities, the modalities of implementation may differ from a Member State to another, to the extent they do not hamper the effective application of the exception or limitation or cross-border uses. This should allow Member States to build on the existing arrangements concluded at national level. In particular, Member States could decide to subject the application of the exception or limitation, fully or partially, to the availability of adequate licences, covering at least the same uses as those allowed under the exception. This mechanism would, for example, allow giving precedence to licences for materials which are primarily intended for the educational market. In order to avoid that such mechanism results in legal uncertainty or administrative burden for educational establishments, Member States adopting this approach should take concrete measures to ensure that licensing schemes allowing digital uses of works or other subject-matter for the purpose of illustrascientific research and private study, the modalities of implementation may differ from a Member State to another, to the extent they do not hamper in any way the effective application of the exception for teaching are easily available and that educational establishments are aware of the existence of such licensing schemcross-border uses.
Amendment 208 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Amendment 218 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Different approaches in the Member States for acts of preservation by cultural heritage institutions hamper cross- border cooperation and the sharing of means of preservation by cultural heritage institutions in the internal market, leading to an inefficient use of resources and risking to negatively affect the preservation of cultural heritage.
Amendment 219 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Amendment 223 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Member States should therefore be required to provide for an exception to permit cultural heritage institutions to reproduce works and other subject-matter permanently in their collections for preservation purposes, such as traditions and intangible cultural heritage, for example to address technological obsolescence or, the degradation of original supports or the loss of oral or intangible heritage. Such an exception should allow for the making of copies by the appropriate preservation tool, means or technology, in the required number and at any point in the life of a work or other subject-matter to the extent required in order to produce a copy for preservation, consultation, cataloguing and filing purposes only.
Amendment 225 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Amendment 226 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Member States should therefore be required to provide for an exception to permit cultural heritage institutions to reproduce works and other subject-matter permanently in their collections for preservation purposes, for example to address technological obsolescence or, the degradation of original supports and digitisation. Such an exception should allow for the making of copies by the appropriate preservation tool, means or technology, in the required number and at any point in the life of a work or other subject-matter to the extent required in order to produce a copy for preservation purposes only.
Amendment 237 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 b (new)
Recital 21 b (new)
(21 b) It should be acknowledged the importance of certain exceptions and limitations already provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC, and the need to ensure legal certainty and harmonisation within the internal market. To this end such exceptions and limitations should be made mandatory. It should also be recognised that new technologies are enhancing and changing the ways in which the uses of copyrighted works or other subject matter can take place and be enjoyed, which often are not detrimental to rightholders. Therefore a general de minimis exception should be introduced in order to take into account technological developments.
Amendment 241 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21 a) In view of allowing citizens and consumers to fully benefit from the opportunities offered by new technologies, public lending of literary works, including e-lending, should be permitted within the internal market. The concept of lending, within the meaning of Articles 1(1), 2(1)(b) and 6(1) of Directive 2006/115/EC, covers the lending not only of physical books, but also of a digital copy thereof. When Member States apply the derogation set out in Article 6 of Directive 2006/115/EC, libraries should be able to buy any physical book on the market. Once purchased, they can lend it without restrictions linked to contract terms or other measures of protection which prevent the exercise of exceptions and limitations to copyright. These provisions should also apply to e-books. In order to achieve legal certainty and harmonisation within the internal market, Member States should ensure that the exception to the exclusive public lending right set out in article 6 of Directive 2006/115/EC should be mandatory.
Amendment 247 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or other non- commercial documentation centers should benefit from a clear framework for the digitisation and dissemination, including across borders, of out-of-commerce works or other subject-matter. However, the particular characteristics of the collections of out-of-commerce works mean that obtaining the prior consent of the individual rightholders may be very difficult. This can be due, for example, to the age of the works or other subject- matter, their limited commercial value or the fact that they were never intended for commercial use. It is therefore necessary to provide for measures to facilitate the licensing of rights inavailability of out-of-commerce works that are in the collections of cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or other non-commercial documentation centers and thereby to allow the conclusion of agreements with cross- border effect in the internal market.
Amendment 254 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Member States should, within the framework provided for in this Directive, have flexibility in choosing the specific type of legal mechanism allowing for licences for out-of-commerce works to extend to the rights of rightholders that are not represented by the collective management organisation, in accordance to their legal traditions, practices or circumstances. Such mechanisms can include extended collective licensing and presumptions of representationcultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or other non-commercial documentation centers to digitise, distribute, communicate to the public or make available the out-of-commerce works permanently in their collection, in accordance to their legal traditions, practices or circumstances. Such mechanisms should allow rightholders to exclude their works, on the basis of reasonable evidence, and can include extended collective licensing and presumptions of representation. In any case, Member States should be required to provide for a mandatory general exception, applying where collective management organisations do not exist, or are unable to achieve sufficient representativity, or to offer easily available licences to cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or other non-commercial documentation centers for the types of works and other subject matter held in their collections.
Amendment 257 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) For the purpose of those possible licensing mechanisms, a rigorous and well- functioning collective management system is important. That system includes in particular rules of good governance, transparency and reporting, as well as the regular, diligent and accurate distribution and payment of amounts due to individual rightholders, as provided for by Directive 2014/26/EU. Additional appropriate safeguards should be available for all rightholders, who should be given the opportunity to exclude the application of such mechanisms to their works or other subject-matter. Conditions attached to those mechanisms should not affect their practical relevance for cultural heritage institutions.
Amendment 258 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Considering the variety of works and other subject-matter in the collections of cultural heritage institutions, it is important that the potential licensing mechanisms introduced by this Directive areare easily available and can be used in practice for different types of works and other subject-matter, including photographs, sound recordings and audiovisual works. In order to reflect the specificities of different categories of works and other subject-matter as regards modes of publication and distribution and to facilitate the usability of those mechanisms, specific requirements and procedures may have to be established by Member States for the practical application of those potential licensing mechanisms. It is appropriate that Member States consult rightholders, users, cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments, other non-commercial documentation centers and collective management organisations when doing so.
Amendment 259 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Amendment 264 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) For reasons of international comity, the licensing mechanisms for the digitisation and dissemination of out-of- commerce works provided for in this Directive should not apply to works or other subject-matter that are first published or, in the absence of publication, first broadcast in a third country or, in the case of cinematographic or audiovisual works, to works the producer of which has his headquarters or habitual residence in a third country. Those mechanisms should also not apply to works or other subject- matter of third country nationals except when they are first published or, in the absence of publication, first broadcast in the territory of a Member State or, in the case of cinematographic or audiovisual works, to works of which the producer's headquarters or habitual residence is in a Member State.
Amendment 266 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) As mass digitisation projects can entail significant investments by cultural heritage institutions, any licences granted under the mechanisms provided for in this Directive should not prevent them from generating reasonable revenues in orderthat should be allocated only to cover the costs of the licence and the costs of digitising and disseminating the works and other subject- matter covered by the licence.
Amendment 269 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Information regarding the future and ongoing use of out-of-commerce works and other subject-matter by cultural heritage institutions on the basis of the licensing mechanism, educational establishments, other non-commercial documentation centers provided for in this Directive and the arrangements in place for all rightholders to exclude the application of licences to their works or other subject- matter should be adequately publicised. This is particularly important when uses take place across borders in the internal market. It is therefore appropriate to make provision for the creation of a single publicly accessible online portal for the Union to make such information available to the public for a reasonable period of timepermanently, easily and effectively available to the public, in any case for at least six months before the cross-border use takes place. Under Regulation (EU) No 386/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council33 , the European Union Intellectual Property Office is entrusted with certain tasks and activities, financed by making use of its own budgetary measures, aiming at facilitating and supporting the activities of national authorities, the private sector and Union institutions in the fight against, including the prevention of, infringement of intellectual property rights. It is therefore appropriate to rely on that Office to establish and manage the European portal making such information available. _________________ 33 Regulation (EU) No 386/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 April 2012 on entrusting the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) with tasks related to the enforcement of intellectual property rights, including the assembling of public and private-sector representatives as a European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights (OJ L 129, 16.5.2012, p. 1–6).
Amendment 270 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28 a (new)
Recital 28 a (new)
(28 a) In order to substantiate the general public goal of increasing access to, and favouring the dissemination of, creative content, information and knowledge and to ensure legal certainty within the internal market, a definition of public domain should be introduced. It should also be highlighted that the ultimate goal of most authors, performers and creators is primarily the human and societal development and prosperity rather than the potential economic gain.
Amendment 271 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28 b (new)
Recital 28 b (new)
(28 b) It is of the utmost importance to clarify that once a work or other subject matter is in the public domain, any faithful reproduction, whether analogical or digital, of that work or subject matter, which does not constitute a new or transformative work or subject matter, should remain in the public domain. Public domain should encompass works or other subject matter whose copyright have expired, or have never existed or have been voluntarily relinquished by rightholders.
Amendment 272 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28 c (new)
Recital 28 c (new)
(28 c) When the copyright expires on a work or other subject matter, it could be extremely difficult to establish that such work or subject matter has passed into the public domain. Public domain works or other subject matter could never be identified, thus hindering access to content, information and knowledge. Member States should allow authors, performers and producers, who do not intend to copyright their work or other subject matter, to dedicate it, in whole or in part, to the public domain. Indeed, it should be acknowledged that the ultimate goal of most authors, performers and creators is primarily the human and societal development and prosperity rather than the potential economic gain. In light of this, Member States should encourage the use of appropriate public domain equivalent licences (e.g. creative commons). This would help authors, performers and producers to makes it clear to potential re-users that the work is in the public domain, thus spreading the dissemination of content, information and knowledge.
Amendment 274 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) On-demand services have the potential to play a decisive role in the dissemination of European works across the European Union. However, agreements on the online exploitationnjoyment of such works may face difficulties related to the licensing of rights. Such issues may, for instance, appear when the holder of the rights for a given territory is not interested in the online exploitation of the work or where there are issues linked to the windows of exploitation.
Amendment 277 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) To facilitate the licensing of rights in audiovisual works to video-on-demand platforms, this Directive requires Member States to set up a negotiation mechanism allowing parties willing to conclude an agreement to rely on the assistance of an impartial public body. The body should meet with the parties and help with the negotiations by providing professional and, external, impartial and affordable advice. Against that background, Member States should decide on the conditions of the functioning of the negotiation mechanism, including the timing and duration of the assistance to negotiations and, the bearing of the costs and the composition of such bodies. Member States should ensure that administrative and financial burdens remain proportionate to guarantee the efficiency of the negotiation forum.
Amendment 281 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 282 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 294 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 295 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 308 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
Amendment 312 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) For the purposes of this Directive, it is necessary to defineclarify the sconceptpe of press publication in a way that embraces only journalistic publications, published by a service provider, periodically or regularly updated in any media, for the purpose of informing or entertaining. Such publications would include, for instance, daily newspapers, weeklotection set out in Article s2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC. In order to improve legal certainty for all concerned parties, and to ensure the freedom to carry out certain acts necessary for monthly magazines of general or special ithe normal functioning of the Internest and news websites. Periodical publications which are published for scientific or academic purposes, such as scientific journals, should not be covered by the protection granted to press publications under this Directive. This protection doess well as to take account of certain fundamental rights, these Articles should not extend to acts of hyperlinking, which do not constitute communication to the public.
Amendment 325 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
Amendment 326 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
Amendment 340 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 341 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 350 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
Amendment 359 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
Amendment 381 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38
Recital 38
Amendment 383 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Amendment 404 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Amendment 414 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Amendment 434 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
Amendment 461 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Certain rightholders such as authors, creators and performers needoften face a lack of transparency regarding the information they need to assess and the economic value of their rights, which are harmonised under Union law. This is especially the case where such rightholders grant a licence or a transfer of rights in return for remuneration. AsSuch information should be adequate, accurate and comprehensive in order to allow authors and performers, who tend to be in a weaker contractual position when they grant licences or transfer their rights, they need information to assess the continued economic value of theirose rights, compared to the remuneration receivoriginally agreed for their licence or transfer, but they often face a lack of transparency. Therefore, the sharing of adequate, accurate and comprehensive information by their contractual counterparts or their successors in title is importantessential for the transparency and balance, equality and fairness in the system that governs the remuneration of authors and performers.
Amendment 470 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) When implementing transparency obligations, the specificities of different content sectors and of the rights of the authors and performers in each sector should be considered. Member States should consult all relevant stakeholders as that shcould help determine sector-specific requirements. Collective bargaining shouldmay be considered as an option to reach an agreement between the relevant stakeholders regarding transparency. To enable the adaptation of current reporting practices to the transparency obligations, a transitional period should be provided for. The transparency obligations do not need to apply to agreements concluded with collective management organisations as those are already subject to transparency obligations under Directive 2014/26/EU.
Amendment 471 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41 a) The creative drive is present in every human being, and needs to be nurtured, protected and stimulated in order to lay the foundations for the continuous renewal of creative talents. Therefore, the fundamental and prominent role of authors, creators and performers in the creative process and within society should be recognised. To this end, Member States should ensure that they are entitled to a fair and proportionate remuneration of the revenues derived from the exploitation of their works.
Amendment 477 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Certain contracts for the exploitation of rights harmonised at Union level are of long duration, offering few possibilities for authors and performers to renegotiate them with their contractual counterparts or their successors in title. Therefore, without prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in Member States, there should be a remuneration adjustment mechanism for cases where the remuneration originally agreed under a licence or a transfer of rights is disproportionately low compared to the relevant revenues and the benefits derived from the exploitation of the work or the fixation of the performance, including in light of the transparency ensured by this Directive. Such mechanism should allow authors and performers, individually or through representative organisations, to claim an additional and equitable remuneration. The assessment of the situation should take account of the specific circumstances of each case as well as of the specificities and practices of the different content sectors. Where the parties do not agree on the adjustment of the remuneration, the author or performer should be entitled to bring a claim before a court or other competent judicial authority.
Amendment 482 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Authors and performers are often reluctant to enforce their rights against their contractual partners before a court or tribunal. Member States should therefore provide for an voluntary and public alternative dispute resolution procedure that addresses claims related to obligations of transparency and the contract adjustment mechanism.
Amendment 488 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive lays down rules which aim at further harmonising the Union law applicable to copyright and related rights in the framework of the internal market, taking into account in particular digital and cross-border uses of protected content. IWithout jeopardising the further changes likely to be made to the regulatory framework in the future in order to allow for technological developments, it also lays down rules on exceptions and limitations, on the facilitation of licences as well as rules aiming at ensuring a well-functioning marketplace for the exploitation of works and other subject-matter.
Amendment 490 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive lays down rules which aim at further harmonising the Union law applicable to copyright and related rights in the framework of the internal market, taking into account in particular digital and cross-border uses of protected content. It also lays down rules on exceptions and limitations, on the facilitation of licences as well as rules aiming at ensuring a well-functioning marketplace for the exploitationnjoyment of works and other subject-matter.
Amendment 491 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. In addition, Member States shall harmonise the term of protection of copyright and related rights so that its duration does not exceed the current international standards set out in the Berne Convention, taking into account the time needed to recoup an investment, the average commercial life of a work, and the public interest in the dissemination of creative works.
Amendment 497 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 502 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Amendment 505 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Amendment 506 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 516 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 3 a (new)
(3a) 'public domain' means the status of a work or other subject matter when the copyright and related rights therein : (a) have expired, or (b) have never existed, or (c) have been voluntarily relinquished by rightholders;
Amendment 519 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Amendment 521 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Amendment 536 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and, Article 11(1) of this Directive and Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 2009/24/EC for reproductions and extractions made by research organisationpersons or legal entities in order to carry out text and data mining of works or other subject-matter to which they have lawfulauthorised access for the purposes of scientific research.
Amendment 552 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Rightholders shall not be allowed to apply measuretechnological measures to prevent or hinder beneficiaries from benefiting from the exception provided for in paragraph 1, unless to ensure the security and integrity of the networks and databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted. Such measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate, shall not go beyond what is necessary to achieve that objective and be justified by objective reasons.
Amendment 553 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Rightholders shall not be allowed to apply measuretechnological measures to prevent or hinder beneficiaries from benefiting from the exception provided for in paragraph 1, unless to ensure the security and integrity of the networks and databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted. Such measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and shall not go beyond what is necessary to achieve that objective.
Amendment 557 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall encourage rightholders and research organisationbeneficiaries to define commonly-agreed best practices concerning the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 3across the Union concerning the development of technologies implementing the exception provided for in paragraph 1 as well as the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 3. These best practices shall be made easily and effectively accessible to the public.
Amendment 567 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3a Right to impose private copying levies Member States shall regulate the right to impose private copying levies in order to ensure that citizens are informed about the actual amount to be levied, the purpose of the levy, and the ways in which it is to be used.
Amendment 568 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – title
Article 4 – title
Use of works and other subject-matter in digital and cross-border teaching activities and scientific research
Amendment 572 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive in order to allow for the digital use of works and other subject- matter for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching or scientific research, including private study, to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved, provided that the use: is accompanied by the indication of the source, including the author's name, unless this turns out to be impossible.
Amendment 586 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 597 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 604 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Any contractual provision contrary to the exception provided for in paragraph 1 shall be null and void.
Amendment 607 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 616 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 627 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The use of works and other subject- matter for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching through secure electronic networksor scientific research, including private study, undertaken in compliance with the provisions of national law adopted pursuant to this Article shall be deemed to occur solely in the Member State where the educational establishmentbeneficiary is established.
Amendment 630 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Member States may provide for fair compensation for the harm incurred by theany unreasonable prejudice to the legitimate interests of rightholders due to the use of their works or other subject-matter pursuant to paragraph 1.
Amendment 645 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Member States, taking into account the fact that the dissemination of culture and knowledge is in the public interest, shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive, permitting cultural heritage institutions, to make copies of any works or other subject-matter that are permanently in their collections, in any format or medium, for the sole purpose of the preservation, consultation, or cataloguing of such works or other subject-matter and to the extent necessary for such preservation.
Amendment 654 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Any contractual provision contrary to the exception provided for in paragraph 1 shall be null and void.
Amendment 661 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a Public lending of literary works 1. Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided in Article 1 of Directive 2006/115/EC, permitting public libraries to lend literary works in any format to the public, including remotely, where such literary works have entered into their collections or to which they have authorised access. This is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Article 6 of Directive 2006/115/EC. 2. Any contractual provision contrary to the exception provided for in paragraph 1 shall be null and void. 3. Member States shall, in consultation with authors, publishers and public libraries, ensure that public libraries can acquire and lend on reasonable terms, in any format, including remotely, all literary works which have already been lawfully made available to the public and have entered into their collections or to which they have authorised access. 4. Member States shall report to the Commission on the steps taken according to paragraph 3. The Commission shall facilitate the exchange of best practices among Member States and make them easily and effectively accessible to the public.
Amendment 669 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 b (new)
Article 5 b (new)
Article 5 b General de minimis exception 1. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights provided for in Article 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, and Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 2009/24/EC, to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved, regardless of the format or medium used, in the following cases: (a) uses for the benefit of persons with a disability, which is directly related to the disability, to the extent required by the specific disability; (b) reproduction, communication to the public or making available of published articles on current economic, political or religious topics or of broadcast works or other subject-matter of the same character, in cases where such use is not expressly reserved, and as long as the source, including the author's name, is indicated or use of works or other subject- matter in connection with the reporting of current events, to the extent justified by the informatory purpose and as long as the source, including the author's name, is indicated, unless this turns out to be impossible; (c) quotations for purposes such as criticism or review, provided that they relate to a work or other subject-matter which has already been lawfully made available to the public, that, unless this turns out to be impossible, the source, including the author's name, is indicated, and that their use is in accordance with fair practice, and to the extent required by the specific purpose; (d) uses for the purposes of public security or to ensure the proper performance or reporting of administrative, parliamentary or judicial proceedings; (e) use of political speeches as well as extracts of public lectures or similar works or subject-matter to the extent justified by the informatory purpose and provided that the source, including the author's name, is indicated, except where this turns out to be impossible; (f) incidental inclusion of a work or other subject-matter in other material; (g) uses for the purpose of caricature, parody or pastiche; (h) uses in connection with the demonstration or repair of equipment, or the reconstruction of an original or a copy of a work; (i) making of a back-up copy of a work by a person having a right to use it and insofar as it is necessary for that use; 2. Any other use that is analogous to the uses enumerated in paragraph 1 is permitted provided that the corresponding requirements of the relevant exceptions or limitations are met and the use does not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the authors or rightholders, and taking account of the legitimate interests of third parties.
Amendment 676 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – title
Article 7 – title
Use of out-of-commerce works by cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or other non-commercial documentation centers
Amendment 680 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall provide that when a collective management organisation, on behalf of its members, concludes a non-exclusive licence for non-commercial purposes with a cultural heritage institution ffor an exception to the rights set out in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC, permitting cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or othe digitisationr non- commercial documentation centers, to digitise, distributione, communicatione to the public or makinge available of out-of-commerce works or other subject-matter permanently in their collection of the institution, such a non-exclusive licence may be extended or presumed to apply to rightholders of the same category as those covered by the licence who are not represented by the collective management organisation, provided that:for non- commercial purposes.
Amendment 681 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 683 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 685 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 687 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
When implementing the exception laid down in the first subparagraph, Member States may provide for remuneration schemes to compensate any unreasonable prejudice to the legitimate interests of rightholders. Rightholders may at any time, on the basis of reasonable evidence, object to their works or other subject- matter being deemed to be out of commerce and be able to exclude the application of the exception laid down in the first subparagraph.
Amendment 691 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Member States may estabish that the exception adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 does not apply generally or as regards specific types of out-of- commerce works or other subject-matter, to the extent that operational non- exclusive licences, concluded between a collective management organisation, on behalf of its member, and a cultural heritage institution, an educational establishment or another non-commercial documentation center, authorising the uses provided for in paragraph 1, exist and are easily available. In this case, such non-exclusive licences may be extended or presumed to apply to rightholders of the same category as those covered by the licences who are not represented by the collective management organisation, provided that: (a) the collective management organisation is, on the basis of mandates from rightholders, broadly representative of rightholders in the category of works or other subject-matter and of the rights which are the subject of the licence; (b) equal treatment is guaranteed to all rightholders in relation to the terms of the licence; (c) all rightholders may at any time, on the basis of reasonable evidence, object to their works or other subject-matter being deemed to be out of commerce and exclude the application of the licence to their works or other subject-matter.
Amendment 698 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
A work or other subject-matter shall be deemed to be out of commerce when the whole work or other subject-matter, in all its translations, versions and manifestations, is not available to the public through customary, easily accessible, channels of commerce and cannot be reasonably expected to become so. Out-of- commerce works shall also include works that have never been, or were never intended, to be in commerce.
Amendment 700 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall, in consultation with rightholders, collective management organisations and, cultural heritage institutions, educational establishments or other non- commercial documentation centers, ensure that the requirements used to determine whether works and other subject-matter can be licensed in accordance with paragraph 1deemed to be out of commerce, do not extend beyond what is necessary and reasreasonable and proportionablte and do not preclude the possibility to determine the out-of- commerce status of a collection as a whole, when it is reasonable to presume that all works or other subject-matter in the collection are out of commerce.
Amendment 701 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Member States shall provide that appropriate and effective publicity measures are taken regarding:
Amendment 702 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) theany licence, and in particular its application to unrepresented rightholders;
Amendment 703 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point c – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point c – paragraph 1
the possibility of rightholders to object, referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 1 and in point (c) of paragraph 1a;
Amendment 705 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point c
(c) the cultural heritage institution, educational establishment or non- commercial documentation center is established, when a Member State or a third country could not be easily determined, after reasonable efforts, according to points (a) and (b).
Amendment 706 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Amendment 712 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. WOut-of-commerce works or other subject-matter covered by a licence grantmay be used, in accordance with Article 7 may be used by the, by cultural heritage institution in accordance with the terms of the licences in all Member States.
Amendment 716 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that information that allows the identification of the works or other subject-matter covered by a licence grantused in accordance with Article 7 and information about the possibility of rightholders to object referred to in Article 7(1)(c) are made publicthe second subparagraph of Article 7(1) and Article 7(1a)(c) are made permanently, easily and effectively accessible in a public single online portal, and in any case for at least six months before the works or other subject-matter are digitised, distributed, communicated to the public or made available in Member States other than the one where the licence is granted, and for the whole duration of the licence.
Amendment 718 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure a regular dialogue between representative users' and rightholders' organisations, and any other relevant stakeholder organisations, to, on a sector-specific basis, foster the effectiveness of the measures applied to implement the exception referred to in Article 7, including the relevance and usability of the licensing mechanisms referred to in Article 7(1), ensure the effectiveness of the safeguards for rightholders referred to in this Chapter, notably as regards publicity measures, and, where applicable, assist in the establishment of the requirements referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 7(2).
Amendment 722 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a Public domain Member States shall ensure that once a work or other subject-matter is in the public domain, faithful reproductions, in any format or medium, in full or in part of that work or subject matter, which does not constitute a new work or subject matter, shall equally not be subject to copyright or related rights.
Amendment 724 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that where parties wishing to conclude an agreement for the purpose of making available audiovisual works on video-on-demand platforms face difficulties relating to the licensing of rights, they may rely on the assistance of an impartial public body with relevant experience. That body shall provide impartial and affordable assistance with negotiation and help reach agreements.
Amendment 731 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11
Article 11
Amendment 735 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11
Article 11
Amendment 745 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Amendment 767 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Amendment 774 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Amendment 779 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Amendment 786 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 12
Article 12
Amendment 789 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Amendment 799 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13
Article 13
Amendment 807 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Amendment 838 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Amendment 856 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Amendment 890 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that authors and performers receive on a regular basis and taking into account the specificities of each sector, timely, adequate and sufficient, accurate and comprehensive information on the exploitation of their works and performances from those to whom they havir works are licensed or transferred their rightsheir rights are transferred, notably as regards all modes of exploitation, revenues generated and remuneration due.
Amendment 900 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The obligation in paragraph 1 shall be proportionate and effective and shall ensure an appropriate level of transparency in every sector. However, in those cases where the administrative burden resulting from the obligation would be disproportionate in view of the revenues generated by the exploitation of the work or performance, Member States may adjust the obligation in paragraph 1, provided that the obligation remains effective and ensures an appropriate level of transparency.
Amendment 910 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Amendment 927 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 15 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1 Member States shall, in any case, ensure that authors and performers are entitled to a fair and proportionate remuneration of the revenues derived from the exploitation of their works.
Amendment 941 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that authors and performers, individually or through representative organisations, are entitled to requestclaim an additional, appropriatnd equitable remuneration from the party with whom they entered into a contract for the exploitation of the rights when the remuneration originally agreed is disproportionately low compared to the subsequent relevant revenues and benefits derived from the exploitation of the works or performances.
Amendment 957 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Any contractual provision contrary to paragraph 1 shall be null and void.
Amendment 960 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15a Mandatory term for the use of transferred rights Member States, in order to restore balance to the bargaining power between authors and publishers, may provide for a mandatory period, of reasonable duration, for the use of the rights transferred from an author to a third party, after which those rights would lapse.
Amendment 963 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Without prejudice to other judicial remedies, Member States shallmay provide that disputes concerning the transparency obligation under Article 14 and the contract adjustment mechanism under Article 15 may be submitted to a voluntary, and public alternative dispute resolution procedure.
Amendment 966 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Such mechanism shall guarantee impartiality and be affordable, equally accessible and shall comply with the national constitutional rights and safeguards provided for the parties.
Amendment 994 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Directive 2006/115/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
2 a. Article 6 - paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: "Member States may derogate from the exclusive right provided for in Article 1 in respect of public lending, provided that at least authors obtain a remuneration for such lending, without prejudice to the exceptions provided for in Directive [this Directive]. Member States shall be free to determine this remuneration taking account of their cultural promotion objectives." (This amendment seeks to amend a provision within the existing act - Article 6, paragraph 1 -Or. en that was not referred to in the Commission proposal.)
Amendment 995 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2