9 Amendments of Lucy ANDERSON related to 2016/0280(COD)
Amendment 85 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The protection of technological measures established in Directive 2001/29/EC remains essentialwas established to ensure the protection and the effective exercise of the rights granted to authors and to other rightholders under Union law. The scope of this protection should be maintained whileadapted in order to better ensuringe that the use of technological measures does not prevent the enjoymentusers' right to make use of the exceptions and the limitation established in this Directive, which are particularly relevant in the online environment. Rightholders should have the opportunityare often not best placed to ensure this through voluntary 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 benefit from them provided that such means are appropriate. In the absence of voluntary measures, because technological protection measures are most commonly put in place by entities other than the rightsholders. All actors in the value chain should provide the beneficiaries of the exceptions and the limitation established in this Directive, in Directive 96/9/EC, Directive 2001/29/EC, Directive 2009/24/EC and Directive 2012/28/EU, with the means to benefit from them. Member States should take appropriate measures in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 6(4) of Directive 2001/29/EC.
Amendment 87 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7 a) In order to ensure that technological measures do not prevent the enjoyment of the exceptions and limitations established in this Directive, in Directive 2001/29/EC, Directive 96/9/EC, Directive 2009/24/EC or Directive 2012/28/EU, Article 6(4) of Directive 2001/29/EC needs to be updated in order to take account of the fact that in the marketplace, rightsholders are often unable to make available to the beneficiary of an exception or limitation the means of benefiting from that exception or limitation, because technological protection measures are generally not applied by the rightsholders themselves, but by third party suppliers who provide the content to consumers, such as online marketplaces, some of whom enjoy a dominant market position. The inability of users to make use of their rights under copyright exceptions and limitations is not just having a negative impact on users' fundamental rights, it is also detrimental to rightsholders who often find themselves in a weaker bargaining position vis-à-vis suppliers of digital content, especially when consumers are locked into the products and services offered by that seller through the use of technological measures. It is therefore insufficient to require Member States only to place obligations upon the rightsholders, who are generally unable to remove the technological protection measures put on their works by third parties. In addition, the act of circumventing technological protection measures for the purposes of enjoying exceptions and limitations to copyright and related rights needs to be exempted from the general legal protection of effective technological measures enshrined in Article 6(1) and 6(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC. Furthermore, the definition of "technological measures" in Article 6(3) of Directive 2001/29/EC needs to be clarified so as not to include measures which are designed to restrict authorised uses under copyright exceptions and limitations.
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The protection of technological measures established in Directive 2001/29/EC remains essentialwas established to ensure the protection and the effective exercise of the rights granted to authors and to other rightholders under Union law. The scope of this protection should be maintained whileadapted in order to better ensuringe that the use of technological measures does not prevent the enjoymentusers' rights to make use of the exceptions and the limitations established in this Directive, which are particularly relevant in the online environment. Rightholders should have the opportunityare often not best placed to ensure this through voluntary measures. They should remain free to choose the format and the modalities to, because technological protection measures are most commonly put in place by entities other than the rightsholders. All actors in the value chain should provide the beneficiaries of the exceptions and the limitations established in this Directive with the means to benefit from them provided that such means are appropriate. In the absence of voluntary measures,, in Directive 96/9/EC, Directive 2001/29/EC, Directive 2009/24/EC and Directive 2012/28/EU, with the means to benefit from them. Member States should take appropriate measures in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 6(4) of Directive 2001/29/EC.
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7 a) In order to ensure that technological measures do not prevent the enjoyment of the exceptions and limitations established in this Directive and in Directive 2001/29/EC, Directive 96/9/EC, Directive 2009/24/EC or Directive 2012/28/EU, Article 6(4) of Directive 2001/29/EC needs to be updated in order to take account of the fact that in the marketplace, rightsholders are often unable to make available to the beneficiary of an exception or limitation the means of benefiting from that exception or limitation, because technological protection measures are generally not applied by the rightsholders themselves, but by third party suppliers who provide the content to consumers, such as online marketplaces, some of whom enjoy a dominant market position. The inability of users to make use of their rights under copyright exceptions and limitations is not just having a negative impact on users' fundamental rights, it is also detrimental to rightsholders who often find themselves in a weaker bargaining position vis-à-vis suppliers of digital content, especially when consumers are locked into the products and services offered by that seller through the use of technological measures. It is therefore insufficient to require Member States only to place obligations upon the rightsholders, who are generally unable to remove the technological protection measures put on their works by third parties. In addition, the act of circumventing technological protection measures for the purposes of enjoying exceptions and limitations to copyright and related rights needs to be exempted from the general legal protection of effective technological measures enshrined in Article 6(1) and 6(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC. Furthermore, the definition of "technological measures" in Article 6(3) of Directive 2001/29/EC needs to be clarified so as not to include measures which are designed to restrict authorised uses under copyright exceptions and limitations.
Amendment 568 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point c d (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point c d (new)
Directive 2001/29/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
(cd) In Article 6, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: "3. For the purposes of this Directive, the expression '"technological measures'" means any technology, device or component that, in the normal course of its operation, is designed to prevent or restrict acts, in respect of works or other subject- matter, which are not authorised by the rightholder of any copyright or any right related to copyright as provided for by law or the sui generis right provided for in Chapter III of Directive 96/9/EC, and which are not authorised by national or Union law. Technological measures shall be deemed '"effective'" where the use of a protected work or other subject -matter is controlled by the rightholders through application of an access control or protection process, such as encryption, scrambling or other transformation of the work or other subject-matter or a copy control mechanism, which achieves the protection objective." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/?qid=1491298593782&uri=CELEX:32001L0029)
Amendment 571 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
Directive 2001/29/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(bb) In Article 6(4), the following subparagraph is added: The protections provided for in paragraph 1 and 2 shall not apply to acts described in paragraph 1 and 2 whose sole purpose is to enable a user's right to enjoy the exceptions and limitations to copyright and related rights outlined in this Directive or in Directive 96/9/EC, Directive 2009/24/EC Directive 2012/28/EU or Directive ... [this directive], to the extent necessary to benefit from that exception or limitation and where that beneficiary has legal access to the protected work or subject-matter concerned;
Amendment 602 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
Directive 2001/29/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
(bb) paragraph 3 of Article 6 is amended as follows: "3. For the purposes of this Directive, the expression "technological measures" means any technology, device or component that, in the normal course of its operation, is designed to prevent or restrict acts, in respect of works or other subject- matter, which are not authorised by the rightholder of any copyright or any right related to copyright as provided for by law or the sui generis right provided for in Chapter III of Directive 96/9/EC or which are not authorised by national or Union law. Technological measures shall be deemed "effective" where the use of a protected work or other subject-matter is controlled by the rightholders through application of an access control or protection process, such as encryption, scrambling or other transformation of the work or other subject-matter or a copy control mechanism, which achieves the protection objective." (This amendment seeks to amend a provision within the existing act - Article 6, paragraph 3 - that was not referred to in the Commission proposal. Please note, however, that this amendment does not open any new substantial point in the revision of the Directive, but merely introduces a change necessary to ensure legal consistency with the Shadow'sOr. en position.)
Amendment 989 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b d (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b d (new)
Directive 2001/29/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
(b d) In Article 6, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: "3. For the purposes of this Directive, the expression "technological measures" means any technology, device or component that, in the normal course of its operation, is designed to prevent or restrict acts, in respect of works or other subject-matter, which are not authorised by the rightholder of any copyright or any right related to copyright as provided for by law or the sui generis right provided for in Chapter III of Directive 96/9/EC, and which are not authorised by national or Union law. Technological measures shall be deemed "effective" where the use of a protected work or other subject- matter is controlled by the rightholders through application of an access control or protection process, such as encryption, scrambling or other transformation of the work or other subject-matter or a copy control mechanism, which achieves the protection objective."
Amendment 990 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b e (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b e (new)
Directive 2001/29/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
(b e) In Article 6(4), the following subparagraph is added: "The protections provided for in paragraph 1 and 2 shall not apply to acts described in paragraph 1 and 2 whose sole purpose is to enable a user's right to enjoy the exceptions and limitations to copyright and related rights outlined in this Directive or in Directive 96/9/EC, Directive 2009/24/EC Directive 2012/28/EU or Directive ... [this directive], to the extent necessary to benefit from that exception or limitation and where that beneficiary has legal access to the protected work or subject-matter concerned;"