BETA

34 Amendments of Daniel BUDA related to 2016/0280(COD)

Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
(2) The directives which have been adopted in the area of copyright and related rights contribute to the functioning of the internal market, provide for a high level of protection for rightholders, facilitate the clearance of rights and create a framework wherein the exploitation of works and other protected subject-matter can take place. This harmonised legal framework contributes to the good functioning of the internal market; it stimulates innovation, creativity, investment and production of new content, also in the digital environment, with a view to avoiding fragmentation of the internal market. The protection provided by this legal framework also contributes 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.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 85 #
Proposal for a directive
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 the exercise and enforcement of rights in publications, on the use of works and other subject-matter byon online service providers' platforms storing and giving access to user uploaded content and on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts. _________________ 26 COM(2015) 626 final.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 88 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 a (new)
(4 a) For the purpose of the application of Union law in the field of copyright, in particular of this directive, and in order to guarantee a strong level of protection for rightholders, it should be recalled that an act of communication to the public and/or of making available occurs whenever an access is given to a protected work or any other subject-matter to people outside the normal circle or who do not belong to the closest social acquaintances of the family of the person providing such an access, irrespective of whether these people are at the same place or in different ones, or whether they perceive the protected works or other subject-matters at the same time or in different ones.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 103 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
(6) The exceptions and the limitations set out in this Directive seek to achieve a fair balance between the 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. Exceptions also contain conditions that ensure the preservation of functioning markets and rightholders' interests and incentives to create and invest.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 174 #
Proposal for a directive
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. 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 digital teaching activities, including online and across borders. Article 5(5) of Directive 2001/29/EC should apply to all the exceptions and limitations provided for by this Directive.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a directive
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 educational activity for a non-commercial purpose and are recognised as such or accredited as educational establishments by the relevant national authority. 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.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 278 #
Proposal for a directive
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 negotifacilitation mechanism allowing the relevant parties willing to conclude an agreement to rely on the assistance of an impartial body. The body should meet with the relevant parties and help withfacilitate the negotiations by providing professional and external advice. Against that background, Member States should decide on the conditions of the functioning of the negotifacilitation mechanism, including the timing and duration of the assistance to negotiations and the bearing of the costs. Member States should ensure that administrative and financial burdens remain proportionate to guarantee the efficiency of the negotifacilitation forum.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 287 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
(31) A free and pluralist press is essential to ensure quality journalism and citizens' access to information. It provides a fundamental contribution to public debate and the proper functioning of a democratic society. In the transition from print to digital, publishers of press publications are facing problems in licensing the online use of their publications and recouping their investments and in establishing their standing for the purpose of asserting the rights they hold by law or by means of assignment, licence or any other contractual arrangement. In the absence of recognition of publishers of press publications as rightholders, licensing and enforcement in the digital environment isare often complex and inefficient.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 314 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
(33) For the purposes of this Directive, it is necessary to define the concept 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, weekly or monthly magazines of general or special interest 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 does not extend to acts of hyperlinking which do not constitute communication to the public.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 363 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
(37) Evolution of digital technologies has led to the emergence of new business models and reinforced the role of the Internet as the main marketplace for the distribution and access to copyright- protected content. Over the last years, the functioning of the online contentis marketplace has gained in complexity. Online services providing access to copyright protected content uploaded by their users without the involvement 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.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 371 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37 a (new)
(37) The creative sector contributes significantly both economically and culturally to strengthening the Union, and the importance of the sector has long been recognised under European Union law including Directive 2001/29/EC, which aims to guarantee a legislative framework wherein the exploitation of works and other protected subject-matter can take place. Rightholders frequently encounter difficulties in licensing their rights with certain online providers and securing remuneration for the online distribution of their works, with the risk of undermining their activities. To uphold a high level of protection that enables the creative sectors to continue to contribute culturally and economically to the Union it is necessary to ensure that legal certainty is provided both for rightholders and users of protected works and subject- matter and that rightholders are able to negotiate copyright licenses with user – uploaded content services that distribute their content.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 391 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Where information society service providers store and provi, index access to the public tond classify 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 publicor providing access to the public as the case may be, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholders or prevent the unauthorised availability of works or other copyright- protected subject matter provided by them, 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 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).Directive 2000/31/EC of the European
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 425 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
In order to ensure the functioning of any licensing agreement, or to prevent the unauthorized availability of their services in respect of content not covered by such contracts , information society service providers storing and, indexing, classifying or providing access to the public to large 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.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 449 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 a (new)
(39) In cases when the measures and technologies deployed in accordance with this Directive affect the upload of content covered by an exception or approved by virtue of authorization granted, it is necessary to require service providers to set up complaints and redress mechanisms for the benefit of users whose content has been affected by these measures/technologies. Such mechanisms must ensure an appropriate balance between the need to ensure that content covered by exceptions to copyright or approved by virtue of authorisations is not unduly affected by the measures/technologies on the one hand and the need to ensure that complaints and redress mechanisms do not unduly detract from the effectiveness of the measures on the other. To achieve that objective, complaints and redress mechanisms should prescribe minimum standards for complaints to ensure that rightholders are provided with adequate information to assess and respond to complaints. Properly functioning complaints and redress mechanisms should provide rightholders with an adequate period to respond to complaints, taking into account the number of complaints being processed by the recipient rightholder at the time of the complaint.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 468 #
Proposal for a directive
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, as well as the significance of the contribution by authors and performers to the work or the overall performance or execution should be considered. Member States should consult all relevant stakeholders as that should help determine sector-specific requirements. Collective bargaining should be considered as an option to reach an agreement between the relevant stakeholders regardor similar contractual agreements should be considered as meeting transparency requirements. 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.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 473 #
Proposal for a directive
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 ishave become disproportionately low compared to the relevant net 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. The assessment of the situation should take account of the specific circumstances of each case as well as of the economic specificities or other features and practices of the different content sectors, as well as the nature and importance of the contribution of the author, performer or executant of the work or the performance or rendering as a whole. 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 authority.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 562 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Reproductions of works or other protected subject matter, made in accordance with paragraph 1, must be safely stored against unauthorised access for the period necessary to carry out text and data mining for the purpose of scientific research and must be deleted at the end of the proceedings. Any reproductions of works or other protected subject matter used for text and data mining that are stored or preserved for longer than necessary shall be regarded as counterfeit copies.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 610 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States may provide that the exception adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 does not apply generally or as regards specific types of works or other subject- matter, to the extent that adequate licences authorising the acts described in paragraph 1 and adapted to the specific needs and requirements of educational establishments are easily available in the market.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 714 #
2. Member States shall ensure that information that allows the identification of the works or other subject-matter covered by a licence granted in accordance with Article 7 and information about the possibility of rightholders to object referred to in Article 7(1)(c) are made publicly accessible in a single online portal 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.(Does not affect the English version.)
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 726 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that where the relevant 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 body with relevant experience. That body shall provide assistance with negotiation and help reach agreementto facilitate the negotiations.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 781 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall expire 2015 years after the publication of the press publication. This term shall be calculated from the first day of January of the year following the date of publication.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 806 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – title
Use of protected content by information society service providers storing and giving access to large amounts of works and other subject-matter uploaded by their users
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 810 #
Proposal for a directive
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 meaMember States shall ensures to ensure the functionhat any licencing 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. between information society service providers, that store and provide to the public access to protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, and rightholders, shall include :
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 825 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Information society service providers that store, index, classify 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 effective measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the unauthorised 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.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 826 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a (new)
(a) an obligation for the information service provider to take measures, such as the use of content recognition technologies, to ensure the effective functioning of the agreement concluded for the use of the protected works or other subject-matters;
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 827 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b (new)
(b) the coverage of the content uploaded by the users, as well as their liability, including where they perform an act of reproduction and/or of communication to the public, insofar they act on a non-professional basis.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 829 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Member States shall ensure that in the absence of a licencing agreement as referred to in paragraph 1, either because it was not required by rightholders or because the information society service provider is eligible to the liability exemption regime set out in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC, information service providers shall take measures to prevent the availability on their services of protected works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 836 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. The measures, referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a shall be appropriate and proportionate.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 837 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. For the purpose of ensuring a proper application of the measures referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a : a) rightholders shall provide information society service providers with all relevant and necessary information in order to identify protected works and other-subject matter available on their services, and b) the service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 841 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 1, in particular regarding the possible application of an exception or an authorisation of use relating to the content concerned. Such mechanisms shall not unreasonably prejudice the effectiveness of measures provided for in paragraph 1.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 846 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 919 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. Member States may decide that tThe obligation in paragraph 1 does not apply when the transparency obligation has already been established by agreement between the parties or when the contribution of the author or performer is not significant having regard to the overall work or performance.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 932 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure thatmay decide whether authors and performers are entitled to requestwhose contribution is significant having regard to the overall work or performance are entitled to request an adjustment to the contract or additional, appropriate remuneration from the party with whom they entered into a contract for the exploitation of the rights when the remuneration originally agreed ibecomes disproportionately low compared to the subsequent relevant net revenues and benefits derived from the exploitation of the works or performances. When assessing the disproportionality, the corresponding circumstances of each case, including the nature and significance of the contribution of the authors and performers to the overall work or performance, shall be taken into account.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 996 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The provisions of Article 15 shall apply only in situations where the remuneration has become strikingly disproportionate after [the date mentioned in Article 21(1)].
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI