5 Amendments of Françoise CASTEX related to 2010/2156(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the technological advances in information and communication technology in no way alter the fundamental need to protect intellectual property rights, but do call for substantial changes in the legal framework protecting these rights so thata renewal of cultural industries so that creators take full advantage can be taken of the new possibilities offered, whilst guaranteeing a well-balanced system of rights protection which takes account of the interests of both creators and consumers,
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises the need for effective enforcement of intellectual property rights in both the offline and online environments and stresses, in that connection, that existing measures, as well as any new measures proposed, should be carefully evaluated in order to ensurguarantee their effectiveness and assess their implications for theiciency, proportionality and impact on fundamental rights of citizens;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Stresses that the scale of unauthorised use of copyright protected material reported by the content industry strongly suggests that the current legal framework suffers from problems of legitimacy in the eyes of the consumer. It is therefore crucial that the roots of this problem be identified and eliminated, rather than exacerbated through repressive measures.
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the issue of the fragmented nature of European copyright law has been well known for years and, in that connection, calls on the Commission to present, as soon as possible, concrete legislative proposals on how to tackle the issue of territoriality in order to dismantle existing obstacles to the development of the internal market, in particular in the online environment, while respecting consumers demand and cultural diversity;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasises that a short-term measure to deal with certain obstacles created by territoriality should include a reassessment of the optional nature of the exceptions and limitations introduced by Directive 2001/29/EC and that a review of that directive, as required by its provisions, is now long overdue, particularly in order to ensure that innovative European companies are not disadvantaged compared counterparts in other jurisdictions, such as in the United States where companies that can benefit from a harmonized and system of “fair use” copyright exceptions which do not interfere with the normal exploitation of the work or other subject matter by the rightholder;