88 Amendments of Theresa GRIFFIN related to 2016/0280(COD)
Amendment 13 #
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. The Commission should investigate all possible measures to prevent the illegal use of copyright protected visual and audio-visual content for commercial purposes, through for example embedding or framing techniques. In addition, 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.
Amendment 19 #
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 researchers 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 benefit the research community and in so doing encourage innovation, growth and jobs. However, in the Union, research organisations such as universities and research institutes are confronted with legal uncertainty as to the extent to which they can perform text and data mining of content. 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 24 #
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 researchusers 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 research is 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 26 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9 a) Union law should take into consideration that text and data mining has the huge potential to be used in both formal and informal research settings and should recognise the potential of text and data mining to stimulate significant innovation, growth and jobs.
Amendment 27 #
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. 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 should also benefit from the exception when they engage into public-private partnerships.
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) There is no need to provide for compensation for rightholders as regards uses under the text and data mining exception introduced by this Directive given that in view of the nature and scope of the exception the harm should be minimal. It should be noted that a license is still required to access research for text and data mining and any further compensation for rightsholders is unnecessary.
Amendment 39 #
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. 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. TAlongside uneven application in Member States, 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. This situation may hamper the development of digitally- supported teaching activities and distance learning. 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, including online and across borders.
Amendment 42 #
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 educa, higher education, formal and non-formal educational settings, especially libraries and other cultural heritage institutions, to the extent they pursue their educational activity 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 44 #
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, in both formal and non- formal educational settings, especially libraries and other cultural heritage institutions, 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 limitation should be understood as covering the specific accessibility needs of persons with a disability in the context of illustration for teaching. Compensation mechanisms should be only used in cases where there is unreasonable prejudice to the rightholders.
Amendment 48 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) An act of preservation may require a reproduction of a work or other subject- matter in the collection of a cultural heritage institution and consequently the authorisation of the relevant rightholders. Cultural heritage institutions, research organisations and educational establishments, both formal and non- formal, are engaged in the preservation of their collections for future generations. Digital technologies offer new ways to preserve the heritage contained in those collections but they also create new challenges. In view of these new challenges, it is necessary to adapt the current legal framework by providing a mandatory exception to the right of reproduction in order to allow those acts of preservation.
Amendment 49 #
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. Member States should facilitate the cross-border sharing of best-practice, new technologies and preservation techniques.
Amendment 51 #
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, research organisations and educational establishments, both formal and non- formal, 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. 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 53 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) For the purposes of this Directive, works and other subject-matter should be considered to be permanently in the collection of a cultural heritage institution when copies are owned, held on long-term loan or permanently held by the cultural heritage institution, for example as a result of aresearch organisations and educational establishments, both formal and non-formal, including transfer of ownership or licence agreements.
Amendment 56 #
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 mechanism allowing for licences for out-of-commerce works to extend to the rights of rightholders that are noteither not represented or not adequately 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 representation.
Amendment 58 #
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 licensing mechanisms introduced by this Directive are 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 licensing mechanisms. It is appropriate that Member States consult rightholders, cultural institutions, users and collective management organisations when doing so.
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33 a (new)
Recital 33 a (new)
(33 a) The rights for press publishers should apply without prejudice to the rights of individuals for the reproduction, communication or providing links or extracts of a press publication to the public for private use or not-for-profit, non-commercial purposes.
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) The rights granted to the publishers of press publications under this Directive should have the same scope as the rights of reproduction and making available to the public provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC, insofar as digital uses are concerned. They should also be subject to the same provisions on exceptions and limitations as those applicable to the rights provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC including the exception on quotation for purposes such as criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive.
Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) The protection granted to publishers of press publications under this Directive should not affect the rights of the authors and other rightholders in the works and other subject-matter incorporated therein, including as regards the extent to which authors and other rightholders can exploit their works or other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. Therefore, publishers of press publications should not be able to invoke the protection granted to them against authors and other rightholders. This is without prejudice to contractual arrangements concluded between the publishers of press publications, on the one side, and authors and other rightholders, on the other side. Member States should ensure that a fair share of remuneration, derived from the use of the press publishers right, is attributed to journalists, authors and other rightsholders.
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Over the last years, the functioning of the online content marketplace has gained in complexity. Online services providing access to copyright protected content uploaded by their users without the involvement or agreement of right holders have flourished and have become main sources of access to content online. This affects rightholders' possibilities to determine whether, and under which conditions, their work and other subject- matter are used as well as their possibilities to get an appropriate remuneration for it. Information society service providers claim to be covered by the safe harbour exemption of Directive 2000/31/EC and either refuse to enter into licensing agreements or underpay creators, directly competing with fully licensed content providers for the same users and revenues. These services therefore conflict with the normal exploitation of copyright protected works and subject matter and drive down the overall value of creative content online.
Amendment 91 #
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. TIn this ever-changing digital environment the Commission should investigate all possible measures to prevent the illegal use of copyright protected visual and audiovisual content for commercial purposes, through embedding or framing techniques. In addition, 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.
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Where information society service providers that store and provide access to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, thereby going beyond the mere provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public and reproduction, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholders,. Information society service providers that play an active role are not exempt unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . _________________ 34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1–16).
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In the fields of research, education and preservation of cultural heritage, 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, 96/9/EC and 2009/24/EC in these fields may negatively impact the functioning of the internal market. 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 scientifacademic research, teaching and preservation of cultural heritage 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 scientifacademic research, illustration for teaching in the digital environment and for preservation of cultural heritage 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 and 2001/29/EC should be adapted.
Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
In respect of Article 14, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider plays an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-matter or promoting them, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefore. An information society service provider shall be obliged to acquire licenses for copyright protected content regardless of whether they have editorial responsibility for that content. The licenses acquired by information society service providers from rightsholders should be deemed to cover all user generated content by their users, including users that are acting for non- commercial purposes. This will provide legal certainty for individual users of such services whilst clarifying the liability of platforms.
Amendment 113 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
In order to ensure the functioning of any licensing agreement, information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to largesignificant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject- matter uploaded by their users should take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure protection of works or other subject-matter, such as implementing effective technologies. This obligation should also apply when the information society service providers are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC.
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Union law already provides certain exceptions and limitations covering uses for scientifacademic 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 scientifacademic research. Moreover, where researchers 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 research is 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 118 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) Collaboration between information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to largesignificant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users and rightholders is essential for the functioning of technologies, such as content recognition technologies. In such cases, rightholders should provide the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content and the services should be transparent towards rightholders with regard to the deployed technologies, to allow the assessment of their appropriateness. The services should in particular provide rightholders with information on the type of technologies used, the way they are operated and their success rate for the recognition of rightholders' content. Those technologies should also allow rightholders to get information from the information society service providers on the use of their content covered by an agreement. Those technologies should not require the identity of individual users uploading content and should not process data relating to individual users, in accordance with Directive 95/46/EC, Directive 2001/58/EC and the General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679. On the contrary it should be limited to preventing the availability of specifically identified and duly notified works based on the information provided by right holders and therefore does not lead to a general monitoring obligation.
Amendment 122 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Certain rightholders such as authors and performers need information to assess 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. As authors and performers tend to bare in a weaker contractual position when they grant licences or transfer their rights, they need information to assess the continued economic value of their rights, compared to the remuneration received for their licence or transfer, but they often face a lack of transparency. Therefore, the sharing of adequate information by their contractual counterparts orand subsequent transferees or licenses, as well as their successors in title is important for the transparency and balance in the system that governs the remuneration of authors and performers. The reporting and transparency obligation should follow the work across all forms of exploitation and across borders.
Amendment 124 #
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 should help determine sector-specific requirements, standard reporting statements and procedures. Collective bargaining should 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. Directive 2014/26/EU, on the condition that Member States have transposed Directive 2014/26/EU and taken all necessary measures to ensure that the management of all collective management organisations is carried out in an effective and equitable manner. Member States should also ensure that collective management organisations act in the best interest of the rightsholders, ensuring the accurate and regular distribution of payment and production of an annual public transparency report, in compliance with Directive 2014/26/EU.
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Research organisations across the Union encompass a wide variety of entities the primary goal of which is to conduct scientifacademic research or to do so together with the provision of educational services. Due to the diversity of such entities, it is important to have a common understanding of the beneficiaries of the exception. Despite different legal forms and structures, research organisations across Member States generally have in common that they act either on a not for profit basis or in the context of a public-interest mission recognised by the State. Such a public-interest mission may, for example, be reflected through public funding or through provisions in national laws or public contracts. At the same time, organisations upon which commercial undertakings have a decisive influence allowing them to exercise control because of structural situations such as their quality of shareholders or members, which may result in preferential access to the results of the research, should not be considered research organisations for the purposes of this Directive.
Amendment 132 #
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 for reproductions and extractions made by research organisations, not-for-profit organisations and/or citizens 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 147 #
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, informal, non-formal and higher education to the extent they pursue their educational activity 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 148 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – point 1 (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – point 1 (new)
(1) Legal redress should be available for those under excessive circumstances referenced under Paragraph 3.
Amendment 159 #
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 research, to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved, provided that the use:
Amendment 162 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) takes place on the premises of an educational establishment, whether formal or non-formal, or through a secure electronic network accessible only by the educational establishment's pupils or students and, teaching staff, or registered member;
Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Member States availing themselves of the provision of the first subparagraph shall take the necessary measures to ensure appropriate availability and visibility of the licences, through an easily accessible database, authorising the acts described in paragraph 1 for educational establishments.
Amendment 179 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Member States may provide for fair compensation for theany undue financial harm incurred by the rightholders due to the use of their works or other subject- matter pursuant to paragraph 1.
Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 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, Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive, permitting cultural heritage institutions, research organisations and educational establishments, both formal and non- formal, to make copies of any works or other subject-matter that are permanently in their collections, in any format or medium, for the sole purposes of the preservation of such works or other subject-matter and to the extent necessary for such preserv, research and education.
Amendment 186 #
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, ensure that the requirements used to determine whether works and other subject-matter can be licensed in accordance with paragraph 1 do not extend beyond what is necessary and reasonable 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. In the event that a collective management organisation does not exist or adequately represent the rights of rightsholders, Member States should provide exceptions for cultural heritage institutions, research organisations and educational establishments, both formal and non-formal, to distribute, communicate to the public or make available out-of-commerce-works for non- commercial purposes. Member States should ensure appropriate remuneration for any unreasonable prejudice to the legitimate interests of the rightsholders and ensure that all rightsholders may at any time object to the use of their works.
Amendment 187 #
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 relevance and usability of the licensing mechanisms referred to in Article 7(1), including resolving issues where cultural heritage institutions activities in line with Article 7 and Article 8 are not being reasonably enabled, and 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 201 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Member States should ensure that a fair share of the revenue derived from the uses of the press publishers rights is attributed to journalists.
Amendment 207 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – title
Article 13 – title
Use of protected content by information society service providers storing and giving access to largesignificant amounts of works and other subject-matter uploaded by their users
Amendment 214 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to largesignificant amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, conclude licensing agreements with rightholders. These services shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter.
Amendment 231 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Information society service providers that take measures referred to in paragraph 1, shall ensure that such measures are in full compliance with Directive 95/46/EC and Directive 2002/58/EC, and the General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679.
Amendment 232 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a Licensing agreements for information society service providers that store and provide access to the public to significant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users 1. Information society service providers that store and provide access to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, thereby going beyond the mere provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public and of reproduction, shall conclude licensing agreements with rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. 2. Service providers that play an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-matter or promoting them, are not eligible for the safe harbour liability exemption. 3. Licenses acquired by information society service providers shall cover all the acts of their individual users, which are not for direct or indirect economic or commercial advantage.
Amendment 236 #
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 basisat least once a year and taking into account the specificities of each sector, accurate, timely, adequate and sufficient information on the exploitation and promotion of their works and performances from those to whom they have licensed or transferred their rights, including subsequent transferees or licensees, notably as regards modes of promotion, exploitation, revenues generated and remuneration due.
Amendment 240 #
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 high 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 244 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Member States shall ensure that sector-specific standard reporting statements and procedures are developed through stakeholder dialogues.
Amendment 244 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) The protection granted to publishers of press publications under this Directive should not affect the rights of the authors and other rightholders in the works and other subject-matter incorporated therein, including as regards the extent to which authors and other rightholders can exploit their works or other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. Therefore, publishers of press publications should not be able to invoke the protection granted to them against authors and other rightholders. This is without prejudice to contractual arrangements concluded between the publishers of press publications, on the one side, and authors and other rightholders, on the other side. Member States should ensure that a fair share of remuneration derived from uses of the press publishers rights is attributed to journalists.
Amendment 248 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14 a Unwaivable right to fair remuneration for authors and performers 1. Member States shall ensure that when authors and performers transfer or assign their right of making available to the public, they retain the right to obtain a fair remuneration derived from the exploitation of their work. 2. The right of an author or performer to obtain a fair remuneration for the making available of their work is inalienable and cannot be waived. 3. The administration of this right to fair remuneration for the making available of an authors or performers work shall be entrusted to their collective management organisations, unless other collective agreements, including voluntary collective management agreements, guarantee such remuneration to authors, audio-visual authors and performers for their making available right. 4. Collective management organisations shall collect the fair remuneration from information society services making works available to the public.
Amendment 250 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that authors and performers, or representatives they appoint, are entitled to request additional, appropriatefair 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 251 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Over the last years, the functioning of the online content marketplace has gained in complexity. Online services providing access to copyright protected content uploaded by their users without the involvement or agreement of right holders have flourished and have become main sources of access to content online. This affects rightholders' possibilities to determine whether, and under which conditions, their work and other subject- matter are used as well as their possibilities to get an appropriate remuneration for it. These user uploaded content services claim to be covered by the safe harbour exemption of Directive 2000/31/EC and either refuse to enter into licensing agreements or underpay creators, whilst at the same time they directly compete with fully licensed content providers for the same users and revenues. These services therefore conflict with the normal exploitation of copyright protected works and subject matter and drive down the overall value of creative content online.
Amendment 252 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a Rights reversion mechanism 1. Member States shall ensure that authors and performers that are in a contractual relationship with ongoing payment obligations, may terminate the contract by which they have licensed or transferred their rights when there is a complete absence of exploitation of their works and performances, a persistent failure to pay the remuneration agreed or a complete lack of reporting and transparency. 2. The right to terminate the contract on the transfer of licencing of rights may be exercised if within a year from the notification by the performer or author of this intention to terminate the contract, the contracting party fails to fulfil its contractual obligation with regards to the payment of the remuneration agreed. With regards to the absence of exploitation of a work and the complete lack of reporting and transparency the right to terminate the contract on the transfer or licencing of rights may be exercised if within five years from the notification by the performer or author of their intention to terminate the contract, the contracting party fails to fulfil its contractual obligations. 3. Member States may decide that the obligation in paragraph 1 does not apply when the contribution of the author or performer is not significant having regard to the overall work or performance.
Amendment 264 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Amendment 271 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
In respect of Article 14, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider plays an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-matter or promoting them, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefor. An information society service provider should be obliged to acquire licences for copyright protected content regardless of whether the provider has editorial responsibility for that content. The licences acquired by service providers from right holders should be deemed to cover all the acts of their users, provided that they are acting for non-commercial purposes. This will provide legal certainty for individual users of such services whilst clarifying the liability of platforms.
Amendment 289 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) Collaboration between information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to largesignificant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users and rightholders is essential for the functioning of technologies, such as content recognition technologies. In such cases, rightholders should provide the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content and the services should be transparent towards rightholders with regard to the deployed technologies, to allow the assessment of their appropriateness. The services should in particular provide rightholders with information on the type of technologies used, the way they are operated and their success rate for the recognition of rightholders' content. Those technologies should also allow rightholders to get information from the information society service providers on the use of their content covered by an agreement. Those technologies should not require the identity of individual users uploading content and should not process data relating to individual users, in accordance with Directive 95/46/EC, Directive 2002/58/EC and the General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679. On the contrary it should be limited to preventing the availability of specifically identified and duly notified works based on the information provided by right holders and therefore does not lead to a general monitoring obligation.
Amendment 303 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Certain rightholders such as authors and performers need information to assess 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. As authors and performers tend to bare in a weaker contractual position when they grant licences or transfer their rights, they need information to assess the continued economic value of their rights, compared to the remuneration received for their licence or transfer, but they often face a lack of transparency. Therefore, the sharing of adequate information by their contractual counterparts orand subsequent transferees or licenses, as well as their successors in title is important for the transparency and balance in the system that governs the remuneration of authors and performers. The reporting and transparency obligation should follow the work across all forms of exploitation and across borders.
Amendment 332 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
‘research organisation’ means a university, a research institute or any other organisation the primary goal of which is to conduct scientifacademic research or to conduct scientifacademic research and provide educational services:
Amendment 333 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) on a non-for-profit basis or by reinvesting all the profits in its scientifacademic research; or
Amendment 334 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
in such a way that the access to the results generated by the scientifacademic research cannot be enjoyed on a preferential basis by an undertaking exercising a decisive influence upon such organisation;
Amendment 357 #
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 for reproductions and extractions made by research organisations 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 scientifacademic research.
Amendment 388 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Amendment 389 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) ensures the fair remuneration of the rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter.
Amendment 407 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
In respect of Article 14, it is necessary to verify whether the service providerthe application of Article 14 of the Directive 2000/31/EC, unless it has been ascertained that the role of the service provider is of a purely passive nature, the service provider would not be eligible for the liability exemption of Article 14 of the Directive 2000/31/EC and would be deemed to plays an active role, including by optimising. An active role includes, inter alia, optimisation for the purpose of the presentation by the service of the uploaded works or subject-matter or their promoting themon by the service, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefor. A service provider can be deemed active even where it has no editorial control over the content which it makes available.
Amendment 451 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 a (new)
Recital 39 a (new)
(39 a) The use of technical measures is essential for online licensing and rights management purposes, and content recognition technologies in particular are readily available and affordable. Such technical measures do not require the identity of uploaders and involve targeted technical cooperation between rightholders and information service providers, based on the data provided by rightholders. Provided they are used in such a way, the use of technical measures is fully compatible with Article 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC and the European Charter of Fundamental Rights. In order to promote collaboration between rightholders and information society services providers, Member States should encourage industry agreements between rightholders and information society services, and if necessary the Commission may bring forward proposals for a Code of Conduct at a later date.
Amendment 502 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States may ensure that a fair share of the revenue derived from the uses of press publishers' rights is attributed to journalists.
Amendment 522 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Information society service providers that store and/or provide to the public access to largesignificant amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall conclude licensing agreements with rightholders. These services shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter. Rightholders shall provide information society service providers with the reference file, metadata or any information necessary to ensure the effective functioning of those measures.
Amendment 536 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Amendment 540 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 b (new)
Article 13 b (new)
Article 13b Use of protected content by automated image referencing information society services 1. Information society services that automatically reproduce or refer to significant amounts of visual works of art for the purpose of indexing and referencing shall conclude licensing agreements with right holders in order to ensure the fair remuneration of visual authors. 2. The licences acquired by information society services shall cover all the acts of their individual users, which are not for direct or indirect economic or commercial advantage.
Amendment 541 #
Proposal for a directive
Article -14 (new)
Article -14 (new)
Amendment 546 #
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 basisat least once a year and taking into account the specificities of each sector, accurate, timely, adequate and sufficient information on the exploitation and promotion of their works and performances from those to whom they have licensed or transferred their rights, including subsequent transferees or licensees, notably as regards modes of promotion, exploitation, revenues generated and remuneration due.
Amendment 552 #
2. The obligation in paragraph 1 shall be proportionate and effective and shall ensure an appropriate high 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, as well as a right of authors to audit.
Amendment 557 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States shall ensure that sector-specific standard reporting statements and procedures are developed through stakeholder dialogues.
Amendment 593 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Directive 96/9/EC
Article 6(2), point (b)
Article 6(2), point (b)
(b) where there is use for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching or scientifacademic research, as long as the source is indicated and to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved, without prejudice to the exceptions and the limitation provided for in Directive [this Directive];
Amendment 595 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Directive 96/9/EC
Article 9, point (b)
Article 9, point (b)
(b) in the case of extraction for the purposes of illustration for teaching or scientifacademic research, as long as the source is indicated and to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved, without prejudice to the exceptions and the limitation provided for in Directive [this Directive];
Amendment 598 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b
Directive 2001/29/EC
Article 5(3), point (a)
Article 5(3), point (a)
(a) use for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching or scientifacademic research, as long as the source, including the author's name, is indicated, unless this turns out to be impossible and to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved, without prejudice to the exceptions and the limitation provided for in Directive [this Directive];
Amendment 747 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide publishers of press publications with the rights provided for in Article 2 and Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the digital use of their press publications and shall ensure that a fair share of the revenue derived from the uses of the press publishers right is attributed to journalists and other employees.
Amendment 761 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Member States shall provide publishers of press publications with an unwaivable right to obtain equitable remuneration for the use of their press publications.
Amendment 819 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate, and shall ensure the protection of individual user data as far as possible, in compliance with Directive 95/46/EC and Directive 2002/58/EC, and the General Data Protection Regulation. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter.
Amendment 867 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a Licensing agreements for information society service providers that store and/or provide access to the public to significant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users 1. Information society service providers that store and/or provide access to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, thereby going beyond the mere provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public and of reproduction, shall conclude licensing agreements with rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. 2. Service providers that play an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-matter or promoting them, are not eligible for the safe harbour liability exemption. 3. Licenses acquired by information society service providers shall cover all the acts of their individual users, which are not for direct or indirect economic or commercial advantage.
Amendment 882 #
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 no less than once a year and taking into account the specificities of each sector, timely, adequate and sufficientaccurate and comprehensive information on the exploitation of their works and performances from those to whom they have licensed or transferred their rights, including subsequent transferees or licensees, notably as regards modes of exploitation, promotion, revenues generated and remuneration due.
Amendment 902 #
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 high 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, as well as author's right to audit.
Amendment 923 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14 a Unwaivable right to equitable remuneration 1. Member States shall ensure that when a performer or audiovisual author has transferred or assigned his making available right to a producer, that performer or audiovisual author shall retain the right to obtain an equitable remuneration. 2. This right to obtain an equitable remuneration for the making available of the performer or audiovisual author's work is inalienable and cannot be waived. 3. The administration of this right to obtain an equitable remuneration for the making available of the performer or audiovisual author's work shall be entrusted to collective management organisations representing audiovisual authors and/or performers, unless other collective agreements, including voluntary collective management agreements, guarantee such remuneration to performers or audiovisual authors for their making available right. 4. Performers' and audiovisual authors' collective management organisations shall collect the equitable remuneration from audiovisual media services making works available to the public.
Amendment 929 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 15 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1 Member States shall ensure that authors and performers are entitled to a proportionate remuneration of the revenues derived from all modes of exploitation and every use of their works.
Amendment 940 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that authors and performers are entitled to request additional, appropriatequitable 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 956 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Member States shall ensure that representative organisations of authors and performers may make the claim for additional, equitable remuneration on behalf of their members.
Amendment 964 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Member States shall provide that disputes concerning the transparency obligation under Article 14 and the contract adjustment mechanism under Article 15 may be submitted to a voluntary,n alternative dispute resolution procedure.
Amendment 969 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Member States shall ensure that representative organisations of authors and performers may represent their members in the alternative dispute resolution procedure.