Activities of Jean-Marie CAVADA
Plenary speeches (35)
Outcome of the European Council on 11-12 December 2008 - French Presidency’s term of office (debate)
Explanations of vote
Combating terrorism - Protection of personal data (debate)
Presentation of the programme of the French Presidency (debate)
Freedom, security and justice (annual debate) (Articles 2 and 39 TEU) (debate)
Immigration - Legal migration - Policy priorities in the fight against illegal immigration of third-country nationals (debate)
New PNR agreement SWIFT (debate)
Approval of Minutes of previous sitting
Decision on urgent procedure
Coordination of certain of the Member States' provisions on television broadcasting (debate)
Accession of Bulgaria - Accession of Romania (debate)
Use of passenger data (PNR) (debate)
Freedom, security and justice – Immigration (debate)
Interception of bank transfer data from the SWIFT system by the US secret services (debate)
The period of reflection: structure, subjects and context for an assessment of the debate on the EU
Presumed use of European countries by the CIA for the transportation and illegal detention of prisoners
Data retention
Agenda
Current problems regarding immigration
Liberty and security
Order of business
Area of freedom, security and justice
Question Time (Council)
Area of freedom, security and justice
Request for urgent procedure
Explanations of vote
Traditional, VAT- and GNI based own resources and measures to meet cash requirements (A7-0268/2014 - Anne E. Jensen, Jean-Luc Dehaene) (vote)
Homophobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity (A7-0009/2014 - Ulrike Lunacek)
Statement by the President
Creative Europe programme (debate)
Closure of Greek national broadcasting company (debate)
US NSA surveillance programme, surveillance bodies in various Member States and impact on EU citizens' privacy (debate)
European Schools system (short presentation)
Media law in Hungary (debate)
The Belgian Presidency’s programme of activities (debate)
Reports (16)
REPORT Report on the proposal for a Council decision on defining 1-benzylpiperazine (BZP) as a new synthetic drug which is to be made subject to control measures and criminal provisions PDF (129 KB) DOC (64 KB)
REPORT Report on the recommendation for a Council Decision concerning the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Convention of 26 July 1995, drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests, the Protocol of 27 September 1996, drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, to the Convention on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests, the Protocol of 29 November 1996, drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, the Protocol on the interpretation, by way of preliminary rulings, by the Court of Justice of the European Communities of the Convention on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests and the Second Protocol of 19 June 1997, drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, to the Convention on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests PDF (141 KB) DOC (69 KB)
REPORT on the recommendation for a Council Decision concerning the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Convention of 26 July 1995, drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on the use of information technology for customs purposes PDF (131 KB) DOC (62 KB)
REPORT on the initiative of the Republic of Finland with a view to adopting a Council Decision adjusting the basic salaries and allowances applicable to Europol staff PDF (141 KB) DOC (70 KB)
REPORT on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Community, of an Arrangement between the European Community and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway on the modalities of those states' participation in the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union PDF (147 KB) DOC (103 KB)
PDF (125 KB) DOC (58 KB)
PDF (125 KB) DOC (57 KB)
REPORT on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion of the agreement between the European Community and Romania on the participation of Romania in the work of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction PDF (124 KB) DOC (57 KB)
REPORT Report on the amended proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Community, of the Protocol Against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air, supplementing the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime PDF (134 KB) DOC (65 KB)
REPORT Report on the amended proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Community, of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women And Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime PDF (135 KB) DOC (65 KB)
REPORT on the proposal for a Council regulation imposing certain specific restrictive measures against certain persons suspected of involvement in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri PDF (200 KB) DOC (126 KB)
REPORT on the proposal for a Council regulation imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo PDF (195 KB) DOC (114 KB)
REPORT on the proposal for a Council regulation imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons impeding the peace process and breaking international law in the conflict in the Darfur region in Sudan PDF (208 KB) DOC (119 KB)
REPORT on the proposal for a Council regulation imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d’Ivoire PDF (207 KB) DOC (87 KB)
REPORT on the online distribution of audiovisual works in the European Union PDF (250 KB) DOC (137 KB)
REPORT on the European Schools' system PDF (231 KB) DOC (144 KB)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT Report on journalism and new media - creating a public sphere in Europe PDF (215 KB) DOC (132 KB)
Opinions (5)
OPINION Draft Opinion Cavada on Lisbon Treaty : Impact of the new Treaty in the Justice and Home Affairs area on the acquis and ongoing procedures 2007/2156(INI)
OPINION on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting
OPINION Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implications of the Court's judgment of 13 September 2005 (Case C-176/03 Commission v Council)
OPINION on the period of reflection: the structure, subjects and context for an assessment of the debate on the European Union
OPINION on a competitive digital single market – eGovernment as a spearhead
Shadow opinions (2)
OPINION on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on collective management of copyright and related rights and multi-territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online uses in the internal market
OPINION on the European Platform against poverty and social exclusion
Written explanations (23)
Copyright in the Digital Single Market (A8-0245/2018 - Axel Voss) FR
Le Parlement européen en adoptant aujourd’hui la directive sur le droit d’auteur dans le marché unique numérique a parfaitement compris la gravité de la situation en saisissant la chance unique qui lui été offerte de préserver pour les années à venir les auteurs, les créateurs, les interprètes, les éditeurs de presse et les journalistes.Il fallait que cette question soit tranchée en faveur de la protection des contenus qui illustrent si bien à travers l’histoire de nos pays, nos aspirations à l’originalité et à la vivacité de nos cultures et à la préservation de l’activité journalistique qui, dans sa diversité, est le socle de nos démocraties européennes. C’est pourquoi je me suis battu depuis plus de deux ans et demi pour arriver à ce que ce texte soit adopté.
Contracts for the supply of digital content and digital services (A8-0375/2017 - Evelyne Gebhardt, Axel Voss) FR
J’ai voté cette directive en cours depuis fin 2015 et qui marque une étape importante dans la définition de règles communes au niveau de l'UE pour les contrats numériques.Les espoirs et les efforts étaient donc grands en ce qui concerne cette nouvelle approche consistant à introduire des règles facilitant et sécurisant l’achat et la vente transfrontaliers de biens matériels et de contenus numériques.Un juste équilibre a été trouvé ici entre les intérêts légitimes du consommateur et les obligations du fournisseur.
Report on financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance (A8-0170/2019 - Jeppe Kofod, Luděk Niedermayer) FR
Cette législature a consacré une attention prioritaire aux questions de la fraude et de l’évasion fiscales et de leur blanchiment.Nous devons nous engager pour un système international plus juste et une mondialisation équitable fondée sur des règles partagées par tous. Nous devons soutenir une lutte résolue contre les pratiques de sous-imposition et d’évasion fiscale, qui tienne compte des enjeux liés au numérique, en particulier pour les plateformes.Partageant l’ambition du Parlement européen, j’ai voté ce rapport et souhaite que le Conseil européen appelle à participer directement au processus d’adoption des règles dans le domaine fiscal, conformément à la communication de la Commission du 15 janvier 2019 relative au passage à la majorité qualifiée.
Amendments to Parliament's Rules of Procedure (A8-0462/2018 - Richard Corbett) FR
J’ai voté en faveur des modifications du règlement intérieur du Parlement européen. Ces modifications concernent notamment les normes de conduites et de transparence qui s'appliquent aux députés. Les députés seront incités à publier leurs réunions avec les représentants d’intérêts (et cela sera obligatoire pour ceux exerçants certaines fonctions) et l’utilisation de leurs frais. Ces modifications sont un progrès pour la transparence démocratique nécessaire à notre institution.
CO2 emission performance standards for new heavy-duty vehicles (A8-0354/2018 - Bas Eickhout) FR
J’ai voté, mercredi 14 novembre, en faveur du rapport Eickhout visant à réduire les émissions de CO2 des poids lourds. Ce texte détermine un objectif de diminution des rejets de CO2 pour les poids lourds et autobus d’au moins 25 % d’ici 2025, puis un minimum de 35 % d’ici 2030.Je me réjouis de ces chiffres qui vont au-delà de ceux proposés par la Commission européenne. Les émissions de CO2 des poids lourds et autobus représentent 6 % du total des émissions de CO2 dans l’Union européenne, il est indispensable de réduire ces rejets.
Multiannual plan for fish stocks in the Western Waters and adjacent waters, and for fisheries exploiting those stocks (A8-0310/2018 - Alain Cadec) FR
J’ai voté pour le rapport de Monsieur Alain Cadec, en faveur d’un plan de gestion pluriannuel pour la Manche et pour l’Atlantique. Ce texte prévoit une gestion programmée de la ressource et de la pêche et vise à mettre fin à la surpêche d’ici 2020 pour que cette activité soit soutenable sur le long terme. J’ai choisi de voter contre l’amendement qui aurait permis des dérogations pour repousser cette échéance jusqu’à trois ans: la préservation de nos ressources naturelles est aujourd’hui une urgence.
Reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment (A8-0317/2018 - Frédérique Ries) FR
J’ai souhaité soutenir le rapport de Madame Frédérique Ries visant à interdire certains produits en plastique à usage unique lors du vote en plénière le 24 octobre dernier. L’usage de ces produits en plastique, pour lesquels des alternatives sont d’ores et déjà connues, sera ainsi interdit d’ici 2021. Ce rapport fixe également un objectif de réduction de l’usage des produits en plastique pour lesquels des alternatives ne sont pas encore connues à ce jour, d’ici 2025. Il est aujourd’hui indispensable que chacun prenne ses responsabilités et réduise son impact environnemental dans les prochaines années.
Quality of water intended for human consumption (A8-0288/2018 - Michel Dantin) FR
J’ai voté en faveur du rapport de Monsieur Michel Dantin mardi 23 octobre à Strasbourg. Les changements adoptés dans la directive sur l’eau potable visent à offrir un plus grand accès à une eau de meilleure qualité. Cet engagement va de pair avec une meilleure information des consommateurs. Il est nécessaire que tous les citoyens aient accès à une eau de qualité, et ce à un coût accessible pour tous.
Emission performance standards for new passenger cars and for new light commercial vehicles (A8-0287/2018 - Miriam Dalli) FR
J’ai voté mercredi 3 octobre en faveur du projet visant à réduire les émissions de dioxyde de carbone et à augmenter la part de véhicules à faibles ou zéro émissions sur nos routes.Le secteur des transports est le seul pour lequel les émissions des gaz à effet de serre sont plus élevées aujourd'hui qu’en 1990: le durcissement des règles d’émissions pour les véhicules était nécessaire. Je me réjouis donc que les députés européens réunis en plénière aient choisi de durcir les mesures proposées par la Commission. L’adoption d’un objectif de réduction de 40% d’ici 2030 aidera à atteindre les objectifs de l’Accord de Paris.
Provision of audiovisual media services (A8-0192/2017 - Sabine Verheyen, Petra Kammerevert) FR
J’ai voté en faveur du rapport de Mesdames Verheyen et Kammerevert visant à réviser la directive « Service de médias audiovisuels » (directive SMA) mardi 2 octobre en session plénière à Strasbourg.La révision de cette directive était devenue indispensable afin de s’adapter aux changements du paysage audiovisuel européen, et de rendre le texte cohérent avec le marché numérique. Je salue les mesures ambitieuses présentés par ce rapport. En effet, les plateformes de partage de vidéo sont intégrées dans le champ d’application de la directive : c’est un nouveau pas vers une plus grande responsabilisation des plateformes en ligne. Par ailleurs, ce texte apporte un soutien conséquent à la création et la diversité culturelle : les plateformes se verront désormais contraintes à proposer un minimum de 30% d’œuvre européennes dans leur catalogue.
Common Corporate Tax Base (A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang) FR
J'ai voté le jeudi 15 mars en faveur du rapport de M. Tang qui vise à instaurer une assiette commune pour l’impôt sur les sociétés (ACIS). Ce rapport permet en effet de définir le résultat imposable d’une société au sein de l’Union européenne afin d’amener plus de transparence sur les taux imposés par les États membres et simplifier la vie des sociétés.Cependant, je regrette que l’amendement 78 n’ait pas été adopté. Ce dernier qui voulait introduire un taux minimum d’imposition effectif aurait sans aucun doute réduit les différences entre les systèmes fiscaux européens et favoriser l’établissement d’une concurrence équitable.Il s’agit de normes fiscales, la décision finale reviendra donc au Conseil des ministres votant à l’unanimité. J’espère que la voix du Parlement sera entendue car ce rapport va dans la bonne direction.
Monitoring the application of EU law 2015 (A8-0265/2017 - Kostas Chrysogonos) FR
J’ai voté jeudi en faveur du rapport de M. Chrysogonos sur le contrôle de l’application du droit de l’Union en 2015. Il fait suite au rapport annuel de la Commission pour l’année 2015 sur l’application du droit de l’Union par les États membres.Ce rapport souligne bien les efforts consentis par les États membres pour appliquer correctement le droit de l’Union. Il est particulièrement clair sur les points essentiels que sont: le respect des droits fondamentaux, la crise migratoire, les infractions au droit de l’environnement, la responsabilité des États membres qui ne respectent pas les quotas d’accueil des réfugiés. Ce dernier sujet est essentiel dans la période de crise migratoire que nous connaissons aujourd’hui, les États membres doivent prendre conscience de leurs obligations.Je me félicite en revanche que les paragraphes de ce rapport qui établissaient un lien de causalité entre les mesures financières restrictives imposées par l’Union à certains États membres et l’application correcte du droit de l’Union aient été rejetés.
Legitimate measures to protect whistle-blowers acting in the public interest (A8-0295/2017 - Virginie Rozière) FR
J'ai voté en faveur du rapport d'initiative de Mme Rozière sur les mesures légitimes visant à protéger les lanceurs d’alerte. Le rapport est très bon et pourra constituer la base d'une proposition législative pour créer une protection européenne des lanceurs d'alerte, qui suppléent aux carences des pouvoirs institutionnels et cherchent à protéger les citoyens. Ils bénéficieront ainsi de mécanismes de signalement pour faciliter la révélation anonyme d'alertes auprès de la presse et des ONG lorsqu’il ne leur sera pas possible de passer par leur hiérarchie. Ils disposeront également d'une protection contre les mesures de représailles ainsi que d’assistance juridique. La proposition de Mme Rozière est équilibrée car elle établit un certain nombre de garde-fous pour éviter de favoriser un système de délation.
Enhanced cooperation: European Public Prosecutor's Office (A8-0290/2017 - Barbara Matera) FR
J'ai voté jeudi dernier en faveur de la création d'un parquet européen pour lutter contre le détournement de fonds de l’UE. Le rapport de Mme Matera était bon et allait dans le sens d'une plus grande coopération des systèmes judiciaires des États membres. Actuellement, les poursuites pénales pour des infractions contre le budget de l'UE relèvent de la compétence exclusive des États membres, ce qui a conduit à des niveaux de protection inégaux des intérêts financiers de l'Union. Ce parquet permettra d'unifier le travail des procureurs nationaux au sein d'un même organe européen qui mènera des enquêtes sur les auteurs de ces infractions et pourra engager des poursuites contre eux. Il s’agit là d’un pas en avant dans la construction d’un espace européen de justice et dans l’intégration européenne.
State of play of negotiations with the United Kingdom (B8-0538/2017, B8-0539/2017) FR
J’ai soutenu l’adoption de la résolution sur l’état d’avancement des négociations avec le Royaume-Uni. En effet, nous ne pouvons que regretter le manque de progrès sur l’accord de retrait du Royaume-Uni. Malgré le dernier discours encourageant de Theresa May, la première phase des négociations n’a toujours pas abouti. De nombreux points doivent encore être éclaircis: la frontières entre l’Irlande du Nord et l’Irlande, les droits des citoyens et le règlement sur les engagements financiers du Royaume-Uni.Aussi le Parlement européen invite le Conseil à décider, lors de sa réunion d’octobre, de reporter l’ouverture de la deuxième phase des négociations.
Disclosure of income tax information by certain undertakings and branches (A8-0227/2017 - Hugues Bayet, Evelyn Regner) FR
Mardi 4 juillet, j’ai voté en faveur du rapport de Mr Bayet et de Mme Regner, qui met en place de nouvelles règles en matière de transparence fiscale. Désormais les multinationales auront l’obligation de publier, pour chaque pays dans lequel elles sont établies, leurs actifs et leurs revenus imposables dans ce pays, le montant de l’impôt payé et le nombre d’employés, entre autres. Une dérogation est prévue afin d’éviter de divulguer au public des informations trop sensibles et stratégiques pour l’entreprise. Cette dérogation est temporaire et doit être revue au bout d’un an. Cela permettra de garantir la transparence fiscale tout en assurant la compétitivité des entreprises européennes vis-à-vis de leurs concurrents non-européens.
Online platforms and the Digital Single Market (A8-0204/2017 - Henna Virkkunen, Philippe Juvin) FR
Jeudi 15 juin, j'ai voté en faveur du rapport d'initiative de M. Juvin et de Mme Virkkunen, qui aspire à une responsabilisation des plateformes en ligne, à la mise en place de conditions de concurrence équitables, ainsi qu'à un partage de la valeur plus équitable et un meilleur respect des droits de la propriété intellectuelle.Jusqu'à présent, l'Europe était en retard dans ces nouvelles formes d'économies et le marché numérique demeurait dominé par de grands acteurs extra-européens, américains ou asiatiques. Il est donc impératif que l'Union Européenne se résolve à mettre en place une stratégie offensive pour devenir un acteur culturel sur le plan mondial, et ce rapport d'initiative proposé par M. Juvin et Mme Virkkunen va dans ce sens.
Possible evolutions of and adjustments to the current institutional set-up of the European Union (A8-0390/2016 - Guy Verhofstadt) FR
J’ai voté en faveur de la résolution finale du rapport et je suis profondément convaincu qu’il faut une Union européenne forte.Cependant, j’ai voté contre l’amendement 53, car le maintien de Strasbourg comme siège du Parlement est un symbole fort de l’unité souhaitée par les pères fondateurs de l’Europe. Vouloir toucher à ce symbole, c’est vouloir nier ce que nous sommes.Les arguments avancés par les défenseurs du siège unique, tels que les frais de déplacement et l’empreinte carbone trop élevés, s’avèrent non pertinents: le coût des navettes réalisées par les parlementaires entre Strasbourg et Bruxelles s’élèvent à 10 centimes par citoyen, et l’empreinte carbone du Parlement européen de Strasbourg ne représente que 3 250 tonnes par an, ce qui en fait un exemple en matière d’écologie.
Civil Law Rules on Robotics (A8-0005/2017 - Mady Delvaux) FR
J’ai voté contre le rapport car il n'a pas réussi à élaborer une approche cohérente et viable, ce que je regrette. Il s’agit heureusement d’un simple rapport d’initiative, qui n’a pas de valeur législative.Proposer une agence européenne sans évaluation préalable n'est pas responsable.Il n'est pas approprié de plaider en faveur d'un débat sur l'instauration d'un revenu de base général, car il relève de la compétence des États membres et nécessite un débat beaucoup plus large. Je me félicite que ce paragraphe, ainsi que celui sur la taxe sur le travail des robots aient été rejetés.Je regrette que l'idée de donner une personnalité juridique aux robots subsiste car cela implique qu’ils aient des devoirs et des droits, ce qui est un non-sens du point de vue juridique.L’Union européenne doit poser un cadre pour créer un environnement de confiance pour les consommateurs et les entreprises en faisant des questions de responsabilité, de confidentialité, de protection des données et de sécurité ses priorités. Il faut rester prudent et ne pas extrapoler sur les possibles développements de la robotique au stade où nous en sommes.
EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (A8-0009/2017 - Artis Pabriks) FR
J’ai voté en faveur de l’accord sur le CETA. Bien qu’il ne soit pas parfait du point de vue démocratique, cet accord reste le meilleur que l’Union Européenne ait négocié d’un point de vue technique. Entre autres, il garantit une réelle protection des normes sanitaires et environnementales; il est également doté d’un système judiciaire arbitral protecteur, ce que je salue.Grâce à cet accord, la crédibilité de l’Union Européenne en tant que partenaire commercial est assurée.C’est en écoutant les arguments des nationalistes lors des débats que j’ai compris pourquoi ils combattent le CETA. En fait, ils spéculent sur une restriction du commerce au mépris des emplois à l’exportation qui verront le jour et des perspectives en matière d’investissement.Le CETA est un engagement commun pris par le Canada et l’UE d’un avenir en faveur d’un commerce libre et équitable. C’est un accord moderne et progressif qui défend nos valeurs et nos conceptions communes.
2016 Report on Albania (A8-0023/2017 - Knut Fleckenstein) FR
J'ai voté contre les rapports Fleckenstein et Preda. En effet, l'Union Européenne s'était engagée à faire une pause dans son élargissement afin d'approfondir la cohésion entre les États membres. Il apparaît donc indispensable qu'elle respecte cet engagement préalable avant d'accueillir de nouveaux pays, tels que l'Albanie et la Moldavie, dans un cadre économique, politique et social stable.
2016 Report on Bosnia and Herzegovina (A8-0026/2017 - Cristian Dan Preda) FR
J'ai voté contre le rapport Preda. En effet, l'Union Européenne s'était engagée à faire une pause dans son élargissement afin d'approfondir la cohésion entre les États membres. Il apparaît donc indispensable qu'elle respecte cet engagement préalable avant d'accueillir de nouveaux pays tels que l'Albanie et la Moldavie, dans un cadre économique, politique et social stable.
A European Pillar of Social Rights (A8-0391/2016 - Maria João Rodrigues) FR
Nous avons adopté en hémicycle le jeudi 19 janvier, par 396 voix en faveur du texte - 180 voix contre et 66 abstentions, des recommandations sur la prochaine proposition de « socle des droits sociaux ». Ces recommandations ont pour but de participer à la création d’un cadre législatif afin que les droits fondamentaux des travailleurs soient garantis, dans tous les pays de l’Union européenne et ce quel que soit le type de contrat ou d’emploi.Dans le contexte actuel de mondialisation, de révolution numérique et de politiques d’austérité auxquelles nous nous heurtons, il est nécessaire que l’Union européenne agisse comme un bouclier protecteur pour sécuriser au mieux les citoyens européens. Il semble donc que le moment soit venu de mettre en place un système efficace de coordination des politiques de sécurité sociale dans le but d’assurer une protection sociale de qualité pour tous.Dans ce même souci de sécuriser les citoyens européens, j’ai voté en faveur de l’instauration d’un salaire minimum national pour les travailleurs européens. C’est également dans cette optique que je me suis opposé aux contrats zéro heure.Enfin, c’est précisément dans cette optique que je me suis opposé à ces contrats qui ne garantissent pas des conditions de vie décentes aux travailleurs.
Written declarations (7)
Legal basis opinions (5)
Electronic publication of the Official Journal of the EU: authentication by electronic seal
Instrument contributing to stability and peace: military actors (2017-2020)
Country by country reporting
Mercury
Combating terrorism
Amendments (1880)
Amendment 3 #
2018/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the rapid pace of technology development, both in the transport industry and in the robotics and artificial intelligence sector, will havehas a significant impact on the economy and society; whereas driverless vehicles will significantly change our daily life, will determine the future of worldwide road transport and will also significantly reduce transport costs and improve road safety;
Amendment 6 #
2018/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the existing liability rules, such as Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products (the Product Liability Directive) and Directive 2009/103/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, and the enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability (the Motor Insurance Directive), were not developed to deal with the challenges posed by the use of autonomous cars and stresses that there is growing evidence that the current regulatory framework will no longer be sufficient or adequate when faced with the new risks emerging from increasing vehicle automation, connectivity and complexity;
Amendment 13 #
2018/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the view that, in the light of the dynamic technological changes in the sector, there is a need to clarify who should bear the damage in the event of accidents caused by fully autonomous vehicles; calls therefore on the Commission to carry out a thorough assessment, to adapt the current EU legal framework and, if necessary, introduce new rules on the basis of which responsibility and liability are allocated;
Amendment 18 #
2018/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that an EU-level approach could facilitatwill incentivise the cross-border development of autonomous transport systems by avoiding, facilitate the competitiveness of the European Union’s automative industry, ensure a high level of consumer protection and avoid fragmentation in the internal market;
Amendment 33 #
2018/2080(INI)
Recital 10
(10) Whereas provisions should be laid down regarding the officials and servants of the Ombudsman´s secretariat which will assist him and the budget thereof; whereas the seat of the Ombudsman should be that of the seat of the European Parliament;
Amendment 77 #
2018/2080(INI)
Article 13
The seat of the Ombudsman shall be that of the seat of the European Parliament.
Amendment 19 #
2018/2079(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
Ka. whereas it seems necessary to find a suitable solution as regards the different language regimes which could consist of harmonised forms, available in all EU languages;
Amendment 37 #
2018/2079(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. 11a. Understands that language barriers could be an additional obstacle and thus another reason for choosing one, and not another, law to be applicable;
Amendment 38 #
2018/2079(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Underlines that the availability of uniform standard forms, available in all EU languages, would facilitate access to the EECP;
Amendment 39 #
2018/2079(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11c. Suggests, that in order to ensure uniform standard forms, implementing powers should be conferred to the Commission, exercised in accordance with the Inter-institutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making;
Amendment 10 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the 2017 EU Justice Scoreboard focuses mainly on civil, commercial and administrative justice, as well as on the rule of law as the basis for an effective justice system;
Amendment 45 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the importance of efficient and timely proceedings infor citizens' fundamental rights and social rights in particular, including the matters of strengthening consumer protection and safeguarding intellectual property and data privacy rights; notes with concern that such proceedings are still too lengthy in some Member States; points out in addition that a large backlog of pending cases might also make citizens and businesses less willing to trust the judicial system, trust being the cornerstone of respect for the rule of law;
Amendment 54 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights the need to intensify and diversify the scope of training offered to judges, namely in the fields of gender structuresmainstreaming, judicial ethics, IT skills, courtjudicial management, mediation, and communication with parties and with the press; underlines furthermore the importance of adequate training in EU law and in the different EU cooperation structures, such as Eurojust;
Amendment 63 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. AsksCalls on the Commission to consideradd collective redress procedures into next year’s comparative exercise on accessibility factors of justice systems, as it is increasingly significant for facilitating access to justice and efficient dispute resolutionbelieves access to justice and efficient dispute resolution to be of prime importance; considers them a major tool for strengthening consumer, environmental, and health protection in Europe as a whole, in areas in which large numbers of applicants are directly affected;
Amendment 68 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights that legal aid for consumers below the poverty threshold remains an essential balancing factor; underlines the role of legal aid in guaranteeing that weaker parties may alsocan have access to justice, a fundamental right under EU law on equal terms, which is a fundamental right in the EU; points out that legal aid should be linked to the poverty threshold in Member States; maintains that legal costs should, in general, be lowered still further, for example by making use of national electronic eJustice portals;
Amendment 83 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Highlights that there is still much to do in terms of gender equality in the judicial professions across Europe, for examplenot least as regards access to the office of judge, and in terms of gender stereotypes, transparency in appointments, reconciliation between work and non-work responsibilities or the existence of mentoring practices; emphasises the clear discrepancy between the proportions of female professionals at lower levels of the judiciary (including non-judge staff) and that at the higicial officers) and at the higher court and prosecution levels; urges the Member States, therefore, to direct their court and prosecution levelsefforts towards learning support, especially in the field of higher education for women in the judicial professions, and to encourage a positive attitude to female judges, who should be viewed as a social asset;
Amendment 86 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls the 2015 Joint Statement by the European Parliament and the Council stating that Member States should, to the greatest possible extent and in view of the objective of achieving equality between men and women laid down in Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union, ensure an equal presence of women and men when appointing candidates as judges at the General Court of the Court of Justice of the European Union; urges the Member States to set a good example;
Amendment 88 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Underlines that, while over half of the Member States increased expenditure on the judicial system per inhabitant in 2015, the determination of financial resources is still mostly based on historical or actual costs instead of actual workload or number of court requests;
Amendment 90 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Welcomes the increased use of alternative dispute resolution systemechanisms in most Member States, in particular that of the European online dispute resolution (ODR) platform for consumers and traders;
Amendment 94 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on Member States to give greater consideration to the fact that a strong, independent judicial system is a key element of an effective justice system, which is in turn central to respect for the rule of law; points out that an independent judicial system relies, on the one hand, on the lack of interference or pressure from government and politics or from economic vested interests and, on the other hand, on effective guarantees provided by the status and position of judges and on their financial situation;
Amendment 4 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that Europe faces many challenges linked to globalisation, but it is important to adapt the texts in force in a measured way, on an area-by-area basis, with due respect for national identities and the principles of subsidiarity and proporglobalisation implies many advantages for businesses and citizens; at the same time, globalisation ality so as to take into account the fears expressed by a growing number of citizens about their futureso raises concerns, which need to be addressed by the European Union;
Amendment 9 #
2018/2005(INI)
2. Stresses that this adjustment should take place in at least four areas: the protection of intellectual property, the protection of protected geographical indications (PGIs), the taking into account of opinion 2/15 of 16 May 2017 of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the possible creation of a multilateral court for the settlement of disputes relating to investmentinternational trade plays an important role in how globalisation develops; the legislator, in this regard, should pay special attention to the following areas of jurisdiction among others, which are subjected to international trade agreements: intellectual property rights, including copyright, trademarks and patents, data protection and enhanced transparency obligations, food safety requirements and environmental standards;
Amendment 14 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 18 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that, with regard to PGIs and agricultural Ge importance to further promote the European Union's scheme of geographical Iindications, or AGIs (including wine and cheese), the Union must be determined strictly to control the use of the traditional European designations of origin, especially in negotiating free trade agreementand traditional specialities and to continue concluding respective bilateral agreements with third countries;
Amendment 20 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Insists that oRecalls Opinion 2/15 of the CJEU be taken into account, in particular in that it offers a key for the clear divisourt of Justice of the European Union on the allocation of the competences between the European Union and the Member States, ands recalls that, as regards investment protection, the Courtgards the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and Singapore, which consicluders that the protection ofEuropean Union enjoys exclusive competences on all trade related matters except for non-direct foreign investment and the, investor-Sstate dispute settlement mechanism are a competence shared between the Union and the Member States, whereas the protection of direct investment fallresolution, covering all types of investments, and ancillary provisions regarding non-direct foreign investment; welcomes the Court opinion as it creates legal clarity for all future EU agreements within the exclusive competence ofird countries, including with the United Kingdom after its departure from the Union;
Amendment 24 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. StIn order to addresses the need, in order to protect the public interest, to replace the arbitration courts with a multilateral court to settle investment disputes, and welcomes the fact that the Council has just adopted a negotiating mandate to this effect; limitations of the existing Investor State Dispute Settlement system, welcomes Council's recent mandate given to the European Commission to negotiate, on behalf of the European Union, a Convention establishing a multilateral court for the settlement of investment disputes (MIC); the MIC will serve as a permanent body to settle investment disputes and will be a more transparent, coherent and fair system, which will be extremely beneficial for investors; further welcomes in this regard that the Council has also decided to make the negotiation directives publicly available, which was a longstanding request by the European Parliament in its efforts to push for more transparency in the field of international negotiations;
Amendment 28 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Supports, in the light of the above,Welcomes Union initiatives likely to establish a fair and undistorted conditions of competition, without excluding reasonablebalance between undistorted competition and protection measures, such as those already decided on by the Union in the fight against dumping to limit imports of some Chinese producanti-dumping measures as regards third country imports.;
Amendment 38 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Those rights and values must continue to be promoted and enforced and shared among the citizens and peoples and be at the heart of the EU project. Therefore, a new Justice, Rights and Values Fund, comprising the Rights and Values and the Justice programmes shall be created in the EU budget. At a time where European societies are confronted with extremism, radicalism and division, prejudice and anti-democratic ideologies, by means of new and more dangerous ways, using ‘fake news’ and cyber-attacks, spreading hate and mistrust against our open and inclusive societies, it is more important than ever to promote, strengthen and defend justice, rights and EU values:, EU values and the rule of law, which is inseparable from democracy itself, and a condition for its effectiveness. To promote and support human rights, respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, and the rule of law. This will have profound and direct implications for political, social, cultural and economic life in the EU. As part of the new Fund, the Justice Programme will continue to support the further development of Union area of justice and cross-border cooperation. The Rights and Values Programme will bring together the 2014-2020 Programme Rights, Equality and Citizenship established by Regulation (EU) No 1381/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council8 and the Europe for Citizens programme established by Council Regulation (EU) No 390/20149 , (hereafter 'the predecessor Programmes'). __________________ 8 Regulation (EU) No 1381/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme for the period 2014 to 2020 (OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, p. 62) 9 Council Regulation (EU) No 390/2014 of 14 April 2014 establishing the ‘Europe for Citizens’ programme for the period 2014- 2020 (OJ L 115, 17.4.2014, p.3)
Amendment 44 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The Justice, Rights and Values Fund and its two underlying funding programmes will focus primarily on people and entities, which contribute to makesupport, disseminate and protect our common values, rights and rich diversity, keeping them alive and vibrant. The ultimate objective is to nurture and sustain rights- based, equal, inclusive and democratic society. That includes defending a vibrant civil society, encouraging people's democratic, civic and social participation and fostering the rich diversity of European society, based on our common values, history and memory. Article 11 of the Treaty of the European Union further specifies that the institutions shall, by appropriate means, give citizens and representative associations the opportunity to make known and publicly exchange their views in all areas of Union action.
Amendment 48 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The Rights and Values programme (the 'Programme') should allow developing synergies to tackle the challenges that are common to the dissemination, promotion and protection of values and to reach a critical dimension to have concrete results in the field. That should be achieved by building on the positive experience of the predecessor Programmes and also developing new innovative measures. This will enable to fully exploit the potential of synergies, to more effectively support the policy areas covered and to increase their potential to reach people. To be effective, the Programme should take into account the specific nature of the different policies, their different target groups and their particular needs through tailor-made approaches.
Amendment 64 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Strong political will and coordinated action based on the methods and results of the previous Daphne Programmes, the Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme and the Justice Programme are necessary in order to prevent and combat all forms of violence and to protect victims, groups at risk and particularly vulnerable persons. In particular, since its launch in 1997, the Daphne funding to support victims of violence and combat the violence against women, children and young people has been a genuine success, both in terms of its popularity with stakeholders (public authorities, academic institutions and non- governmental organisations) and in terms of the effectiveness of the funded projects. It has funded projects to raise awareness, to provide support services to victims, groups at risk, and particularly vulnerable persons, to support the activities of non- governmental organisations (NGOs) working on the ground. It has addressed all forms of violence, such as for instance domestic violence, sexual violence, trafficking in human beings, as well as new emerging forms of violence such as cyber- bullying. It is therefore important to continue all these actions and that those results and lessons learned are taken into due consideration in the implementation of the Programme.
Amendment 71 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Non-discrimination is a fundamental principle of the Union. Article 19 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides for action to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation. Non- discrimination is also enshrined in Article 21 of the Charter. The specific features of the diverse forms of discrimination should be taken into account and appropriate action should be developed in parallel to prevent and combat discrimination on one or more grounds. The Programme should support actions to prevent and combat discrimination, racism, xenophobia, anti- semitism, anti-muslim hatred and other forms of intolerance, as misogyny, homophobia and ageism. In that context, particular attention should also be devoted to preventing and combating all forms of violence, hatred, segregation and stigmatisation, as well as combating bullying (including cyber-bullying), harassment and intolerant treatment. The Programme should be implemented in a mutually reinforcing manner with other Union activities that have the same objectives, in particular with those referred to in the Commission Communication of 5 April 2011 entitled ‘An EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 202010 ’ and in the Council Recommendation of 09 December 2013 on effective Roma integration measures in the Member States11 . __________________ 10 COM(2011)173. 11 OJ C 378, 24.12.2013, p. 1.
Amendment 74 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) In accordance with Union acts on equal treatment, Member States set up independent bodies for the promotion of equal treatment, commonly known as "equality bodies", in order to combat discrimination based on race and ethnic origin as well as gender. However, many Member States have gone beyond these requirements and ensured that equality bodies can also deal with discrimination based on the other grounds such as age, sexual orientation, religion and belief, disability or other grounds. Equality bodies play a key role in promoting equality and ensuring effective application of equal treatment legislation by providing in particular an independent assistance to victims of discrimination, conducting independent surveys concerning discrimination, publishing independent reports and making recommendations on any issue relating to discrimination in their country. It is essential that the work of all those relevant equality bodies is coordinated at Union level in this respect. EQUINET was created in 2007. Its members are the national bodies for the promotion of equal treatment as established by Council Directives 2000/43/EC15 and 2004/113/EC16 , and by Directives 2006/54/EC17 and 2010/41/EU18 of the European Parliament and of the Council. EQUINET is in an exceptional situation, being the only entity which ensures coordination of activities between equality bodies. This coordination activity by EQUINET is key for the good implementation of Union anti- discrimination law in Member States and should be supported by the Programme. __________________ 15 Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22). 16 Council Directive 2004/113/EC of 13 December 2004 implementing the principle of equal treatment between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services (OJ L 373, 21.12.2004, p. 37). 17 Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (OJ L 204, 26.7.2006, p. 23). 18 Directive 2010/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2010 on the application of the principle of equal treatment between men and women engaged in an activity in a self-employed capacity and repealing Council Directive 86/613/EEC (OJ L 180, 15.7.2010, p. 1).
Amendment 78 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) preventing, including with educational actions, and combating all forms of violence against children, young people and women, as well as violence against other groups at risk;
Amendment 84 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. The general objective of the Programme is to protect and promote rights and values as enshrined in the EU Treaties, including by supporting civil society organisations, in order to sustain and preserve open, democratic and inclusive societies.
Amendment 88 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) preventing and combating inequalities and discrimination on grounds of sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or, belief or opinion, disability, age or sexual orientation, and supporting comprehensive policies to promote gender equality and anti- discrimination and their mainstreaming as well as policies to combat racism and all forms of intolerance, including online;
Amendment 95 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) increasing citizens’ understanding of the Union, its shared values, history, cultural heritage and diversity;
Amendment 99 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) preventing, including with informative and educational actions, and combating all forms of violence against children, young people and women, women and aged persons, as well as violence against other groups at risk, and particularly vulnerable persons;
Amendment 101 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) supporting and protecting victims, groups at risk, and particularly vulnerable persons of such violence.
Amendment 114 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Failure to provide the respective data to monitor the programme implementation may result in a proportionate suspension or interruption of financial assistance to the recipients of Union funding under this Regulation.
Amendment 130 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 6
Article 16 – paragraph 6
6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 14 shall enter into force if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or by the Council within a period of twohree months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
Amendment 131 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Failure to acknowledge the origin of the funding may result in a proportionate suspension or interruption of financial assistance to the recipients of Union funding under this Regulation.
Amendment 30 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Since the adoption in 1992 of the predecessor to Regulation (EC) No 469/2009, markets have evolved significantly and there has been huge growth in the manufacture of generics and especially of biosimilars and active ingredients, in particular in third countries, outside the European Union, where protection does not exist or has expired.
Amendment 37 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
Amendment 48 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The aim of this Regulation is to ensure that manufacturers established in the Union are able to compete effectively in those third country markets where supplementary protection does not exist or has expired. It is intended toshould thereby complement the efforts of the Union’s trade policy to ensure open markets for Union-based manufacturers of medicinal products. Indirectly, it is also intended to put those manufacturers in a better position to enter the Union market immediately after expiry of the relevant supplementary protection certificate. It would also help to serve the aim of fostering access to medicines in the Union by helping to ensure a swifter entry of generic and biosimilar medicines onto the market after expiry of the relevant certificate.
Amendment 69 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In those specific and limited circumstances, andcases, in order to create a level playing field between Union- based manufacturers and third country manufacturers, it is appropriate to restrict the protection conferred by a supplementary protection certificate, so as to allow making for the exclusive purpose of export to third countries and any related acts strictly necessary for making or for the actual export itselfof generic products, biosimilars and active ingredients for the exclusive purpose of export to third countries.
Amendment 70 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) That exception should cover the making of the product, including the product which corresponds to the medicinal product protected by a supplementary protection certificate in the territory of a Member State, for the exclusive purpose of export to third countries, as well as any upstream or downstream acts by the maker or by third parties in a contractual relationship with the maker, where such acts would otherwise require the consent of the certificate-holder, and are strictly necessary for making for the purpose of export or for the actual export itself. For instance, such acts may include the supply and import of active ingredients for the purpose of making the medicinal product to which the product covered by the certificate corresponds, or temporary storage of the product or advertising for the exclusive purpose of export to third country destinations.
Amendment 85 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) By limiting the scope of the exception to making for the purpose of export outside the Union and acts strictly necessary for such making or for the actual export itself, the exception introduced by this Regulation willshould not unreasonably conflict with normal exploitation of the product in the Member State where the certificate is in force, nor unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the certificate-holder, taking account of the legitimate interests of third parties.
Amendment 98 #
2018/0161(COD)
(12) SAppropriate safeguards should accompany the exception in order to increase transparency, to help the holder of a supplementary protection certificate to enforce its protection in the Union and to reduce the risk of illicit diversion onto the Union market during the term of the certificate.
Amendment 103 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) To this end, this Regulation should impose a once-off duty on the person making the product for the exclusive purpose of export, requiring that person to provide certain information to the authority which granted the supplementary protection certificate in the Member State where the making is to take place. The information should be provided before the making is intended to starts for the first time in that Member State. The making and related acts, including those performed in Member States other than the one of making in cases where the product is protected by a certificate in those other Member States too, should only fall within the scope of the exception where the maker has sent this notification to the competent industrial property authority (or other designated authority) of the Member State of making. The once-off duty to provide information to the authority should apply in each Member State where making is to take place, both as regards the making in that Member State, and as regards related acts, whether performed in that or another Member State, related to that making and where the supplementary protection certificate holder has been duly informed about the name and address of the maker, the certificate number and the intended starting date of the making. On the one hand, this limited information should be sufficient for the certificate holder to assess whether there is or will be an infringement of his certificate, and on the other hand, prevents the disclosure of business sensitive information to the certificate holder. The once-off duty to provide information to the authority should apply in each Member State where making is to take place. The authority should be required to publish thate information provided by the maker, in the interests of transparency and foin a timely manner twhe purpose of informing the holder of the certificate of the maker’s intentionreby business sensitive information provided to the competent authority should not be published.
Amendment 110 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) The information contained in the notification to the competent authority should be kept confidential and may only be disclosed upon court order.
Amendment 111 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 b (new)
Recital 13 b (new)
(13b) The maker should be required to inform the competent authority as well as the certificate holder of any changes to the respectively provided information.
Amendment 114 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) In addition, this Regulation should impose certain due diligence requirements on the maker as a condition for the exception to operate. The maker should be required to inform persons within its supply chain, through appropriate means, in particular contractual means, that the product is covered by the exception introduced by this Regulation and is intended for the exclusive purpose of export. A maker who failed to comply with these due diligence requirements would not benefit from the exception, nor would any third party performing a related act in the same or a different Member State where a certificate conferring protection for the product was in force, and the holder of the relevant certificate would therefore be entitled to enforce its rights under the certificate.
Amendment 126 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) This Regulation does not affect the application of Union measures that aim to prevent infringements and facilitate enforcement of intellectual property rights, including Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council41 and Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 of the European Parliament and, Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 and rules ofn the Council42 . _________________ 41 Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (OJ L157, 30.4.2004, p. 45). 42 Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 concerning customs enforcement of intellectual property rights (OJ L 181, 29.6.2013, p. 15)unique identifier provided for in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/161.
Amendment 127 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) However, in order to avoid abuse and illicit distribution of medicinal products manufactured according to this Regulation onto the Union market, even though it was manufactured with the sole purpose of being exported to third countries, thus to help preventing the so called ‘launch-at-risk’, unique identifiers provided for in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/161 should not be affixed to the medicinal product.
Amendment 132 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) In order to ensure that holders of supplementary protection certificates already in force are not deprived of their acquired rights, the exception provided for in this Regulation should onlynot apply to certificates that are granted on or after a specified date after entry into force, irrespective of when the application for the certificate was first lodgedpplied for before entry into force of this Regulation. The date specified should allow a reasonable time for applicants and other relevant market players to adjust to the changed legal context and to make appropriate investment and manufacturing location decisions in a timely way. The date should also allow sufficient time for public authorities to put in place appropriate arrangements to receive and publish notifications of the intention to make, and should take due account of pending applications for certificates.
Amendment 137 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) This Regulation should not have any retroactive effect.
Amendment 138 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) The Commission should carry out an regular evaluation of this Regulation. Pursuant to paragraph 22 of the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making of 13 April 201643, that evaluation should be based on the five criteria of effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, coherence and added value and should provide the basis for impact assessments of possible further measures. The evaluation should take into account exports to outside the Union and the ability of generics and especially biosimilars to enter markets in the Union as soon as possible after a certificate lapses. To this extent, the evaluation should also address the possible extension of the scope of this Regulation to manufacturing within the Union by Union established makers for reasons of stockpiling with a view to Day-1 entry into the Union market when a certificate lapses. In this context, it would be important to ascertain that as a consequence of such an extended scope of the exception, the manufacturing currently taking place outside of the Union, would be moved to within its territory. In particular, this evaluation should review the effectiveness of the exception in the light of the aim to restore a global level playing field for generic and biosimilar firms in the Union and a swifter entry of generic and especially biosimilar medicines onto the market after a certificate lapses. It should also study the impact of the exception on research and production of innovative medicines by holders of certificates in the Union and consider the balance between the different interests at stake, including those of public health. _________________ 43 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 150 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) This Regulation respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular, this Regulation seeks to ensure full respect for the right to property in Article 17 of the Charter by maintaining the core rights of the supplementary protection certificate, by confining the exception to certificates applied for, granted on or after a specified date after entry into force of this Regulation and by imposing certain conditions on the application of the exception,
Amendment 165 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 469/2009
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the act comprises: the
Amendment 171 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 469/2009
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
(i) making of a medicinal product for the exclusive purpose of export to third countries; or, including the supply and the import of active ingredients for the purpose of making the medicinal product;
Amendment 183 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 469/2009
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii
Amendment 207 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 469/2009
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) the maker informs the certificate holder of the information listed in paragraph 3, points (a), (c) and (e) of this Article, including any changes thereof, no later than 90 days before the start date of the making;
Amendment 213 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 469/2009
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the maker ensures that the medicinal product manufactured according to paragraph 2(a) does not bear an active unique identifier laid down in Art. 3(d) and 4 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/161. Where appropriate, the competent authority shall have access to the data in the repositories mandated by Directive 2011/62/EU and Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/161 in order to verify compliance;
Amendment 239 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 469/2009
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point f
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point f
(f) an indicative list of the intendedthe third country or third countries to which the product is intended to be exported.
Amendment 241 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 469/2009
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The authorities of the Member States referred to in Art. 9(1) shall under no circumstances disclose any business sensitive information provided by the maker of the medicinal product, neither to the certificate holder nor to the public;
Amendment 252 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 469/2009
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Article 4 – paragraph 5
5. Paragraph 2 shall not apply in the case only of certificates granted on or afterpplied for before [OP: please insert the date of the first day of the third month that follows the month in which this amending Regulation is published in the Official Journal)].;
Amendment 260 #
2018/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EC) No 469/2009
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. The notification sent to an authority as referred to in Article 4(2)(b9(1) shall be published by that authority within 15 days of receipt of the notification.; the information listed in Article 4, paragraph 3, points (a), (c) and (e) as well as any changes thereof without undue
Amendment 52 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to facilitate online procedures for companies, Member States’ registers should not charge for online registration or online submission of information over and above the actual administrative costs of providing the service. Furthermore, Member States should assist those seeking to establish a company or a branch by providing up-to- date, clear, concise and user-friendly information concerning the procedures and requirements to establish and operate limited liability companies and their branches. Concerning private limited liability companies, more detailed information should be made available to applicants and directors because Member States should also ensure the possibility of fully online registration for such companies.
Amendment 55 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) As a first step in a company’s lifecycle, it should be possible to establish and register limited liability companies fully online. However, Member States should have the possibility to derogate from this requirement in case of public limited liability companies due to the complexity of establishment and registration of such companies and in order to respect Member States’ existing traditions of company law. In any event, Member States should lay down detailed rules of registration. It should be possible to carry out online registration with the submission of documents in electronic form.
Amendment 63 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to assist businesses, in particular start-ups, in setting-up their business, it should be possible to register a private limited liability company with the use of harmonised European templates which arshould be model instruments of constitution which should be available onlineand made available online. The Commission should be tasked with the establishment of such templates by way of implementing act. Such models may contain a pre-defined set of options in accordance with different national laws. The applicants should be able to choose between using this model or registering a company with bespoke instruments of constitution and Member States should have the option to provide templates also for other types of companies.
Amendment 83 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Member States should be allowed to take measures, in accordance with national law, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud, which could require, not systematicexceptionally butand on a case-by-case basis, a physical presence of the applicant or their representative before any authority of a Member State where the company or branch is to be registered. Such genuine suspicion of fraud should be based on reasonable grounds, such as, on the basis of information available from the registers of beneficial owners, from criminal records or from indications of identity fraud or tax evasion.
Amendment 108 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive (EU) 2017/1132
Article 13a – paragraph 4
Article 13a – paragraph 4
(4) “template” means a harmonised model for the instrument of constitution of a company which is drawn up by Member Statesthe Commission in compliance with national laws, as communicated by the Member States, and is used for the online registration of a company;
Amendment 130 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive (EU)2017/1132
Article 13b – paragraph 4
Article 13b – paragraph 4
4. Without prejudice to paragraphs 1 to 3, Member States may take measures which could require a physical presence for the purposes of verifying the identity of persons before any authority competent to deal with online registration or online filing, inonly in exceptional cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds.
Amendment 140 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive (EU)2017/1132
Article 13e – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 13e – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) requirements relating to the use of templates,he European template for online registration of companies; including information on national laws which govern the use and contents of such templates;
Amendment 141 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive (EU)2017/1132
Article 13e – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 13e – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) requirements relating to the use of templates, including information on national laws which govern the use and contents of such templathe European template for online registration of companies;
Amendment 146 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive (EU)2017/1132
Article 13e – paragraph 2
Article 13e – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the following minimum information shall be made available concerning the types of companies listed in Annexes I and IIA:
Amendment 149 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive (EU)2017/1132
Article 13e – paragraph 3
Article 13e – paragraph 3
Member States shall provide the information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 on the websites available through the Single Digital Gateway established by Regulation (EU) No [COM (2017) 256] (***). The information shall meet the quality requirements of Article X of that Regulation. Such information shall be made available at least in anll official Union language broadly understood by the largest possible number of cross-border users and shall be free of charge.
Amendment 157 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Directive (EU)2017/1132
Article 13f – paragraph 1
Article 13f – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the registration of companies may be carried out fully online without the necessity for the applicants, or their representatives, to appear in person before any competent authority or before any other person or body dealing with the application for registration, subject to the proviso laid down in Article 13b(4). However, Member States may decide not to provide fully online registration procedures for those types of companies listed in Annex I.
Amendment 164 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Directive (EU)2017/1132
Article 13f – paragraph 2
Article 13f – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online registration of companies, including rules on the use of templateshe European templates for online registration of a company, as referred to in Article 13g and the documents and information required for registering a company. As part of these rules Member States shall ensure that the online registration may be carried out by submitting information or documents in the electronic form, including electronic copies of the documents and information referred to in Article 16a(4).
Amendment 189 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Directive (EU)2017/1132
Article 13g – title
Article 13g – title
Article 13g TEuropean templates for online registration of companies
Amendment 193 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Directive (EU) 2017/1132
Article 13g – paragraph 1
Article 13g – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall make those templates available on registration portals or websites that are part of the Single Digital Gateway for the types of companies listed in Annexes I and IIA. Member States may also make templates available online for the registration of those types of companies listed in Annex II other than those listed in Annex I and IIA.
Amendment 194 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Directive (EU) 2017/1132
Article 13g – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13g – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Commission shall establish a European template for online registration of companies in all official languages of the European Union by way of an implementing act.
Amendment 204 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Directive (EU) 2017/1132
Article 13g – paragraph 3
Article 13g – paragraph 3
Amendment 208 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Directive (EU) 2017/1132
Article 13g – paragraph 4
Article 13g – paragraph 4
4. The content of the templates shall be governed by national lawinclude all the requirements governed by national law. To this end, Member States shall communicate regularly to the Commission about any change of their national requirements for registration of companies listed in annexes I and IIA which would affect the content of the templates. In such case, the Commission shall adapt the European templates for online registration of a company by way of an implementing act.
Amendment 271 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Article 16(5) and with point (g) of Article 19(2) by ….[OP please set the date = the last day of the month of 360 months after the date of entry into force] at the latest.
Amendment 272 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 274 #
2018/0113(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 69 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) To ensure that the general terms and conditions of a contractual relationship enable business users to determine the commercial conditions for the use, termination and suspension of online intermediation services, and to achieve predictability regarding their business relationship, those terms and conditions should be drafted in clear and unambiguous language which is easily understood by an average business user. Terms and conditions should not be considered to have been drafted in clear and unambiguous language where they are vague, unspecific or lack detail on important commercial issues and thus fail to give business users a reasonable degree of predictability on the most important aspects of the contractual relationship such as the provision of objective grounds for suspending or terminating the provision of services for business users.
Amendment 72 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Ensuring transparency in the general terms and conditions can be essential to promoting sustainable business relationships and to preventing unfair behaviour to the detriment of business users. Providers of online intermediation services should therefore also ensure that the terms and conditions are easily available at all stages of the contractual relationship, including to prospective business users at the pre-contractual phase, and that any modifications to those terms areor to the functionality, interoperability and other main performance features of the online intermediation services are proactively notified to business users within a set notice period which is reasonable and proportionate in light of the specific circumstances and which is at least 1530 days. That notice period should not apply where, and to the extent that, it is waived in an unambiguous manner by the business user concerned or where, and to the extent that, the need to implement the modification without respecting the notice period stems from a legal obligation incumbent on the service provider under Union or national law or is necessary to protect the legitimate interests of users or the operation of the online intermediation service as such. In order to enable business users to enjoy the benefits of competition they should be entitled to terminate their agreement without payment of any fee within 30 days from the receipt of a notice of a modification which is materially to their detriment.
Amendment 92 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) It is equally important that online intermediation service providers do not engage in unfair commercial practices (including commercial behaviour or the inclusion of unfair contractual terms) which have a materially detrimental impact on competition or on choice for consumers. The relative bargaining strength of the online intermediary and the business user, along with any other relevant factors, should be considered in determining whether a commercial practice is unfair.
Amendment 119 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
(a) they constitute information society services within the meaning of Article 1(1)(b) of Directive (EU) No 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council27 or they constitute device operating systems and in that capacity they act as intermediaries between online application developers and consumers; _________________ 27 Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services (OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1).
Amendment 130 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) 'online search engine' means a digital service that allows users to perform searches of, in principle, all websites or websites in a particular language on the basis of a query on any subject in the form of a keyword, phrase or other input (by text, voice or any other means), and returns links in which information related to the requested content can be found;
Amendment 131 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) 'online search engine' means a digital service that allows users to perform searches of, in principle, all websites or websites and mobile applications in a particular language on the basis of a query on any subject in the form of a keyword, phrase or other input, and returns links in which information related to the requested content can be found;
Amendment 133 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) 'online search engine' means a digital service that allows users to perform searches of, in principle, all websites or websites in a particular language on the basis of a query on any subject in the form of a keyword, phrase or other input, and returns linksuch results in which information related to the requested contentsearch can be found;
Amendment 134 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) 'online search engine' means a digital service that allows users to perform searches of, in principle, all various websites or websites in a particular language on the basis of a query on any subject in the form of a keyword, phrase or other input, and returns links in which information related to the requested content can be found;
Amendment 143 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)
(10a) ‘device operating system’ is software that allows smartphones, computers and other devices to run applications and programs.
Amendment 156 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall notify to the business users concerned any envisaged modification of their terms and conditions or to the functionality, interoperability or other main performance features of the platform such as its accessibility, continuity and security.
Amendment 157 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall notify to the business users concerned any envisaged material modification of their terms and conditions that adversely impact the business user.
Amendment 158 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall notify in a durable medium to the business users concerned any envisaged modification of their terms and conditions.
Amendment 161 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The envisaged modifications shall not be implemented before the expiry of a notice period which is reasonable and proportionate to the nature and extent of the envisaged modifications and to their consequences for the business user concerned. That notice period shall be at least 15 days from the date on which the provider of online intermediation services notifies the business users concerned about the envisaged modifications. The business user shall be entitled to terminate their agreement free of any charges within 30 days from the receipt of the notice, where such modifications are materially detrimental to the business user.
Amendment 163 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The envisaged modifications shall not be implemented before the expiry of a notice period which is reasonable and proportionate to the nature and extent of the envisaged modifications and to their consequences for the business user concerned. That notice period shall be at least 1530 days from the date on which the provider of online intermediation services notifies the business users concerned about the envisaged modifications.
Amendment 165 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Modifications to terms and conditions implemented by a provider of online intermediation services contrary to the provisions of paragraph 3 shall be null and void without prejudice to the validity of the remaining provisions, which shall remain valid in so far as they can be separated from the non-compliant provisions.
Amendment 168 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5
Article 3 – paragraph 5
5. Paragraph 3 shall not apply (a) where a provider of online intermediation services is subject to a legal obligation which requires it to modify its terms and conditions in a manner which does not allow it to respect the notice period referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 3 or (b) if the terms and conditions have been modified in order to protect the legitimate interests of users or the operation of the online intermediation service as such or (c) if a modification to the functionality, interoperability or other main performance features of the platform is necessary to protect the legitimate interests of users or the operation of the online intermediation service as such.
Amendment 175 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Where a provider of online intermediation services decides to suspend or, terminate or otherwise restrict, in whole or in part, the provision of its online intermediation services to a given business user, it shall provide the business user concerned, without undue delay, with a statement of reasons for that decision.
Amendment 181 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 197 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Providers of online search engines shall set out for corporate website users the main parameters determining ranking, by providing an easily and publicly available description, drafted in clear and unambiguous language on the online search engines of those providers. They shall keep that description up to date. These parameters determining ranking shall not be applied in a discriminatory manner.
Amendment 225 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6a Unfair commercial practices 1. The provider of online intermediation services shall not engage in unfair commercial practices. 2. Directive 2005/29/EC shall apply mutatis mutandis. 3. Annex I provides a non-exhaustive lists of commercial practices which shall be regarded as unfair in the meaning of this Regulation. The Annex shall periodically be reviewed by the Commission’s expert group to the EU Observatory on the Online Platform Economy. The expert group may provide recommendations on further commercial practices, which should be considered as unfair within the meaning of this Regulation.
Amendment 249 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The obligation set out in paragraph 1 shall not result in the restriction of intellectual property rights, wholly or partially.
Amendment 263 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shallmay identify in their terms and conditions one or more mediators with which they are willing to engage to attempt to reach an agreement with business users on the settlement, out of court, of any disputes between the provider and the business user arising in relation to the provision of the online intermediation services concerned, including complaints that could not be resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 9.
Amendment 270 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of online intermediation services as well as the business users shall engage in good faith in any attempt to reach an agreement through the mediation of any of the mediators which they identified in accordance with paragraph 1, with a view to reaching an agreement on the settlement of the dispute.
Amendment 273 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Amendment 284 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. OWithout prejudice to Art. 80 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and after having exhausted the options to settle complaints and disputes, laid down in Art. 9 and 10 of this Regulation, organisations and associations that have a legitimate interest in representing business users or in representing corporate website users, as well as public bodies set up in Member States, shall have the right to take action before national courts in the Union, in accordance with the rules of the law of the Member State where the action is brought, to stop or prohibit any non- compliance by providers of online intermediation services or by providers of online search engines with the relevant requirements laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 316 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The right referred to in paragraph 1 shall be without prejudice to the rights referred to in Directive XXXX/XX/EU (reference to the Directive on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers, and repealing Directive 2009/22/EC, (COM(2018)184)).
Amendment 318 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall encourage the drawing up of codes of conduct by providers of online intermediation services and by organisations and associations representing them, intended to contribute to the proper application of this Regulation, taking account of the specific features of the various sectors in which online intermediation services are provided, as well as of the specific characteristics of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. In particular, codes of conducts shall address interoperability, barriers to switching and data portability.
Amendment 319 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. The CommissionMember States shall encouragsure the drawing up of codes of conduct by providers of online intermediation services and by organisations and associations representing them, intended to contribute to the proper application of this Regulation, taking account of the specific features of the various sectors in which online intermediation services are provided, as well as of the specific characteristics of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises.
Amendment 330 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I (new)
Annex I (new)
Amendment 77 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) The present Directive aims at enhancing the exercise of freedom of expression and the freedom of the media enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union by setting up protection measures for persons reporting breaches of EU law. It should be highlighted that these freedoms are the cornerstone of the investigative journalism and the principle of the confidentiality of sources of information.
Amendment 106 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Such channels shall safeguard the anonymity of whistleblowers, as well as their personal data.
Amendment 123 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) safeguard the anonymity of whistleblowers, as well as their personal data.
Amendment 126 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Protection should also extend to further categories of natural or legal persons, who, whilst not being 'workers' within the meaning of Article 45 TFEU, can play a key role in exposing breaches of the law and may find themselves in a position of economic vulnerability in the context of their work-related activities. For instance, in areas such as product safety, suppliers are much closer to the source of possible unfair and illicit manufacturing, import or distribution practices of unsafe products; in the implementation of Union funds, consultants providing their services are in a privileged position to draw attention to breaches they witness. Such categories of persons, including self- employed persons providing services, freelance, contractors, sub-contractors and suppliers, are typically subject to retaliation in the form of early termination or cancellation of contract of services, licence or permit, loss of business, loss of income, coercion, intimidation or harassment, blacklisting/business boycotting or damage to their reputation. Shareholders and persons in managerial bodies, may also suffer retaliation, for instance in financial terms or in the form of intimidation or harassment, blacklisting or damage to their reputation. Protection should also be granted to persons whose work-based relationship ended, to candidates for employment or for providing services to an organisation who acquired the information on breaches of law during the recruitment process or other pre-contractual negotiation stage, and may suffer retaliation for instance in the form of negative employment references or blacklisting/business boycotting.
Amendment 127 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. These channels shall safeguard the anonymity of whistleblowers, as well as their personal data.
Amendment 130 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Effective whistleblower protection implies protecting also further categories of persons who, whilst not relying on their work-related activities economically, may nevertheless suffer retaliation for exposing breaches. Retaliation against volunteers and paid or unpaid trainees may take the form of no longer making use of their services, or of giving a negative reference for future employment or otherwise damaging their reputation.
Amendment 131 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28 a (new)
Recital 28 a (new)
(28a) Persons who facilitate the reporting and investigative journalists could play a crucial role in exposing breaches of EU law and potentially suffer from retaliation measures. Therefore, they should also be entitled to enjoy the protection measures provided for in this Directive.
Amendment 139 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Effective prevention of breaches of Union law requires that protection is also granted to persons who provide information about potential breaches, which have not yet materialised, but are likely to be committed. For the same reasons, protection is warranted also for persons who do not provide positive evidence but raise well-grounded reasonable concerns or suspicions. At the same time, protection should not apply to the reporting of information which is already in the public domain or of unsubstantiated rumours and hearsay.
Amendment 141 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30a) However, in order to prevent unjustified reputational damages a clear distinction should also be made between deliberate false accusations, intended to harm the reported person or entity, and the reporting of information for which the person had reasonable grounds to believe that it was true. The Directive is without prejudice to national laws applicable in the first case, such as defamation.
Amendment 153 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34 a (new)
Recital 34 a (new)
(34a) The designated competent authorities should provide accurate information and appropriate advice to any person, reporting or reported, requesting such an information or advice for example on the protection measures, the appropriateness of the reporting channels and the scope of the Directive.
Amendment 174 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) In order to allow for effective communication with their dedicated staff, it is necessary that the competent authorities have in place and use specific channels, separate from their normal public complaints systems, that should be user- friendly, confidential and allow for written and oral, as well as electronic and non- electronic reporting.
Amendment 175 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 53
Recital 53
(53) Dedicated staff members of the competent authorities, who are professionally trained, including on applicable data protection rules, would be necessary in order to handle reports and to ensure communication with the reporting person, as well as following up on the report in a suitable manner, as well as to provide information and advice to any interested person.
Amendment 189 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 62
Recital 62
(62) As a rule, reporting persons should first use the internal and/or external channels at their disposal and report to their employer. However, it may be the case that internal channels do not exist (in case of entities which are not under an obligation to establish such channels by virtue of this Directive or applicable national law) or that their use is not mandatory (which may be the case for persons who are not in an employment relationship), or that they were used but did not function properly (for instance the report was not dealt with diligently or within a reasonable timeframe, or no action was taken to address and/or to the competent authority. Moreover, protection is also to be granted in cases where Union legislation allows for the reporting person to report directly to the bodies, offices or agencies of the Union, for example in the context of fraud against the Union budget, prevention and detection of money laundering and terrorist financing or in the bareach of law despite the positive results of the enquiry)financial services.
Amendment 192 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 63
Recital 63
Amendment 193 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 64
Recital 64
(64) Persons making a public disclosure directly should also qualify for protection in cases where a breach remains unaddressed (for example, it was not properly assessed or investigated or no remedial action was taken) despite having been reported internally and/or externally following a tiered use of available channels; or in cases where reporting persons have valid reasons to believe that there is collusion between the perpetrator of the breach and the competent authority is reasonably suspected , that evidence may be concealed or destroyed, or that the effectiveness of investigative actions by competent authorities might be jeopardised; or in cases of imminent and manifest danger for the public interest, or where there is a risk of irreversible damage, including, inter alia, harm to physical integrity.
Amendment 198 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 67
Recital 67
(67) Potential whistleblowers who are not sure about how to report or whether they will be protected in the end may be discouraged from reporting. Member States should ensure that relevant information is provided in a user-friendly way and is easily accessible to the general public. Individual, impartial and confidential advice, free of charge, should be available on, for example, whether the information in question is covered by the applicable rules on whistleblower protection, which reporting channel may best be used and which alternative procedures are available in case the information is not covered by the applicable rules (‘signposting’). Access to such advice, notably through the competent authorities, can help ensure that reports are made through the appropriate channels, in a responsible manner and that breaches and wrongdoings are detected in a timely manner or even prevented.
Amendment 199 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 69
Recital 69
(69) It should not be possible to waive the rights and obligations established by this Directive by contractual means. Individuals’ legal or contractual obligations, such as loyalty clauses in contracts or confidentiality/non-disclosure agreements, cannot be relied on to preclude workers from reporting, to deny protection or to penalise them for having done so. At the same time, this Directive should not affect the protection of legal and other professional privilege, such as professional or medical secrecy, as provided for under national law.
Amendment 202 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 72
Recital 72
(72) The types of legal action may vary between legal systems but they should ensure as full and effective a remedy as possible. Remedies should not discourage potential future whistleblowers. For instance, allowing for compensation as an alternative to reinstatement in case of dismissal might give rise to a systematic practice in particular by larger organisations, thus having a dissuasive effect on future whistleblowers.
Amendment 262 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) shareholders and persons belonging to the management body of an undertaking, including non-executive members, as well as volunteers and paid or unpaid trainees;
Amendment 274 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive shall also apply to reporting persons whose work-based relationship has ended or is yet to begin in cases where information concerning a breach has been acquired during the recruitment process or other pre- contractual negotiation.
Amendment 281 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2a Journalists and persons facilitating the reporting This Directive shall apply to persons facilitating the reporting and to investigative journalists.
Amendment 293 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) ‘abuse of law’ means acts or omissions falling within the scope of Union law which do not appear to be unlawful in formal terms but defeat the object or the purpose pursued by the applicable rules and which represent a risk of serious harm to the public interest;
Amendment 305 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) ‘work-related context’ means current or past work activities in the public or private sector through which, irrespective of their nature, persons may acquire information on breaches and within which these persons may suffer retaliation if they report them.
Amendment 311 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12
(12) ‘retaliation’ means any threatened or actual act or omission prompted by the internal or external reporting or by the public disclosure which occurs in a work- related context and causes or may cause unjustified detriment to the reporting person;
Amendment 386 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a Obligation to provide information The designated competent authorities shall provide clear information about the appropriate reporting channels and the scope of the Directive to any person requesting such an advice.
Amendment 397 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a
a) providing any interested person with information on the procedures for reporting in accordance with Article 6a;
Amendment 408 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point g
g) a statement clearly explaining that persons making information available to the competent authority in accordance with this Directive are not considered to be infringing any restriction on disclosure of information imposed by contract or by any legislative, regulatory or administrative provision, and are not to be involved in liability of any kind related to such disclosure. , except if they are knowingly reporting wrong information or acting in breach of Directive(EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets)against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure.
Amendment 429 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. A person reporting personinternally or/and externally shall qualify for protection under this Directive provided he or she has reasonable grounds to believe that the information reported was true at the time of reporting and that this information falls within the scope of this Directive.
Amendment 433 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Amendment 447 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. A person reporting to relevant bodies, offices or agencies of the Union on breaches falling within the scope of this Directive shall qualify for protection as laid down in this Directive under the same conditions as a person who reported externally in accordance with the conditions set out in paragraph 2.
Amendment 455 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point a
a) he or she first reported internally and/or externally in accordance with Chapters II and III and paragraph 2 of this Article, but no appropriate action was taken in response to the report within the timeframe referred to in Articles 6(2)(b) and 9(1)(b); or
Amendment 486 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 8
Article 15 – paragraph 8
8. In addition to providing legal aid to reporting persons in criminal and in cross- border civil proceedings in accordance with Directive (EU) 2016/1919 and Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council63 , and in accordance with national law, Member States may provide for further measures of legal and financial assistance and support, including psychological, for reporting persons in the framework of legal proceedings. _________________ 63 Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters (OJ L 136, 24.5.2008, p. 3).
Amendment 504 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall provide for effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties applicable to persons making malicious or abusive reports or disclosures knowingly wrong, including measures for compensating persons who have suffered damage from malicious or abusive reports or disclosures.
Amendment 74 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The Commission has adopted legislative proposals for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights and Regulation (EC) No 2027/97 on air carrier liability in respect of the carriage of passengers and their baggage by air30 and for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on rail passengers' rights and obligations.31 It is therefore appropriate to provide that, onthree years after the entry into force of this Directive, the Commission assesses whether the Union rules in the area of air and rail passengers' rights offer an adequate level of protection for consumers, comparable to that provided for in this Directive, and draws any necessary conclusions as regards the scope of this Directive. _________________ 30 31COM(2013) 130 final. COM(2013) 130 final. 31 COM(2017) 548 final. COM(2017) 548 final.
Amendment 84 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) As only qualified entities can bring the representative actions, to ensure that the collective interests of consumers are adequately represented the qualified entities should comply with the criteria established by this Directive. In particular, they would need to be properly constituted according to the law of a Member Statenational law, which could include for example requirements regarding the number of members, the degree of permanence, or transparency requirements on relevant aspects of their structure such as their constitutive statutes, management structure, objectives and working methods. They should also be not for profit and have a legitimate interest in ensuring compliance with the relevant Union law. These criteria should apply to both qualified entities designated in advance and to ad hoc qualified entities that are constituted for the purpose of a specific action.
Amendment 88 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
Amendment 111 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Member States may require qualified entities to provide sufficient information to support a representative action for redress, including a description of the group of consumers concerned by an infringement and the questions of fact and law to be resolved within the representative action. The qualified entity should not be required to individually identify all consumers concerned by an infringement in order to initiate the action. In representative actions for redress the court or administrative authority should verify at the earliest possible stage of the proceedings whether the case is suitable for being brought as a representative action, given the nature of the infringement and characteristics of the damages suffered by consumers concerned.
Amendment 168 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32 a (new)
Recital 32 a (new)
(32a) Member States should be encouraged to set up a national register for representative actions free of charge, which could further enhance the transparency obligations.
Amendment 169 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) To enhance legal certainty, avoid inconsistency in the application of Union law and to increase the effectiveness and procedural efficiency of representative actions and of possible follow-on actions for redress, the finding of an infringement established in a final decision, including a final injunction order under this Directive, issued by an administrative authority or a court should not be relitigated in subsequent legal actions related to the same infringement by the same trader as regards the nature of the infringement and its material, personal, temporal and territorial scope as determined by that final decisionbe binding upon all parties, which participated in the representative action. The final decision should be without prejudice to any additional rights to redress that the consumers concerned may have under Union or national law. The redress obtained through the settlement should also be binding upon cases involving the same practice, the same trader and the same consumer. Where an action seeking measures eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement, including for redress, is brought in a Member State other than the Member State where a final decision establishing this infringement was issued, the decision should constitute a rebuttable presumption that the infringement has occurred.
Amendment 187 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 a (new)
Recital 39 a (new)
(39a) In order to apply the "loser pays principle", Member States should foresee that the party that loses a collective redress action reimburses the necessary legal costs borne by the winning party.
Amendment 194 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41a) In order to explore the possibility of having a procedure at Union level for cross-border representative actions, the Commission should assess the possibility of establishing a European Ombudsman for collective redress.
Amendment 203 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive sets out rules enabling qualifiedrepresentative entities to seek representative actions aimed at the protection of the collective interests of consumers, while ensuring appropriate safeguards to avoid abusive litigation.
Amendment 248 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that representative actions can be brought by qualified entities designated, at their request, by the Member States in advance for this purpose and placed in a publicly available listdesignate within their respective territory representative entities for the purpose of representative actions within in meaning of Article 3 (4). The Member States shall make a list of representative entities publicly available and communicate this list to the Commission, updated where necessary.
Amendment 256 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) it is properly constituted according to the law of a Member Statenational law;
Amendment 270 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) it is either organised as an independent public body or it demonstrates full transparency as regards its financial capacities.
Amendment 279 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 287 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may designate a qualified entity on an ad hoc basis for a particularspecific representative action, at its request, if it complies with the criteria referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 294 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that in particularonly consumer organisations and independent public bodies are eligible for the status of qualifiedrepresentative entity. Member States may designate as qualifiedrepresentative entities consumer organisations that represent members from more than one Member State.
Amendment 296 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Amendment 311 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shall ensure that qualified entitiesthe representative entities, which have been designated in advance, are entitled to bring representative actions seeking the following measures:
Amendment 314 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Member States shall ensure that no other action is pending at a national court or administrative entities of the same Member State regarding the same practice, the same claimants and the same defendant.
Amendment 315 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
In order to seek injunction orders, qualifiedrepresentative entities shall not have to obtain the mandate of the individual consumers concerned orand provide proof of actual loss or damage on the part of the consumers concerned or of intention or negligence on the part of the trader.
Amendment 329 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States shall ensure that a claimant party informs its individual members of any settlement proposal and that an individual member of the claimant party is free to leave the claimant party if it refuses the proposed settlement without being deprived of the possibility to pursue its claims in another form, such as by an individual claims. Member States shall ensure that consumers can join the claimant party of a representative action until the final settlement.
Amendment 330 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States shall ensure that an individual member of the claimant party is free to leave the claimant party at any time before the final judgment, without being deprived of the possibility to pursue its claims in another form, such as by an individual claims. Member States shall ensure that consumers can join the claimant party of a representative action until the final judgment or settlement.
Amendment 332 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5a Registry of collective redress actions 1. Member States may set up a national register for representative actions, which shall be available free of charge to any interested person through electronic means and/or otherwise. 2. Websites publishing the registries shall provide access to comprehensive and objective information on the available methods of obtaining compensation, including out of court methods as well as the pending representative actions. 3. The national registries shall be interlinked. Article 35 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 shall apply.
Amendment 342 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
For the purposes of Article 5(3), Member States shall ensure that qualifiedrepresentative entities are entitled to bring representative actions seeking a redress order, which obligates the trader to provide for, inter alia, compensation, repair, replacement, price reduction, contract termination or reimbursement of the price paid, as appropriate. A Member State mayshall require the mandate of the individual consumers concerned before a declaratory decision is made or a redress order is issued.
Amendment 347 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The qualifiedrepresentative entity shall provide sufficientall the necessary information as required under national law to support the action, including a description of the consumers concerned by the action and the questions of fact and law to be resolved.
Amendment 364 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point a
Amendment 368 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point b
Amendment 376 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. The redress obtained through a final decision in accordance with paragraphs 1, 2 and 32 shall be without prejudice to any additional rights to redress that the consumers concerned may have under Union or national law.
Amendment 381 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – title
Article 7 – title
Amendment 386 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The qualifiedrepresentative entity seeking a redress order as referred to in Article 6(1) shall declare at an early stage of ththe stage of admissibility of the representative action the source of the funds used for its activity in general and the source of the funds that it uses to support the particular representative action. It shall demonstrate that it has sufficient financial resources to represent the best interests of the consumers concerned and to meet any adverse costs should the action fail.
Amendment 395 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States shall ensure that in cases where a representative action for redress is funded by a third party, it is prohibited forthe representative action may be declared inadmissible by the national court or administrative authority if it establishes that the funding by the third party would:
Amendment 398 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) to influence decisions of the qualifiedrepresentative entity in the context of a representative action, including the initiation of representative actions and decisions on settlements;
Amendment 401 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) constitute any further conflict of interest between the third party, the claimant and the representative entities.
Amendment 408 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that courts and administrative authorities are empowered to assess the circumstances referred to in paragraph 2 and accordingly require the qualified entity to refuse the relevant funding and, if necessary, reject the stant the stage of admissibility of the representative action and at a later stage during the court proceeding os if the qualified entity in a specific casecircumstances only yield then.
Amendment 424 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 6
Article 8 – paragraph 6
6. Individual consumers concerned shall be given the possibility to accept or to refuse to be bound by settlements referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3. The redress obtained through an approved settlement in accordance with paragraph 4 shall be binding upon all parties, which participated in the representative action without prejudice to any additional rights to redress that the consumers concerned may have under Union or national law. The redress obtained through the settlement shall also be binding upon cases involving the same practice, the same trader and the same consumer.
Amendment 430 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 9 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1 Member States shall ensure that the representative entities: (a) inform consumers about the claimed violation of rights granted under Union law and the intention to seek an injunction or to pursue an action for damages, (b) explain the possibility to join the action, (c) where relevant, inform about subsequent steps and the potential legal consequences.
Amendment 431 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the court or administrative authority shall require the infringing trader to inform affected consumers at its expense about the final decisions providing for measures referred to in Articles 5 and 6, and the approved settlements referred to in Article 8, by means appropriate to the circumstance of the case and within specified time limits, including, where appropriate, through notifying all consumers concerned individually. Member States may foresee that the information obligation can be complied with through the national register as referred to in Article 5a (new).
Amendment 437 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, in case the representative action fails, the representative entity shall bear the costs of consumer information in accordance with the principle laid down in Article 13a.
Amendment 439 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. The information referred to in paragraph -1 and 1 shall inclube provided in intelligible language an explanation of the subject- matter of the representative action, its legal consequences and, if relevant, the subsequent steps to be taken by the consumers concerned.
Amendment 460 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that, at the request of a qualified entity that has presented reasonably available facts and evidence sufficient to support the representative action, and has indicatedone of the parties, in order to obtain further evidence which lies in the control of the defendantother party, the court or administrative authority may order, in accordance with national procedural rules, that such evidence be presented by the defendant, subject to the applicable Union law and national rules on confidentiality. The order must be adequate and proportionate in the respective case and must not create an imbalance between the two parties involved.
Amendment 464 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13a Costs Member States shall ensure that the party that loses a collective redress action reimburses necessary legal costs borne by the winning party (“loser pays principle”), subject to the conditions provided for in the relevant national law.
Amendment 476 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Amendment 494 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. No later than onthree years after the entry into force of this Directive, the Commission shall assess whether the rules on air and rail passenger rights offer a level of protection of the rights of consumers comparable to that provided for under this Directive. Where that is the case, the Commission intends to make appropriate proposals, which may consist in particular in removing the acts referred to in points 10 and 15 of Annex I from the scope of application of this Directive as defined in Article 2.
Amendment 495 #
2018/0089(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 a (new)
Article 18 a (new)
Article 18a Review clause Without prejudice to Article 16, the Commission shall assess whether cross- border representative actions could be best addressed at Union level by establishing a European Ombudsman for collective redress. No later than three years after the entry into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall draw up a report in this regard and submit it to the European Parliament and the Council, accompanied, if appropriate, by a relevant proposal.
Amendment 72 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) A European Labour Authority (the ‘Authority’) should be established in order to help strengthen fairness and trust in the Single Market and enhance the free movement of citizens. To that effect, the Authority should support the Member States and the Commission in strengthening access to information for individuals and employers about their rights and obligations in cross- border labour mobility situations as well as access to relevant services, support compliance and cooperation between the Member States to ensure the effective application of the Union law in these areas, and mediate and facilitate a solution in case of cross- border disputes or labour market disruptions.
Amendment 107 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) To facilitate the management of labour market adjustments, the Authority should facilitate cooperation among relevant stakeholders, notably the social partners in order to address labour market disruptions affecting more than one Member State, such as cases of restructuring or major projects impacting employment in border regions.
Amendment 118 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) To guarantee its full autonomy and independence, the Authority should be granted an autonomous budget, with revenue coming from the general budget of the Union, any voluntary financial contribution from the Member States and any contribution from third countries participating in the work of the Authority. In exceptional and duly justified cases it should also be in the position to receive delegation agreements or ad hoc grants, and to charge for publications and any service provided by the Authority.
Amendment 139 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Authority shall not in any way interfere with the exercise of fundamental rights as recognised in the Member States and/or at Union level regarding the collective bargaining rights in accordance with national practice. Nor shall it affect the right to negotiate or to conclude and enforce collective agreements.
Amendment 208 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c
(c) promote and share best practices taking into account the specific collective bargaining rights in the Member States;
Amendment 234 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Concerted and joint inspections and their follow-up shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the Member States concerned. National authorities shall also be fully associated in the process and have full and autonomous authority. Where social partners are themselves in charge of inspections at national level, joint and concerted inspections should only take place if the social partners concerned so agree.
Amendment 270 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Upon request of one of the Member States concerned by a dispute, the Authority shall launch a mediation procedure before its Mediation Board set up for this purpose in accordance with Article 17(2). The Authority may also launchsuggest a mediation procedure on its own initiative before the Mediation Board, including on the basis of a referral from SOLVIT, subject to. In this case, the mediation will be launched following the agreement of all Member States concerned by that dispute.
Amendment 288 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
At the request of the national authorities, the Authority may facilitate cooperation between relevant stakeholders in order to address labour market disruptions affecting more than one Member State, such as large-scale restructuring events or major projects impacting employment in border regwith cross- border implications.
Amendment 330 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 4
Article 24 – paragraph 4
4. The Stakeholder Group shall be composed of six representatives of Union- level social partners equally representing trade unions and employer’s organisations, and two representatives of the Commission.
Amendment 337 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – point e
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – point e
Amendment 21 #
2018/0044(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) If assignees are not aware of the legal risk or choose to ignore it, they may face unexpected financial losses. Uncertainty about who has legal title over the claims assigned on a cross-border basis can have knock-on effects and deepen and prolong the impact of a financial crisis. If assignees decide to mitigate the legal risk by seeking specific legal advice, they will incur higher transaction costs not required for domestic assignments. If assignees are deterred by the legal risk and choose to avoid it, they may forego business opportunities and market integration may be reduced.
Amendment 22 #
2018/0044(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) This legal risk can also act as a deterrent. Assignees and assignors may choose to avoid it, thereby allowing business opportunities to pass. This lack of clarity does not therefore appear to be in line with the objective of market integration and the principle of free movement of capital enshrined in Articles 63 to 66 TFEU.
Amendment 35 #
2018/0044(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Priority conflicts between assignees of the same claim may arise where the third-party effects of the assignment have been subject to the law of the assignor’s habitual residence in one assignment and to the law of the assigned claim in another assignment. In such cases, the law applicable to resolve the priority conflict should be the law applicable to the third- party effects of the assignment of the claim which has first become effective against third parties under its applicable law. Where assignment of both claims becomes effective against third parties at the same time, the law of the assignor’s habitual residence should prevail.
Amendment 62 #
2018/0044(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The choice of law shall be made expressly in the assignment contract by an amendment to the contract of assignment or by a separate agreement with the same purpose and concluded between the same parties. The substantive and formal validity of the act whereby the choice of law was made shall be governed by the chosen law.
Amendment 63 #
2018/0044(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. A priority conflict between assignees of the same claim where the third-party effects of one of the assignments are governed by the law of the country in which the assignor has its habitual residence and the third-party effects of other assignments are governed by the law of the assigned claim shall be governed by the law applicable to the third- party effects of the assignment of the claim which first became effective against third parties under its applicable law. Where assignment of both claims becomes effective against third parties at the same time, the law of the country in which the assignor’s habitual residence is situated shall prevail.
Amendment 4 #
2017/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19
Citation 19
Amendment 9 #
2017/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas Article 3 of the TEU stipulates that the aims of the Union are, inter alia, to promote peace, its values and the well-being of its peoples and to work for the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, and a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment, and that the Union shall combat social exclusion and discrimination, and promote social justice and protection, equality between women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child,
Amendment 12 #
2017/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the correct application of EU law guarantees the benefits of Union's policies to all European citizens and a level playing field for businesses;
Amendment 28 #
2017/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that the large number of infringement procedures in 2016 shows that ensuring the timely and correct application of EU legislation in the Member States remains a serious challenge and priority; considers that some of those infringements are the result of the lack of resources dedicated to public administration in some Member States, sometimes as a result of ill-advised austerity measures;
Amendment 63 #
2017/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 66 #
2017/2273(INI)
Amendment 70 #
2017/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 73 #
2017/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 76 #
2017/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to enhance, where possible and necessary, the portion of the European Social Fund dedicinstruments designed to help Member Stateds to ‘enhancing institutional capacity of public authorities and stakeholders and efficient public administration’ (Thematic Objective 11)14 in order to promote social welfarecognize transposition problems, address them at an early stage of the infringement procedures and economic development, and to enhance the effectiveness of beneficial legislation; _________________ 14Article 3(d) of Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the European Social Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006; OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 470.help them find joined solutions and thus, enhance the effectiveness of EU legislation;
Amendment 78 #
2017/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Recalls that the legislation which gives rise to the most flagrant infringement proceedings is the result of directives; recalls that regulations are directly and compulsorily applicable in all the Member States; calls, therefore, on the Commission to make use of regulations as far as possible whenever it considers issuing legislative proposals; considers that such an approach could mitigate the risk of over-regulation;
Amendment 79 #
2017/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Recalls that preliminary rulings help to clarify the manner in which the law of the European Union is to be applied; considers that recourse to this procedure allows a uniform interpretation and implementation of European legislation; encourages, therefore, national courts to refer questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union in the event of doubt and thus prevent infringement proceedings;
Amendment 12 #
2017/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes with regret that insufficient attention has been paid to the concentration of media ownership in Member States; recalls that EU competition rules play an important role in preventing the creation or abuse of dominant positions; calls therefore on the Member States and local authorities to monitor media concentration and to provide easily accessible information on media ownership and economic influence over the media landscape;
Amendment 13 #
2017/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The independence of the press covers both public and private media; highlights in this regard the importance of ethical codes for journalists and editors; such ethical codes shall encompass the duty to verify information and sources; stresses that the dissemination of content online needs to apply the same duty of care than dissemination offline; is concerned in this regard that standards seem to be lowered in a rapidly changing online environment where quantity and promptness and clickbaits seems more important than accurateness;
Amendment 27 #
2017/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is concerned about the legislative and administrative measures used intaken by certain Member States to restrain and control their media, including public media channels, directly or indirectly; stresses that the fundamental principle of editorial independence from the governments and/or from political or commercial interests shouldmust be protected; underlines that theany coverage of election campaigning should be fair, balanced, and impartial and systematically monitored;; urges Member States to adhere to the recommendations and resolutions by the Council of Europe as regards public media independence and recalls the European standards laid down in the Treaties in this respect; stresses that supervision of public service media must be exercised by independent bodies and not directly by political institutions, such as a government; moreover, in cases of state financed public service media, editorial independence must be guaranteed
Amendment 38 #
2017/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 54 #
2017/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. UnderlinNotes that whistle-blowers arcting on reasonable ground can be a crucial resource for investigative journalism and thus contribute to an independent press; calls on the Commission therefore to provide EU-wide protection in accordance with the treaties and the Union objectives of democracy, pluralism of opinion and freedom of expression; the protection of whistle-blowers goes hand in hand with the confidentiality of their sources, however, balanced with the fundamental rights of the accused natural and legal persons;
Amendment 59 #
2017/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Underlines that false accusations or misleading information can have far reaching effects for people and businesses; recalls that in the event of false accusations,those responsible should be held accountable for their action and not benefit from whistle-blower protection; stresses that any person who is defamed by inaccurate or misleading information needs to be afforded effective redress mechanisms;
Amendment 69 #
2017/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights that the fight against ‘fake news’, namely false news and other disinformation spread deliberately via the media, sdeliberate misinformation created or spread in order to make financial or political gains, so called ‘fake news’, break the relationship of trust between the media and citizens and have a potential to endanger liberal democracies as well as to undermine our democratic values such as freedom of expression and the rule of law; as social media has made the circulation of such fake information much easier than in the traditional media, solutions need to be found to hould not result in restricting freedom of internet usage; calls for the Member States and EU institutions to devote sufficient resources to tackling disinformation; is satisfied with the work of the East StratCom Task Force and the establishment of the High Level Expert Groupauthors of fake news accountable for their action in digital media as is the case in the offline world; stresses that strict regulation or censorship of thoughts and views cannot be the response, but that rather assurance of reliability of information and educated, critically thinking citizens as well as media literacy form part of the solution; calls for the Member States and EU institutions to devote sufficient resources to tackling disinformation; highlights in this respect the need for media consumers to be able to distinguish between facts and pure opinions; stresses that the EEAS Strategic Communication Division and in particular the current East StratCom Task Force actively contributing to the development and implementation of a strategy against dissemination onf fake news needs and online disinformationverall upscale and reinforced resources to carry out its tasks properly.
Amendment 81 #
2017/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Welcomes the Commission’s announcement to prepare a strategy to counter fake news, to be published in due course
Amendment 84 #
2017/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Highlights the need for Member States to complement EU efforts to counter fake news and to engage at all levels, including in cooperation with the EU neighbourhood, to foster a pluralistic media environment to communicate EU policies truthfully, coherently and comprehensively,
Amendment 88 #
2017/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5 c. Emphasizes that principles of media freedom, freedom of speech and media pluralism are as relevant for pre- accession countries and the European Neighbourhood area as it is for member states; calls on the Commission to ensure that these principles are strengthened and adequately monitored in these countries and that assistance programs are made contingent upon adherence to these principles.
Amendment 34 #
2017/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas the destruction and looting in Syria and Iraq in recent years have been significant in scale; whereas it is essential to make a firm commitment against the trafficking in works of art that can be used to finance illegal activities and terrorism;
Amendment 35 #
2017/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas UNESCO, in conjunction with major auction houses, museums and renowned collectors in Europe, is developing advanced research into the provenance of these works in order to be able to return them to their owners;
Amendment 36 #
2017/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F c (new)
Recital F c (new)
Fc. whereas ICOM has been publishing 'Red Lists' of categories of objects vulnerable to illicit trafficking for more than a decade, with the aim of complementing the Interpol database on stolen property;
Amendment 41 #
2017/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that institutions such as UNESCO and Interpol are calling for the strengthening of the protection of cultural heritage and the empowerment of states to put in place measures to facilitate restitution;
Amendment 50 #
2017/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses the importance of raising collective awareness to denounce these illegal practices and recalls that each object removed from its owner represents historical and scientific treasures that have been lost forever;
Amendment 67 #
2017/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that care should obviously be taken to create a comprehensive listing of all Jewish-owned cultural objects plundered by the Nazis and their allies, from the time of their spoliation to the present day; urges the Commission to support a cataloguing system, to be used also by public entities and private art collections, to gather data on the situation of looted cultural goods and the exact status of existing claims; urges the Commission to support digitization projects that would establish or connect existing digital databases in order to facilitate the exchange of such data and provenance research;
Amendment 100 #
2017/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Recalls that close cooperation between police and customs services at European and international level is essential in combating the illicit trafficking in works of cultural heritage;
Amendment 1 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 25 October 2016 containing recommendations to the Commission on the establishment of an EU mechanism for democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights,
Amendment 3 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 b (new)
Citation 14 b (new)
- having regard to Articles 267 and 288 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Amendment 7 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union are the cornerstone of the Union's foundations and the observance of these values by Member States should therefore be the subject of constant evaluation;
Amendment 10 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the Union has a number of instruments and processes to ensure the full and correct application of the principles and values enshrined in the Treaty, but in practice these instruments appear to be of limited scope, inadequate or ineffective;
Amendment 11 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas it is therefore necessary to establish a new mechanism, providing a single and coherent framework, building on existing instruments and mechanisms, which should be applied in a uniform manner to all EU institutions and all its Member States;
Amendment 13 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas in 2015, the Commission received 3 450 complaints reporting potential breaches of EU law, with Italy (637), Spain (342) and Germany (274) being the Member States against which the most complaints were filed;
Amendment 34 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recalls its resolution of 25 October 2016 and calls on the Commission to act on the Parliament's recommendations in this resolution;
Amendment 44 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 47 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights that all EU institutions, even when they act as members of groups of international lenders (‘troikas’), are bound by the EU Treaties and the CFREU8 ; _________________ 8 ECJ judgment of 20 September 2016 - Ledra Advertising Ltd (C-8/15 P), Andreas Eleftheriou (C-9/15 P), Eleni Eleftheriou (C-9/15 P), Lilia Papachristofi (C-9/15 P), Christos Theophilou (C-10/15 P), Eleni Theophilou (C-10/15 P) v European Commission, European Central Bank (Joined Cases C-8/15 P to C-10/15 P), paragraphs 67 ff.; OJ C 171, 26.5.2015, p. 7.
Amendment 48 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 50 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 52 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 54 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 62 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Encourages the EU institutions to assume their duty to respect primary EU law when they create rules of secondary EU law, decide policies or sign agreements or treaties with institutions outside the EU, and also to assume their duty to assist EU Member States by all means available in their efforts to respect the values and principles of the Union, especially in times of austerity and budgetary constraintespecially with respect to recent developments in some Member States;
Amendment 64 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Notes that the legislation which gives rise to the most flagrant infringement proceedings is the result of directives; recalls that regulations are directly and compulsorily applicable in all the Member States; calls, therefore, on the Commission to make use of regulations as far as possible whenever it considers issuing legislative proposals; considers that such an approach could mitigate the risk of over-regulation;
Amendment 70 #
2017/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Recalls that preliminary rulings help to clarify the manner in which the law of the European Union is to be applied; considers that recourse to this procedure allows a uniform interpretation and implementation of European legislation; encourages, therefore, national courts to refer questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union in the event of doubt and thus prevent infringement proceedings;
Amendment 34 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 52 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas 3D-printing technology could also raises security issues, particularly with regard to the manufacturing of weapons, explosives and drugs, and particular care should be taken with regard to production of that kind;
Amendment 55 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
Amendment 72 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas as a result of the processes that it uses, 3D printing leads to what the industry has described as a kind of ‘fragmentation of the act of creating’ in that a work may be circulated digitally before it takes a physical form, which makes it easier to copy and complicates the fight against counterfeiting considerably;
Amendment 79 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
Amendment 85 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas Directive 85/374/EEC on liability for defective products covers all contracts; whereas it should be noted that it is progress in 3D printing that has led the Commission to undertake a revision of that Directive to check whether it still meets current needpublic consultation with the aim of assessing whether this Directive is fit for purpose in relation to new technological developments;
Amendment 94 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas general liability rules also apply to 3D printing; whereas a specific liability regime could be envisaged for damage caused by an object created using 3D-printing technology, as the number of stakeholders involved in the process often makes it difficult for the victim to identify the person responsible; whereas those rules could make for the damage caused by an object created using 3D printing; whereas the liability could lie with the creator or vendor of the 3D file liable, or the producer of the 3D printer, the producer of the software used in the 3D printer, the supplier of the materials used or even the person who created the object, depending on the cause of the defect discovered;
Amendment 100 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that to anticipate problems relating to accident liability or intellectual property infringement, the EU will have to adopt new legislation or tailor existing laws to the specific case of 3D technology, taking into account the decisions of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and the relevant case law of the EU and Member State courts; stresses that, in any case, the legislative response should avoid duplicating rules and should take into account projects that are already under way; adds that innovation needs to be accompanied by law, without the law acting as a brake or a constraint;
Amendment 105 #
2017/2007(INI)
1. Stresses that to anticipate problems relating to accidentcivil liability or intellectual property infringement, the EU will have to assess the necessity to adopt new legislation or tailor existing laws to the specific case of 3D technology; stresses that, in any case, the legislative response should avoid duplicating rules and should take into account projects that are already under way; adds that innovation needs to be promoted and accompanied by law, without the law acting as a brake or a constraint;
Amendment 135 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Criticises the fact that the Commission has not revised Directive 2004/48/EC during this term, as it had announced it would, and has instead limited itself to presenting non-binding guidelines, without providing clarifications on issues specific to 3D printing; welcomes, though, the measures announced by the Commission on 29 November 2017 which are intended to step up intellectual property protection;
Amendment 18 #
2017/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) It should be stressed that the proposed improvements aim at achieving the right balance between the autonomy of the ESRB and the need for a strong and credible leadership.
Amendment 23 #
2017/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) To strengthen the visibility of the ESRB as a body that is separate from its individual members, the Chair of the ESRB should be able to delegate tasks related to the external representation of the ESRB to the head of the ESRB Secretariat or to the Vice-Chairs of the ESRB.
Amendment 30 #
2017/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) To ensure the quality and relevance of the ESRB opinions, recommendations and decisions, the Advisory Technical Committee and Advisory Scientific Committee are expected to consult stakeholders and relevant experts, where appropriate, at an early stage and in an open and transparent manner.
Amendment 32 #
2017/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 5 – paragraph 8
Article 5 – paragraph 8
(b) paragraph 8 is replaced by the following: “8. The Chair shall represent the ESRB externally. The Chair may delegate tasks related to the external representation of the ESRB to the head of the Secretariat or to the Vice-Chairs of the ESRB;”
Amendment 39 #
2017/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 12 – paragraph 5
Article 12 – paragraph 5
(a) paragraph 5 is replaced by the following: “5. Where appropriate, the Advisory Scientific Committee shall organise consultations with stakeholders and relevant experts at an early stage and in an open and transparent manner, while taking into account the requirement of confidentiality.;”
Amendment 43 #
2017/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 13 – paragraph 4 a
Article 13 – paragraph 4 a
(b) the following paragraph 4a is inserted: “4a. Where appropriate, the Advisory Technical Committee shall organise consultations with stakeholders and relevant experts at an early stage and in an open and transparent manner, while taking into account the requirement of confidentiality.;”
Amendment 27 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b – subparagraph 1
Amendment 29 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(1a) In Article 3, paragraph 1, the following point is inserted: ‘(ba) its members and its elected members in the European Parliament, national parliament or regional parliament or assembly, are not members of another European political party.’
Amendment 36 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) In Article 18, the following paragraph 2a is inserted: “2a. Its member parties running in the elections of the European Parliament shall publish on their website the political programme and logo of the European political party to which they are affiliated, as well as information on the gender composition of their candidate lists and among their elected Members of the European Parliament.”
Amendment 38 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014
Article 18 – paragraph 3 a
Article 18 – paragraph 3 a
3a. A European political party shall include in its application evidence demonstrating that its member parties have continuously published on their websites, during 12 months preceding the moment at which the applications is made, the political programme and logo of the European political party as well as information, in relation to each of the member partiethe information, in relation to each of its member parties that ran in the previous elections of the European political partyParliament, on the gender representation amongcomposition of their candidates at the laist elections to the European Parliaments and among their elected Members of the European Parliament.
Amendment 41 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Amendment 52 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(4a) In Article 20, after paragraph 1 the following paragraph is inserted: “1a. Donations to European political parties and European political foundations may be used to reimburse annual reimbursable expenditure of a European political party or to cover eligible costs of a European political foundation.”
Amendment 62 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
(6a) In Article 32, paragraph 1, the following point is inserted: “(ja) an updated list of Members of the European Parliament which are direct or indirect members of a European political party pursuant Article 17(1), (3) and 19(1).”
Amendment 64 #
2017/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014
Article 40 a – paragraph 1
Article 40 a – paragraph 1
Amendment 20 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) This Regulation lays down a financial envelope for the period 2018- 2020 which is to constitute the prime reference amount, within the meaning of Point 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management23, for the European Parliament and the Council during the annual budgetary procedure. The prime reference amount includes redeployments from the Erasmus+ programme (EUR 197.7 million) and from the Employment and Social Innovation programme (EUR 10 million) for the financial years 2018, 2019 and 2020, and it is complemented by contributions from several Union programmes under different headings, such as the European Social Fund, the Union Civil Protection Mechanism, the LIFE programme and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development. _________________ 23 Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 1.
Amendment 22 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The European Solidarity Corps should target young people aged 186-305. Participation in the activities offered by the European Solidarity Corps should require prior registration in the European Solidarity Corps Portal.
Amendment 23 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
Amendment 25 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
Amendment 26 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) “volunteering” means a full- time32 unpaid voluntary service for a period of up to twelve months, which provides young people with the opportunity to contribute to the daily work of non-profit organisations active in solidarity-related fields, to the ultimate benefit of the communities within which the activities are carried out, including a solid learning and training dimension in order to enable the young volunteer(s) to gain skills and competences, which will be useful for their personal, educational, social and professional development, and which will also contribute to improving their employability; _________________ 32 As a general principle, an activity carried out continuously, 5 days a week for 7 hours a day.
Amendment 27 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) to provide young people, with the support of participating organisations, with easily accessible opportunities for engagement in solidarity activities while improving their knowledge, skills and competences for personal, educational, social, civic, cultural and professional development, as well as their employability and facilitating transition into the labour market, including by supporting the mobility of young volunteers, trainees and workers;
Amendment 28 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) the setting up of information campaigns to raise awareness of European Solidarity Corps actions.
Amendment 29 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Amendment 35 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. TAfter 2020 and on the basis of the report provided for in Article 15(3), the European Solidarity Corps shallmay be opened up for the participation of other countries on the basis of bilateral agreements. Cooperation shall be based, where relevant, on additional appropriations to be made available in accordance with the procedures to be agreed with those countries.
Amendment 36 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 37 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Young people aged 176 to 305 years willing to participate in the European Solidarity Corps shall register in the European Solidarity Corps Portal. However, at the moment of commencing a placement or a project a registered young person shall be at least 18 years of age and not older than 30.
Amendment 38 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. An application from an eligible entity to become a European Solidarity Corps participating organisation shall be assessed by the competent implementing body of the European Solidarity Corps in order to ascertain that its activities adhere to the principles and requirements ofset out in the European Solidarity Corps Charter.
Amendment 39 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. As a result of the assessment the entity may be attributed the European Solidarity Corps quality label. The obtained label shall be re-assessed periodically and may be revokedregularly and at least every two years, and may be revoked as soon as the activities of that entity no longer adhere to the principles and requirements set out in the European Solidarity Corps Charter.
Amendment 40 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Any entity which has received the European Solidarity Corps quality label shall be incorporated into the database of European organisations participating in the European Solidarity Corps on the Europe Youth Portal, which all young Europeans can access.
Amendment 41 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission, in cooperation with the participating countries, shall regularly monitor the performance of the European Solidarity Corps towards achieving its objectivesand adherence to its principles, specifically cohesion and solidarity.
Amendment 42 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) number and profile of participants in volunteering placements (in-country and cross-border);
Amendment 43 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) number and profile of participants in traineeship placements (in-country and cross-border);
Amendment 44 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) number and profile of participants in job placements (in-country and cross- border);
Amendment 45 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) number and profile of participants in solidarity projects;
Amendment 46 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e a (new)
(e a) employment rate of former participants.
Amendment 47 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. In 2020 the Commission shall publish a report taking stockon the cost-effectiveness of the programme, on its qualitative and quantitative aspects and ofn the progress made towards achieving its results, including the target of offering 100 000 young people opportunities under the European Solidarity Corps by 2020 (covering all the placements and projects referred to in points (a) and (b) of Article 7(1)).
Amendment 48 #
2017/0102(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. Four years after the date of application of this Regulation, the Commission shall carry out an independent evaluation of this Regulation and present a report on the main findings to the European Parliament, the Council, the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committeeto assess the efficiency, effectiveness and impact of the programme against its objectives and shall present a report on the main findings, including recommendations for the future of the programme, to the European Parliament, the Council, the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee. As part of that evaluation, the Commission shall consult regularly with all stakeholders, including participants, participating organisations and the local actors concerned. The results of the evaluation shall feed back into the future design of the programme and any new resource allocation proposals.
Amendment 48 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The content of electronic communications may reveal highly sensitive information about the natural persons involved in the communication, from personal experiences and emotions to medical conditions, sexual preferences and political views, the disclosure of which could result in personal and social harm, economic loss or embarrassment. Similarly, metadata derived from electronic communications may also reveal very sensitive and personal information. These metadata includes the numbers called, the websites visited, geographical location, the time, date and duration when an individual made a call etc., allowing precise conclusions to be drawn regarding the private lives of the persons involved in the electronic communication, such as their social relationships, their habits and activities of everyday life, their interests, tastes etc. The protection of confidentiality of communications is one of the essential conditions for respect for fundamental rights and freedoms, along with the freedoms of conscience, religion and expression.
Amendment 99 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Exceptions to the obligation to obtain consent to make use of the processing and storage capabilities of terminal equipment or to access information stored in terminal equipment should be limited to situations that involve no, or only very limited, intrusion of privacy. For instance, consent should not be requested for authorizing the technical storage or access which is strictly necessary and proportionate for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the end-user. This may include the storing of cookies for the duration of a single established session on a website to keep track of the end-user’s input when filling in online forms over several pages. Cookies can also be a legitimate and useful tool, for example, in measuring web traffic to a website or any other digital medium. Information society providers that engage in configuration checking to provide the service in compliance with the end-user's settings and the mere logging of the fact that the end-user’s device is unable to receive content requested by the end- user should not constitute access to such a device or use of the device processing capabilities.
Amendment 109 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The principles of data protection by design and by default were codified under Article 25 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Currently, the default settings for cookies are set in most current browsers to ‘accept all cookies’. Therefore providers of software enabling the retrieval and presentation of information on the internet should have an obligation to configure the software so that it offers the option to prevent third parties from storing information on the terminal equipment; this is often presented as ‘reject third party cookies’. End-users should be offered a set of privacy setting options, ranging from higher (for example, ‘never accept cookies’) to lower (for example, ‘always accept cookies’) and intermediate (for example, ‘reject third party cookies’ or ‘only accept first party cookies’). Such privacy settings should differentiate between the cookies of third parties having a contractual relationship with the website providers and other third-party cookies. Such privacy settings should be presented in a an easily visible and intelligible manner.
Amendment 112 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) For web browsers to be able to obtain end-users’ consent as defined under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, for example, to the storage of third party tracking cookies, they should, among others, require a clear affirmative action from the end-user of terminal equipment to signify his or her freely given, specific informed, and unambiguous agreement to the storage and access of such cookies in and from the terminal equipment. Such action may be considered to be affirmative, for example, if end-users are required to actively select ‘accept third party cookies’ to confirm their agreement and are given the necessary information to make the choice. To this end, it is necessary to require providers of software enabling access to internet that, at the moment of installation, end-users are informed about the possibility to choose the privacy settings among the various options and ask them to make a choice. Information provided should not dissuade end-users from selecting higher privacy settings and should include relevant information about the risks associated to allowing third party cookies to be stored in the computer, including the compilation of long-term records of individuals' browsing histories and the use of such records to send targeted advertising. Web browsers are encouraged to provide easy ways for end-users to change the privacy settings at any time during use and to allow the user to make exceptions for or to whitelist certain websites, upon a specific request, or to specify for which websites (third) party cookies are always or never allowed.
Amendment 130 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) In order to strengthen the enforcement of the rules of this Regulation, each supervisory authority should have the power to impose penalties including administrative fines for any infringement of this Regulation, in addition to, or instead of any other appropriate measures pursuant to this Regulation. This Regulation should indicate infringements and the upper limit and criteria for setting the related administrative fines, which should be determined by the competent supervisory authority in each individual case, taking into account all relevant circumstances of the specific situation, with due regard in particular to the nature, gravity and duration of the infringement and of its consequences and the measures taken to ensure compliance with the obligations under this Regulation and to prevent or mitigate the consequences of the infringement. For the purpose of setting a fine under this Regulation, an undertaking should be understood to be an undertaking in accordance with Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty. It should not be permitted to impose double penalties resulting from the violation of both Regulation (EU) 2016/279 and this Regulation.
Amendment 157 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Publicly available directories of end-users of electronic communications services are widely distributed. Publicly available directories means any directory or service containing end-users information such as phone numbers (including mobile phone numbers), email address contact details and includes inquiry services. The right to privacy and to protection of the personal data of a natural person requires that end-users that are natural persons are asked for consent beforehave the possibility of objecting to their personal data arebeing included in a directory. The legitimate interest of legal entities requires that end-users that are legal entities have the right to object to the data related to them being included in a directory.
Amendment 160 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) If end-users that are natural persons give their consendo not object to their data being included in such directories, they should be able to determine on a consentmake an objection on basis which categories of personal data are included in the directory (for example name, email address, home address, user name, phone number). In addition, providers of publicly available directories should informprovide accessible information to the end-users of the purposes of the directory and of the search functions of the directory before including them in that directory. End-users should be able to determine by consenobject on the basis of which categories of personal data their contact details can be searched. The categories of personal data included in the directory and the categories of personal data on the basis of which the end-user's contact details can be searched should not necessarily be the same.
Amendment 176 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point f
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point f
(f) ‘direct marketing communications’ means any form of advertisingcommercial communication, whether written or oral, sent to one or more identified or identifiable end-users of electronic communications services, including the use of automated calling and communication systems with or without human interaction, electronic mail, SMS, etc.;
Amendment 268 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The use of processing and storage capabilities of terminal equipment and the collection of information from end-users’ terminal equipment, including about its software and hardware, other than by the end-user concerned shall be prohibited, unless the processing is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the controller or by a third party, except on the following grounds:
Amendment 286 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Publicly available directories of end-users of electronic communications services are widely distributed. Publicly available directories means any directory or service containing end-users information such as phone numbers (including mobile phone numbers), email address contact details and includes inquiry services. The right to privacy and to protection of the personal data of a natural person requires that end-users that are natural persons are asked for consent beforehave the possibility of objecting to their personal data arebeing included in a directory. The legitimate interest of legal entities requires that end-users that are legal entities have the right to object to the data related to them being included in a directory.
Amendment 289 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) If end-users that are natural persons give their consendo not object to their data being included in such directories, they should be able to determine on a consentmake an objection on basis which categories of personal data are included in the directory (for example name, email address, home address, user name, phone number). In addition, providers of publicly available directories should informprovide accessible information to the end-users of the purposes of the directory and of the search functions of the directory before including them in that directory. End-users should be able to determine by consenobject on the basis of which categories of personal data their contact details can be searched. The categories of personal data included in the directory and the categories of personal data on the basis of which the end-user’s contact details can be searched should not necessarily be the same.
Amendment 296 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) if it is necessary for web audience measuringement, provided that such measurement is carried out by the provider of the information society service requested by the end-userinternet service provider requested by the end-user or on his behalf in accordance with the rules laid down in the Regulation on the protection of personal data (2016/679).
Amendment 302 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) where the processing is strictly limited to anonymised or pseudonymised data and the entity concerned undertakes to comply with specific guarantees concerning protection of privacy; or
Amendment 305 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
(db) if this is useful for the personalisation of electronic communication services provided to end- users.
Amendment 330 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it is necessary for providing an information society service requested by the end-user especially in order to secure the integrity, security and access of the information society service, to enhance user experience or for measures to protect against unauthorised use or access to the information society services in agreement with the terms of use for making available the service to the end-user; or
Amendment 338 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) if it is necessary for web audience measuring, provided that such measurement is carried out by the provider of the information society service requested by the end-user.ement, including measurement with the purposes of determining collective rights, remuneration or other payment systems or
Amendment 338 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The definition of and conditions for consent provided for under Articles 4(11) and 7(1), (2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679/EU shall apply.
Amendment 342 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, where technically possible and feasible, in particular for the purposes of point (b) of Article 8(1), consent may be expressed by using the appropriate technical settings of a software application enabling access to the internet or by continuing to use an information society service, having received clear and complete information ensuring that the end-user has given consent.
Amendment 378 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10a This software must ensure that the consent given by an end-user in accordance with point (b) of Article 8(1) takes precedence over the parameters chosen when the software was installed. The software must not block data processing which is legally authorised in accordance with Article 8(1)(a), (b), (c) or (d) or (2)(a), whatever the browser settings.
Amendment 385 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The definition of and conditions for consent provided for under Articles 4(11) and 7Article 7 (1), (2), and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679/EU shall apply.
Amendment 393 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, where technically possible and feasible, for the purposes of point (b) of Article 8(1), consent may be expressed by using the appropriate technical settings of a software application enabling access to the internet or by the continued use of the information society service after having been provided with accessible and comprehensive information about this action of the end-user.
Amendment 402 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. The providers of publicly available directories shall obtain the consentoperators of electronic information, communications and telecommunications services shall collect the data of end- users who are natural persons to include their personal data in the directory and, consequently, shall obtain consent from these end-users for inclusion of data per category of personal data, to the extent that such data are relevant for the purpose of the directory as determined by the provider of the directory. Providepublicly accessible directories. They shall give end-users who are natural persons the right to object to data related to them being included in directories. Operators shall give end-users who are natural persons the meanspossibility to verify, correct and delete such data.
Amendment 406 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Natural or legal persons may use electronic communications services for the purposes of sending direct marketing communications to end-users who are natural persons that have given their consent, or where the processing is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the controller or by a third party.
Amendment 414 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. Where a natural or legal person obtains electronic contact details for electronic mail from its customer, in the context of the sale of a product or a service, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, that natural or legal person may use these electronic contact details may be used for direct marketing of its own similar products or services only if customers are clearly and distinctly given the opportunity to object, free of charge and in an easy manner, to such use. The right to object shall be given at the time of collection and each time a message is sent.
Amendment 439 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. The independent supervisory authority or authorities responsiblEach Member State shall provide that one for monitoring the application of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall also bre independent public authorities are responsible for monitoring the application of this Regulation. Chapters VI and VII of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall apply mutatis mutandito those authorities. The tasks and powers of the supervisory authorities shall be exercised with regard to end-users.
Amendment 440 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. TEach supervisory authority shall contribute to the consistent application of this Regulation throughout the Union. To that end, the supervisory authority or authorities referred to in paragraph 1 shall cooperate whenever appropriate with national regulatory authorities established pursuant to the [Directive Establishing the European Electronic Communications Code] and the national authorities responsible for monitoring the implementation of consumer protection legislation (CPC Regulation).
Amendment 447 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. The providers of publicly available directories shall obtain the consent ofoperators of electronic communication shall provide the option to end- users who are natural persons to includeobject to their personal data being included in the directory and, consequently, shall obtain consent from these end-users forprovide to these end-users the option to object to the inclusion of data per category of personal data, to the extent that such data are relevant for the purpose of the directory as determined by the provider of the directory. Providers shall give end- users who are natural persons the means to verify, correct and delete such data.
Amendment 453 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. The providers of a publicly available directory shall informprovide accessible and intelligible information to end-users who are natural persons whose personal data are in the directory of the available search functions of the directory and obtain end-users’ consent before enablingprovide the end-users' the option to disable such search functions related to their own data.
Amendment 454 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. The providers of publiclyoperators of electronic communication services available directories shall provide end-users that are legal persons with the possibility to object to data related to them being included in the directory. ProvideThe operators shall give such end-users that are legal persons the means to verify, correct and delete such data. Natural persons who act for a commercial or economic purpose, such as freelancers, one-man businesses and individual professionals shall be considered legal persons.
Amendment 497 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. The independent supervisory authority or authorities responsible for monitoring the application of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall alsoEach member state shall determine which relevant supervisory authority should be responsible for monitoring the application of this Regulation. Chapter VI and VII of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall apply mutatis mutandis. The tasks and powers of the supervisory authorities shall be exercised with regard to end-users.
Amendment 533 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it is necessary for providing an information society service requested by the end-user especially in order to secure the integrity, security and access of the information society service, to enhance user experience or for measures to protect against unauthorised use or access to the information society services in agreement with the terms of use for making available the service to the end-user; or
Amendment 551 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) if it is necessary for web audience measuring, provided that such measurement is carried out by the provider of the information society service requested by the end-user.ement, including measurement with the purposes of determining collective rights, remuneration or other payment systems or
Amendment 611 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The definition of and conditions for consent provided for under Articles 4(11) and 7Article 7 (1), (2), and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679/EU shall apply.
Amendment 625 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, where technically possible and feasible, for the purposes of point (b) of Article 8(1), consent may be expressed by using the appropriate technical settings of a software application enabling access to the internet or by the continued use of the information society service after having been provided with accessible and comprehensive information about this action of the end-user.
Amendment 656 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Upon installation, the software shall inform the end-user about the privacy settings options and, to continue with the installation, require the end-user to consent to a setting.Such software shall ensure that a consent given by an end user under Article 8 (1) point (b) prevails over the privacy settings chosen at the installation of the software.
Amendment 662 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The software shall not block data processing wich is legally allowed to Art. 8 (1) a), c) or d) or (2) a), irrespective of the browser settings.
Amendment 700 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. The providers of publicly available directories shall obtain the consent ofoperators of electronic communication shall provide the option to end- users who are natural persons to includeobject to their personal data being included in the directory and, consequently, shall obtain consent from these end-users forprovide to these end-users the option to object to the inclusion of data per category of personal data, to the extent that such data are relevant for the purpose of the directory as determined by the provider of the directory. Providers shall give end- users who are natural persons the means to verify, correct and delete such data.
Amendment 708 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. The providers of a publicly available directory shall informprovide accessible and intelligible information to end-users who are natural persons whose personal data are in the directory of the available search functions of the directory and obtain end-users’ consent before enablingprovide the end-users' the option to disable such search functions related to their own data.
Amendment 714 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. The providers of publiclyoperators of electronic communication services available directories shall provide end-users that are legal persons with the possibility to object to data related to them being included in the directory. ProvideThe operators shall give such end-users that are legal persons the means to verify, correct and delete such data. Natural persons who act for a commercial or economic purpose, such as freelancers, one-man businesses and individual professionals shall be considered legal persons
Amendment 785 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. The independent supervisory authority or authorities responsible for monitoring the application of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall alsoEach member state shall determine which relevant supervisory authority should be responsible for monitoring the application of this Regulation. Chapter VI and VII of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall apply mutatis mutandis. The tasks and powers of the supervisory authorities shall be exercised with regard to end-users.
Amendment 5 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) It is in the interest of a coherent approach to personal data protection throughout the Union, and of the free movement of personal data within the Union, to align as far as possible the data protection rules for Union institutions and bodies with the data protection rules adopted for the public sector in the Member States. Whenever the provisions of this Regulation are based on the same concept as the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, those two provisions should be interpreted homogeneously, in particular because the scheme of this Regulation should be understood as equivalent to the scheme of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 12 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Where the founding act of a Union agency carrying out activities which fall within the scope of Chapters 4 and 5 of Title V of the Treaty lays down a standalone data protection regime for the processing of operational personal data such regimes should be unaffected by this Regulation, as long as they are consistent with the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. However, the Commission should, in accordance with Article 62 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, by 6 May 2019 review Union acts which regulate processing by the competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, including the safeguarding against and the prevention of threats to public security and, where appropriate, make the necessary proposals to amend those acts to ensure a consistent approach to the protection of personal data in the area of judicial cooperation in criminal matters and police cooperation.
Amendment 17 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The Union law including the internal rules referred to in this Regulation should be clear and precise and its application should be foreseeable to persons subject to it, in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights.
Amendment 21 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Personal data which are, by their nature, particularly sensitive in relation to fundamental rights and freedoms merit specific protection as the context of their processing could create significant risks to the fundamental rights and freedoms. Such personal data should not be processed unless processing is allowed in specific cases as laid down in this Regulation. Those personal data should include personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, whereby the use of the term ‘racial origin’ in this Regulation does not imply an acceptance by the Union of theories which attempt to determine the existence of separate human races. The processing of photographs should not systematically be considered to be processing of special categories of personal data as they are covered by the definition of biometric data only when processed through a specific technical means allowing the unique identification or authentication of a natural person. In addition to the specific requirements for processing of sensitive data, the general principles and other rules of this Regulation should apply, in particular as regards the conditions for lawful processing. Derogations from the general prohibition for processing such special categories of personal data should be explicitly provided, inter alia, where the data subject gives his or her explicit consent or in respect of specific needs in particular where the processing is carried out in the course of legitimate activities by certain associations or foundations the purpose of which is to permit the exercise of fundamental freedoms.
Amendment 24 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The processing of special categories of personal data may be necessary for reasons of public interest in the areas of public health without consent of the data subject. Such processing should be subject to proportionate, suitable and specific measures so as to protect the rights and freedoms of natural persons. In that context, ‘public health’ should be interpreted as defined in Regulation (EC) No 1338/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council15, namely all elements related to health, namely health status, including morbidity and disability, the determinants having an effect on that health status, health care needs, resources allocated to health care, the provision of, and universal access to, health care as well as health care expenditure and financing, and the causes of mortality. Such processing of data concerning health for reasons of public interest should not result in personal data beinglead to any further processeding for other purposes, including processing by third parties. _________________ 15 Regulation (EC) No 1338/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on Community statistics on public health and health and safety at work (OJ L 354, 31.12.2008, p. 70).
Amendment 27 #
2017/0002(COD)
Legal acts adopted on the basis of the Treaties or internal rules of Union institutions and bodies may impose restrictions concerning specific principles and the rights of information, access to and rectification or erasure of personal data, the right to data portability, confidentiality of electronic communications as well as the communication of a personal data breach to a data subject and certain related obligations of the controllers, for a limited period of time and as far as necessary and proportionate in a democratic society to safeguard public security, the prevention, investigation and prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, including the safeguarding against and the prevention of threats to public security, including the protection of human life especially in response to natural or manmade disasters, internal security of Union institutions and bodies, other important objectives of general public interest of the Union or of a Member State, in particular an important economic or financial interest of the Union or of a Member State, the keeping of public registers kept for reasons of general public interest or the protection of the data subject or the rights and freedoms of others, including social protection, public health and humanitarian purposes.
Amendment 33 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) In order to demonstrate compliance with this Regulation, controllers should maintain records of processing activities under their responsibility and processors should maintain records of categories of processing activities under their responsibility. Union institutions and bodies should be obliged to cooperate with the European Data Protection Supervisor and make their records, on request, available to it, so that they might serve for monitoring those processing operations. Union institutions and bodies should be able to establish a central register of records of their processing activities. For reasons of transparency, they should also be able to make such a register public. Data subjects should be able to consult the register upon request.
Amendment 36 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) Regulation (EU) 2016/679 established the European Data Protection Board as an independent body of the Union with legal personality. The Board should contribute to the consistent application of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2016/680 throughout the Union, including by advising the Commission. At the same time, the European Data Protection Supervisor should continue to exercise its supervisory and advisory functions in respect of all Union institutions and bodies, including on its own initiative or upon request. In order to ensure consistency of data protection rules throughout the Union, a consultation by the Commission should be obligatory following twhen adoption ofng proposals for legislative acts or during the preparation of delegated acts and implementing acts as defined in Article 289, 290 and 291 TFEU and following twhen adoption ofng recommendations and proposals relating to agreements with third countries and international organisations as provided for in Article 218 TFEU, which have an impact on the right to personal data protection. In such cases, the Commission should be obliged to consult the European Data Protection Supervisor, except when the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 provides for mandatory consultation of the European Data Protection Board, for example on adequacy decisions or delegated acts on standardised icons and requirements for certification mechanisms. Where the act in question is of particular importance for the protection of individuals' rights and freedoms with regard to the processing of personal data, the Commission should be able, in addition, to consult the European Data Protection Board. In those cases, the European Data Protection Supervisor should, as a member of the European Data Protection Board, coordinate its work with the latter with a view to issue a joint opinion. The European Data Protection Supervisor, and where applicable, the European Data Protection Board should provide its written advice within eight weeks. That time-frame should be shorter in case of urgency or otherwise appropriate, for example when the Commission is preparing delegated and implementing acts.
Amendment 38 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) When personal data are transferred from the Union institutions and bodies to controllers, processors or other recipients in third countries or to international organisations, the level of protection of natural persons ensured in the Union by this Regulation should not be undermined, including in cases of onward transfers of personal data from the third country or international organisation to controllers, processors in the same or another third country or international organisation. In any event, transfers to third countries and international organisations may only be carried out in full compliance with this Regulation and in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. A transfer could take place only if, subject to the other provisions of this Regulation, the conditions laid down in the provisions of this Regulation relating to the transfer of personal data to third countries or international organisations are complied with by the controller or processor.
Amendment 39 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
Amendment 42 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation applies to the processing of personal data by all Union institutions and bodies insofar as such processing is carried out in the exercise of activities which fall, wholly or partially within the scope of Union law.
Amendment 53 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – title
Article 8 – title
Conditions applicable to children's consent in relation to information society services
Amendment 54 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Where point (d) of Article 5(1) applies, in relation to the offer of information society services directly to a child, the processing of the personal data of a child shall be lawful where the child is at least 136 years old. Where the child is below the age of 136 years, such processing shall be lawful only if and to the extent that consent is given or authorised by the holder of parental responsibility over the child.
Amendment 61 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Processing of personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences or related security measures pursuant to Article 5(1) may be carried out only if authorised by Union law, which may include internal rules, providing the appropriate specific safeguards for the rights and freedoms of data subjects.
Amendment 64 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Legal acts adopted on the basis of the Treaties or, in matters relating to the operation of the Union institutions and bodies, internal rules laid down by the latter may restrict the application of Articles 14 to 22, 34 and 38, as well as Article 4 in so far as its provisions correspond to the rights and obligations provided for in Articles 14 to 22, when such a restriction respects the essence of the fundamental rights and freedoms and is a necessary and proportionate measure in a democratic society to safeguard:
Amendment 69 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Amendment 72 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 5
Article 25 – paragraph 5
Amendment 79 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 5
Article 31 – paragraph 5
5. Union institutions and bodies may decide toshall keep their records of processing activities in a central register. In this case, they may also decide toThey shall make the register publicly accessible.
Amendment 83 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Union institutions and bodies shall ensure the confidentiality of electronic communications, in particular by securing their electronic communication networksaccordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/XXXX.
Amendment 90 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2
Article 42 – paragraph 2
2. Where an act referred to in paragraph 1 is of particular importance for the protection of individuals’ rights and freedoms with regard to the processing of personal data, the Commission mayshall also consult the European Data Protection Board. In such cases the European Data Protection Supervisor and the European Data Protection Board shall coordinate their work with a view to issue a joint opinion.
Amendment 91 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 4
Article 44 – paragraph 4
4. The data protection officer mayshall be a staff member of the Union institution or, body, or fulfil the tasks on the basis of a service contractffice or agency.
Amendment 95 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) ensure that the rights and freedoms of data subjects are not adversely affected by the processing.
Amendment 96 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1
Article 48 – paragraph 1
1. A transfer of personal data to a third country or international organisation may take place where the Commission has decidedadopted an implementing act pursuant to Article 45(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 which stipulates that an adequate level of protection is ensured in the third country, a territory or one or more specified sectors within that third country, or within the international organisation and the personal data are transferred solely to allow tasks covered by the competence of the controller to be carried out. The implementing act shall provide for a mechanism for a periodic review, at least every four years, which shall take into account all relevant developments in the third country or the international organisation. The implementing act shall further indicate its territorial and sectorial application and shall identify the supervisory authority. Chapter V of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall apply.
Amendment 98 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1
Article 54 – paragraph 1
1. The European Parliament and the Council shall appoint the European Data Protection Supervisor by common accord for a term of five years, on the basis of a list drawn up byjointly by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission following a public call for candidates. The call for candidates shall enable all interested parties throughout the Union to submit their applications. The list of candidates drawn up by the Commission shall be public. On the ba and shall consist of the list drawn up by the Commission, tat least five candidates. The competent committee of the European Parliament may decide to hold a hearing of the listed candidates in order to enable it to express a preference.
Amendment 102 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 63 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. In cases where the data subject is a child, Member States shall provide for specific safeguards, in particular with regard to legal aid.
Amendment 103 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter IX a (new)
Chapter IX a (new)
Chapter IXa Article 70a Review Clause 1. No later than 1 June 2021, and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament a report on the application of this Regulation, accompanied, if necessary, by appropriate legislative proposals. 2. The ex-post evaluation outlined in paragraph 1 shall pay particular attention to the appropriateness of the scope of this Regulation, the consistency with other legislative acts in the field of data protection and assess, in particular, the implementation of Chapter V of this Regulation. 3. No later than 1 June 2021, and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament on the application of Chapter VIII of this Regulation and the penalties and sanctions applied.
Amendment 2 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas online platforms (hereinafter ‘platforms’) cover a wide range of actors involved in numerous economic activities, such as e-commerce, media, search engines, collaborative economy, distribution of cultural content or social networks, and are therefore not subject to any clear and precise definition, the formulation of which would be the first step of a sectoral regulation process;
Amendment 5 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the intermediaries of yesterday have become today’s providers of content and play an essential role in terms of access to content including cultural and audiovisual content;
Amendment 15 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas in order to put an end to the copyright related ambiguity between active user-uploaded content platforms and those having an activity of mere intermediaries, it is necessary to clarify that the limited liability provided by Article 14 of the E-Commerce Directive is only applicable to platforms having a passive intermediary role, that is to say without intervening in the organisation, optimisation or promotion of the content;
Amendment 31 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas platforms can have double roles as intermediaries but also competitors which can potentially lead to abuse;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas a duty of care should be imposed under certain conditions to online service providers to detect and prevent illegal activities on platforms by any technically reliable means;
Amendment 33 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital G c (new)
Recital G c (new)
Gc. whereas online counterfeiting is becoming increasingly sought after by criminal organizations as it is more profitable and has a smaller risk of incurring criminal penalties than racketeering or drug trafficking;
Amendment 36 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses the urgent need for clarification of the status of platforms that play an active role in public communication and the reproduction of protected works;
Amendment 46 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for a regulatory framework that would guarantee loyalty and transparency towards business partners in relation to, inter alia, access to the service, appropriate and fair referencing, search results and the functioning of relevant application programming interfaces;
Amendment 51 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on platforms to take appropriate measures to ensure the proper functioning of contractual agreements concluded with right holders for the use of copyright protected works, such as the installation of effective content recognition technologies, where appropriate;
Amendment 70 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Emphasises the need to restore a balance in the sharing of value for intellectual property, in particular on platforms distributing protected audiovisual content;
Amendment 78 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recalls that counterfeiting affects all sectors of the legal economy and that companies, the first targets of counterfeiters, are not the only ones affected by this scourge. Counterfeiting is a real issue for the health and safety of consumers who must be sensitized and made aware of the reality of trafficking in fake products;
Amendment 79 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Calls on the Commission to further promote the launched platform for settling disputes involving purchases made online amongst consumers, to improve its user-friendliness and to monitor whether traders comply with their obligation to put a link to the platform on their website, in order to further address the increasing number of complaints against several online platforms;
Amendment 80 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Calls on the Commission to consider establishing a harmonised approach to the right of rectification, the right to counterstatement and rights to forbearance for users of platforms;
Amendment 81 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5d. Calls on the Commission to create a level playing field in view of claims for damages against platforms due to the circulation of disparaging facts, which create a persistent harm to the user;
Amendment 198 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Stresses that despite the fact that more creative content is being consumed today than ever before, on services such as user-uploaded content platforms and content aggregation services, the creative sectors have not seen a comparable increase in revenues from this increase in consumption; stress that one of the main reasons for that is being referred to as a transfer of value that has emerged due to the lack of clarity regarding the status of these online services under copyright and e-commerce law; stress that an unfair market has been created, threatening the development of the Digital Single Market and its main players: the cultural and creative industries;
Amendment 212 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Highlights that liability exemptions can only apply to genuinely neutral and passive online providers, and not to services that play an active role in distributing, promoting and monetising content at the expense of creators;
Amendment 221 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Considers that digital platforms are means of providing wider access to cultural and creative works and offer great opportunities for cultural and creative industries to develop new business models; highlights that consideration is to be made of how this process can function with more legal certainty and respect for right holders; underlines the importance of transparency and of ensuring a fair level playing field; considers in this regard that protection of right holders within the copyright and intellectual property framework is necessary in order to ensure recognition of values and stimulation of innovation, creativity, investment and production of content;
Amendment 4 #
2016/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas better access to information and the increased use of improved digital tools for company-law- related formalities throughout the lifecycle of companies would reduce the administrative burden for companies and thus expenses, particularly where the relevant electronic public services are available across borders;
Amendment 13 #
2016/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to raise awareness of the importance of the e- Justice Portal and its uses, and to make the e-Justice Portal a one-stop shop for all the relevant legal information and for access to justice in the Member States;
Amendment 21 #
2016/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Congratulates the Council and the Commission on their work in introducing the European Case Law Identifier (ECLI), which is very usefuleffective for legal research and judicial dialogue, and welcomes the creation of the ECLI search engine, which should facilitate access to legal information across the Union;
Amendment 26 #
2016/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to consider further ways to promote digital solutions for simplifying the formalities throughout a company’s lifecycle, in particular for online registration processes, the electronic filing of company documents and the provision of information for business registers; notes that in this field legislation may be the only way to create an appropriate legal framework for EU- wide digital solutions;
Amendment 30 #
2016/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Stresses that e-governance is particularly important for small and medium-sized companies, which are limited in terms of work force and available funds;
Amendment 109 #
2016/2244(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Calls on the Commission to clarify liability conflicts between the franchisee and the franchisor as regards infringements of industrial and intellectual property rights;
Amendment 110 #
2016/2244(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13 b. Calls on the Commission to consider proposing an EU directive tackling unfair trading practices in the franchise sector with cross-border implications;
Amendment 13 #
2016/2237(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas there are substantial differences among Member States in the way they regulate social enterprises and the organisational forms available to social entrepreneurs under their legal systems; whereas the distinctive organisational forms that social enterprises adopt depend on the existing legal frameworks, on the political economy of welfare provision and on the cultural and historical traditions of for-profit and non-profit development in each country;
Amendment 27 #
2016/2237(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the adoption of diverse legal frameworks on social enterprises in many Member States confirm the development of a new kind of entrepreneurship more focused on social value creation; whereas this diversity also confirms that social entrepreneurship is an innovative and beneficial field;
Amendment 30 #
2016/2237(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas, in light of this diversity of legal forms available for the creation of a social enterprise across Member Stateswithin the EU, there does not seem to exist a consensus in Europesingle view among the Member States as to whether it is convenient or necessary at the present moment to set up at EU level a specific form of social enterprise; whereas Parliament has already stressed that the development of any new legal frameworks at Union level should be optional for enterprises and preceded by an impact assessment to take into account the existence of various social business models across the Member States; whereas Parliament has also stressed that any measures should demonstrate Union-wide added value;
Amendment 87 #
2016/2237(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital V
Recital V
V. whereas the positive impact of social enterprises in the social economy on the community may justify the adoption of concrete actions in their support, such as the payment of subsidies and the adoption of favourable tax and public procurement measures; whereas those measures should in principle be considered as being compatible with the TreatiesUnion competition law, since they aim at facilitating the development of economic activities or areas mainly intended to have a positive impact on society;
Amendment 94 #
2016/2237(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital X
Recital X
X. whereas social-economy enterprises should issue a social report on a regular basis in which they give account, at least, of their activities, results, involvement of stakeholders, allocation of profits, salaries, subsidies and other benefits received;
Amendment 125 #
2016/2237(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to reviewexamine existing legislation and to submit, where appropriate, legislative proposals establishing a more coherent and complete legal framework in support of social- economy enterprises, specifically, but not only, in the fields of public procurement and competition law, so that such undertakings are treated in a manner that is consistent with their particular nature and contribution to social cohesion and to economic growth;
Amendment 136 #
2016/2237(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Annex I – paragraph 3 – introductory part
The European Parliament considers that the ‘European social label’ should only be awarded to enterprises complying with the following criteria in a cumulative manner:
Amendment 17 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas under Article 67(2) TFEU the European Union is competent to deal with matters relating to the European common asylum policy;
Amendment 21 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas whistleblowers play an important role in reporting unlawful or improper conduct which undermines the public interest; whereas whistleblowers are persons who draw the attention of their employers, public and private administrative authorities, judicial authorities and third parties to such unlawful or improper conduct which they have discovered in the performance of their duties and which they have an obligation to disclose on the grounds that the conduct in question is prejudicial to the public interest;
Amendment 26 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas a number of publicised whistleblowing cases have shown that whistleblowing brings serious wrongdoing in the private and public sectors to the attention of the public and of political authorities; whereas suchome of these wrongdoings have therefore been subject to corrective measures;
Amendment 34 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas corruption is one of the mosta serious problems facing around the world today, as it can hamper a state’s ability to deliver inclusive economic growth in various fields;
Amendment 34 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas whistleblowing has proved useful in a number of areas, such as public health, taxation, the environment, consumer protection, and combating corruption and upholding social rightsbreaches of labour law;
Amendment 35 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas such cases must be clearly defined, in the light of the duties performed by whistleblowers, the seriousness of the facts reported or the nature of the dangers revealed;
Amendment 36 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas it is essential that the line between whistleblowing and informing should not be crossed; whereas it is not a matter of knowing everything about everyone, but rather of identifying instances of a failure to address threats to democracy;
Amendment 40 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas investigative journalism and the independent press remain vulnerable in the context of the disclosure of sensitive information, and whereas members of these professions must enjoy the same protection as the whistleblowers they protect in the name of the confidentiality of their sources;
Amendment 42 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for action to change the public perception of whistle-blowers by highlighting their positive role as an early warning mechanism to prevent abuses and corruption and to enable public scrutiny of state actionbring to light wrongdoing by companies or governments;
Amendment 46 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the protection of whistleblowers is not guaranteed in a number of Member Statesa number of Member States do not have laws which offer whistleblowers appropriate protection, while many others have introduced advanced programmes to protect them; whereas the result of that is fragmented protection of whistleblowers in Europe, which makes it difficult for them to find out their rights and how to whistleblow, and creates legal insecurity in cross-border scenarios;
Amendment 55 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for measures to protect workers who detect and report wrongdoings in the field of unemployment;
Amendment 55 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the Commission has not proposed suitable legislative measures to protect whistleblowers in the EU effectively, in particular in cases involving a Member State;
Amendment 61 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas any third-country national recognised as a whistleblower by the European Union or one of its Member States must be entitled to all the relevant protection measures if, whether in the course of his or her duties or otherwise, he or she has come into the possession of and disclosed information about illegal conduct or acts of espionage, committed either by a third country or by a domestic or multinational company, which are prejudicial to a State, a nation or Union citizens and jeopardise, without their knowledge, the integrity of a government, national security or collective or individual freedoms;
Amendment 62 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points to the dangers of excluding whistle-blowing workers from career progression and of retaliation by colleagues at their workplace, in addition to that of losing their jobs, and the dampening effect this has on those who may come across wrongdoing;
Amendment 68 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission, after assessing the options available, to present a horizontal legislative proposal, which should ideally be horizontal, with a view to effectively protecting whistleblowers in the EU before the end of this yearas soon as possible; stresses that there are at present a number of possibilities for legal bases enabling the EU to take action on the matter; calls on the Commission to consider all those possibilities with the aim of proposing a coherent and effective mechanism;
Amendment 83 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes ‘whistleblower’ to mean anybody who reports on or reveals information on an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which undermines the public interest,, a serious threat or instance of damage which undermines the public interest and which has come to his or her attention in the context of his or her working relationship, be it in the public or private sector, of a contractual relationship, or of his or her trade union or association activities;
Amendment 87 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Takes the view that the definition of whistleblower should reassert the principles of ethical conduct, good faith, disinterest and freedom;
Amendment 91 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Believes that thought should be given to taking legislative action at EU level in order to afford whistle-blowers the necessary legal certainty and protection throughout the Union; calls accordingly on the Commission to continue to look for an appropriate legal basis;
Amendment 93 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that a breach of the public interest includes, but is not limited to, acts of corruption, conflicts of interest, unlawful use of public funds, threats to the environment, health, public safety, national security and privacy and personal data protection, tax avoidance, attacks on workers’ rights and other social rightsbreaches of labour law and attacks on human rights;
Amendment 96 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. RStresses the importance of establishing a clear definition of ‘whistle- blower’ that includes the stipulation that there must be no ulterior motive behind disclosures; recalls that in the event of false accusations, those responsible should be held accountable.
Amendment 103 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the role of whistleblowers in revealing serious attacks on the public interest has proved its significance on many occasions over a number of years and that whistleblowing must be recognised as a mechanism which has a vital role to play in preventing unlawful acts; stresses, further, that whistleblowers have proved to be a crucial resource for investigative journalism and for an independent press;
Amendment 107 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that whistleblowers are proving to be a crucial resource for investigative journalism and for an independent press; emphasises that for this reason members of these professions are vulnerable in the context of the disclosure of sensitive information and must therefore enjoy the same protection as the whistleblowers they protect in the name of the confidentiality of their sources;
Amendment 111 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 114 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Emphasises that protecting whistleblowers is essential if instances of serious wrongdoing are to be brought to the attention of the authorities and the general public; emphasises, further, that the role of whistleblowers must be recognised and the relevant rules harmonised at European level, in order to deter reprisals against them;
Amendment 121 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that one of the barriers to whistleblowers’ activities is the absence of clearly identified means of reportingprotection, which may deter potential whistle-blowers from reporting what they know; stresses that the absence of clearly identified means of reporting causes a number of whistleblowers to remain silent; expresses its concern about the retaliation and pressures which whistleblowers face when they address the guilty person or party in their organisation;
Amendment 127 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that the credibility and validity of a report must be able to be assessed in part on the way in which it was made; believes that it is necessary to establish a coherent systemTakes the view that a coherent, credible and reliable system should be introduced which enables reports to be delivered both inside and outside the organisation; emphasises that public disclosure should be envisaged only as a last resort;
Amendment 129 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to study a tiered system enablingof procedures to facilitate whistleblowing inside and outside the organisation; stresses that, to do so, clear procedures should be established; believes that employers should be encouraged to introduce internal reporting procedures and that one person should be responsible for collecting reports in each organisation; considers that employee representatives should be involved in the assignment of that role;
Amendment 134 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that the whistleblower should give priority to the organisation’s internal reporting mechanisms or to the competent authorities; stresses, however, that in the absence of a favourable response from the; takes the view that if the recipient of the report fails to take proper steps to check its validity within a reasonable period, the whistleblower must be able to turn to the competent authorities; stresses, however, that as a last resort, if the competent authorities fail to take action on the report within three months, the whistleblower must be able to turn to the public authorities, non-governmental organisation,s or the press; if the whistleblower is at risk or urgently needs to report information, he or she must be able to turn todirectly to the public authorities, non-governmental organisations or the press;
Amendment 138 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that the whistleblower should give priority to teach organisation should set clear reporting channel allowing the whistleblower to blow the whistle inside his or her organisation’s internal reporting mechanisms or to the competent authorities; stresses, however,, underlines that each employee should be informed of that reporting procedure, which should guarantee confidentiality and a treatment of the alert in an reasonable time; underlines that in the absence of a favourable response from the organisation, or if the whistleblower is at risk or urgently needs to report information, he or she must be able to turn to non-governmental organisations or the press;
Amendment 140 #
2016/2224(INI)
11a. recalls the right of the public to be informed of any wrongdoing that undermines the public interest, underlines in that respect that it should always be possible for a whistleblower to publicly disclose information on an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which undermines public interest;
Amendment 143 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that reporting outside the organisation without first going through an internal step is not grounds to invalidate a report, file a lawsuit or refuse to give protection, provided that the whistleblower can provide proof of the risk that he or she is running and acted in good faith and disinterestedly;
Amendment 153 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Expresses its concerns about the risks run by whistleblowers at their place of work, in particular the risks of direct or indirect retaliation by the employer and by those working for or acting on behalf of the employer; stresses that retaliation usually takes the form of suspending, slowing down or stopping career progression or even dismissal, along with psychological harassment; stresses that retaliation is a barrier to whistleblowers’ activities; believes that it is necessary to introduce protective measures against destabilising practices; takes the view that retaliation should be penalised and sanctioned effectively; stresses that, once somebody is recognised as a whistleblower, the measures taken against him or her should be brought to an endshould be taken to protect him or her;
Amendment 157 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Takes the view that protection should also be provided if a whistleblower draws attention to conduct involving a Member State;
Amendment 158 #
2016/2224(INI)
13b. Notes that investigative journalists and members of the independent press pursue a solitary profession in the course of which they face many kinds of pressure; emphasises, therefore, that it is essential that they should be protected against all attempts at intimidation;
Amendment 162 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Expresses its concern aboutCondemns the practice of gagging orders, which involve filing or threatening to file lawsuits against the whistleblower not in an effort to have him or her convictedsecure justice, but in an effort to bring about self-censorship or financial, mental or psychological exhaustion;
Amendment 163 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Stresses, however, that a clear distinction must be drawn between the professional confidentiality obligations which employees and public servants have and the need to disclose or bear witness in good faith to instances of wrongdoing likely to undermine the public interest. Any person who makes a report which they know to be false or which is malicious must be liable to disciplinary measures or even prosecution;
Amendment 165 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Points out, however, the risk that whistleblowers run of having legal and civil proceedings brought against them; stresses that they are often the weaker party in trials; stresses, in that connection, that the right of employees to report unlawful conduct or acts which have come to their attention at their workplace must be safeguarded and that, if it can be inferred on the basis of the evidence presented that they reported or bore witness in good faith to acts constituting an offence, any unfair dismissal must be deemed null and void and even cause for legal action; considers it necessary to provide for a reversal of the burden of proof in respect of retaliation against and pressure on whistleblowers; takes the view that confidentiality should be guaranteed throughout the proceedings;
Amendment 177 #
2016/2224(INI)
16. Believes that the option to report confidentially or anonymously would encourage whistleblowers to share information which they would not share otherwise; stresses, in that regard, that clearly regulated means of reporting anonymously or confidentially should be introduced, at least at the first stage of the reporting procedure;
Amendment 183 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses that nobody should lose the benefit of protection on the sole grounds that he or she has misjudged the facts or that the perceived threat to the public interest did not materialise, provided that, at the time of reporting, he or she had reasonable grounds to believe them to be trueacted in good faith and disinterestedly;
Amendment 187 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses the role that public authorities, non-governmental organisations and trade unions play in supporting and helping whistleblowers in their dealings within their organisation;
Amendment 199 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Calls on the Member States, with a view to making these measures effective, to consider the advisability of setting up national compensation funds;
Amendment 202 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Member States to introduceconfer on an independent body responsibleility for collecting reports, verifying their credibility and guiding whistleblowers, particularly in the absence of a positive response from their organisation; in the case of reports involving Member States, the various stages in the reporting procedure must be followed. This task may be conferred on the European Ombudsman.
Amendment 206 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Calls on the Commission to introduce the principle of granting an EU passport to any third-country national who, whether in the course of their duties or not, has disclosed information about illegal conduct or acts of espionage, committed either by a third country or a domestic or multinational company which are prejudicial to a State, a nation or Union citizens and jeopardise, without their knowledge, the integrity of a government, national security or collective or individual freedoms;
Amendment 208 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Emphasises that, in addition to all the protection measures afforded to whistleblowers in general, these whistleblowers in particular must be guaranteed proper reception arrangements, accommodation and safety in a Member State which does not have an extradition agreement with the country which committed the acts in question. In cases where the European Union has an extradition agreement with the third country involved, calls on the Commission, pursuant to Article 67(2) TFEU on European asylum policy, to use its powers to take all the measures required to protect these whistleblowers, who are particular vulnerable to severe reprisals in the country whose illegal or fraudulent practices they brought to public attention;
Amendment 212 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to propose the establishment ofconfer on a similar body at EU level responsibleility for coordinating Member State activities, particularly in cross-border cases; believes that that European body should also be able to collect reports, verify their credibility and guide whistleblowers when the response given by the Member State is obviously not appropriate; considers that the European Ombudsman’s mandate could be extended to serve that purpose;
Amendment 3 #
2016/2154(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the 2015 statistics for the three courts which make up the Court of Justice confirm the trend seen in recent years as regards the average duration of proceedings, which remains very satisfactory [Court of Justice: 15.3 months for requests for a preliminary ruling (15 months in 2014), 1.9 months for urgent requests for a preliminary ruling (2.2 months in 2014), 17.6 months for direct actions (20 months in 2014) and 14 months for appeals (14.5 months in 2014); General Court and Civil Service Tribunal: respectively 20.6 months (23.4 months in 2014) and 12.1 months (12.7 months in 2014) for all types of case], which makes it clear that the reform of the Court was unnecessary;
Amendment 876 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 4 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Rule 4 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Where the competent authorities of the Member States ornotify the President of the Unionend orf the Member concerned notify the President of an appointment or election to an office incompatible with the office of Member of the European Parliament within the meaning ofterm of office of a Member of the European Parliament as a result either of an additional incompatibility established by the law of that Member State in accordance with Article 7(1) or (23) of the Act of 20 September 1976, the President shall inform Parliament, which shall establish that there is a vacancy or of the withdrawal of the Member's mandate pursuant to Article 13(3) of that Act, the President shall inform Parliament that the term of office of that Member ended on the date communicated by the Member State. Where no such date is communicated, the date of the end of the term of office shall be the date of the notification by that Member State.
Amendment 882 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 9 – paragraph 3
Rule 9 – paragraph 3
3. The committee shall make a proposal for a reasoned decision which recommends the adoption or rejection of the request for the waiver of immunity or for the defence of privileges and immunities. No amendments may be tabled to such a proposal. If the proposal is rejected, a contrary decision shall be deemed to have been adopted.
Amendment 886 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 9 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
Rule 9 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
The committee's reportproposal for a decision shall be placed at the head ofon the agenda of the first sitting following the day on which it was tabled. No amendments may be tabled to thesuch a proposal(s) for a decision.
Amendment 960 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 39 – paragraph 4
Rule 39 – paragraph 4
4. IWhere appropriate, after exchanging views with the Council and the Commission in accordance with the arrangements agreed at interinstitutional level1a, if the committee responsible for legal affairs decides to dispute the validity or the appropriateness of the legal basis, it shall report its conclusions to Parliament. Without prejudice to Rule 63, Parliament shall vote on this before voting on the substance of the proposal. __________________ 1aInterinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better-Law Making, paragraph 25 (OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1)
Amendment 961 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 42 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Rule 42 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Where the committee responsible for the subject-matter is of the opinion that a proposal for a legislative act, or parts of it, does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity, it shall request the opinion of the committee responsible for respect of the principle of subsidiarity. Such request shall be made no later than four weeks of the announcement in Parliament of referral to the committee responsible for the subject-matter.
Amendment 982 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
– where the Commission withdrawsreplaces, substantially amends or intends substantially to amend its initial proposal after Parliament has adopted its position, in order to replace it with another text, except where this is done in order to take account of Parliament's position; orif the Commission intends to modify the legal basis provided for in its initial proposal, with the result that the ordinary legislative procedure would no longer apply, the President may also act at the request of the committee responsible for legal affairs;
Amendment 983 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
Amendment 984 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 3
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 3
– where, through the passage of time or changes in circumstances, the nature of the problem with which the proposal is concerned substantially changes; or
Amendment 985 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 63 – paragraph 2
Rule 63 – paragraph 2
2. ParliamThe President shall, at the request of the committee responsible, ask the Council to refer again to Parliament a proposal submitted by the Commission pursuant to Article 294 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Unio for the subject-matter or the committee responsible for legal affairs, ask the Council to refer a draft legislative act to Parliament again, where the Council intends to modify the legal basis of the proposalprovided for in Parliament's position at first reading with the result that the ordinary legislative procedure willould no longer apply.
Amendment 1041 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 118 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Rule 118 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. In the event of a change in the financial interests of a Commissioner during her/his term of office, this situation shall be subject to scrutiny by Parliament in accordance with Article 1(3) to (6) of Annex XVI. If a conflict of interests is identified during a Commissioner's term of office and the Commission fails to implement Parliament's recommendations for resolving that conflict of interests, Parliament may ask the President of the Commission to withdraw confidence in the Commissioner in question, pursuant to paragraph 5 of the Framework agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission.
Amendment 1077 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 141 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Rule 141 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. In urgent cases, the President, where possible after consulting the Chair and rapporteur of the committee responsible for legal affairs, may take precautionary action in order to comply with the relevant time-limits. In such cases, the procedure provided for in paragraphs 3 or 4 shall, as applicable, be implemented at the earliest opportunity.
Amendment 1078 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 141 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Rule 141 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. The committee responsible for legal affairs shall lay down principles for the application of this Rule.
Amendment 1278 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex XVI – paragraph 1 – point a – interpretation –subparagraph 1 a (new)
Annex XVI – paragraph 1 – point a – interpretation –subparagraph 1 a (new)
The confirmation by the Committee responsible for Legal Affairs of the absence of any conflict of interests is an essential precondition for the holding of the hearing by the committee responsible. In the absence of such confirmation or if the Committee responsible for Legal Affairs identifies a conflict of interests, the procedure for appointing the Commissioner-designate shall be suspended.
Amendment 1279 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex XVI – paragraph 6 b (new)
Annex XVI – paragraph 6 b (new)
The following guidelines shall be applied when the declarations of financial interests are scrutinised by the Committee responsible for Legal Affairs: (a) if, when scrutinising a declaration of financial interests, the Committee responsible for Legal Affairs deems, on the basis of the documents presented, the declaration to be accurate, complete and to contain nothing indicating an actual or potential conflict of interests in connection with the portfolio of the Commissioner-designate, its Chair shall send a letter confirming this fact to the committees responsible for the hearing or to the committees involved in the event of a procedure taking place during a Commissioner's term of office; (b) if the Committee responsible for Legal Affairs deems the declaration of interests of a Commissioner-designate to contain information which is incomplete or contradictory, or if there is a need for further information, it shall request this information from the Commissioner- designate and shall consider this before making its decision; (c) if the Committee responsible for Legal Affairs identifies a conflict of interests based on the declaration of financial interests or the supplementary information supplied by the Commissioner-designate, it shall draw up recommendations aimed at resolving the conflict of interests; the recommendations may include renouncing the financial interests in question and/or changes being made to the portfolio of the Commissioner-designate by the President of the Commission;
Amendment 27 #
2016/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Points out that a conflict of interests is defined as ‘any interference situation between a public interest and public and private interests that is likely to affect or that appears likely to affect the independent, impartial and objective exercise of a duty’.
Amendment 33 #
2016/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Beyond the time allocated for questions that the Committee on Legal Affairs wishes to put to the Commissioner-designate, should it note a possible conflict of interests, it should be granted the right to continue with the hearing and obtain the required clarifications;
Amendment 47 #
2016/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Points out that the credibility of the declaration of financial interests depends on the accuracy of the form presented to the Commissioner-designate; it should therefore be improved so that the questions that are asked may provide the Committee on Legal Affairs with accurate information with which it can substantiate its decision unequivocally;
Amendment 48 #
2016/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Therefore considers that the declaration of financial interests must include present or past interests or activities from the last two years that are of a property, professional, personal or family nature in line with the offered portfolio; it must also take account of the fact that the interest may pertain to an advantage for the person involved or for a third party, and that it may also be of a moral, material or financial nature;
Amendment 54 #
2016/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that, in the event of a conflict of interests being identified during a Commissioner's term of office and of the President of the Commission not following Parliament's recommendations for resolving the conflict of interests as set out in paragraph 7 of this resolution, the Committee on Legal Affairs may make recommendations aimed at reducing the remuneration of the Commissioner in question and asking the President of the Commission to withdraw confidence in theat Commissioner in question;
Amendment 67 #
2016/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14a (new)
Paragraph 14a (new)
14a. Considers that, given the amount of time required for the preparation and adoption of directives, the Commissioners’ Code of Conduct must be revised with a view, in particular, to extending to five years the period of transition during which Commissioners may not exercise activities to represent interests within their areas of responsibility;
Amendment 16 #
2016/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that the digital environment offers new opportunities for the creators to produce and distribute their worksion and production of cultural and creative works, and for their distribution, exploitation and accessibility to a wider public at a lower cost, independently of physical and geographical constraints and at times at a lower cost;
Amendment 19 #
2016/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that digital technology has also brought about opportunities for the creation of different types of artistic work or practices and for which that digital technology is an essential part of the creative process;
Amendment 20 #
2016/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Stresses that in defining 'cultural and creative industries' consideration is to be made of the continuous changes and opportunities that digital technology may continue to provide and that any such definition refers to works, including goods and services, which are a product of artistic, cultural or creative processes and which are susceptible to protection as intellectual property rights without restricting the processes through which such works are created or produced;
Amendment 24 #
2016/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls in this context that CCIs predominantly consist of a myriad of micro-, small and medium sized enterprises and freelancers, with limited access to infrastructures, resources and funding and with limited bargaining power vis-à- vis the onlinew digital outlets;
Amendment 28 #
2016/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers consequently that protection of right holders within the copyright and intellectual property legislative frameworks is necessary in a manner that recognises, values and stimulates innovation, creativity, investment and production of content;
Amendment 31 #
2016/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses therefore that business models are challenged by continuous digital innovation and thatat continuous digital innovation challenges the cultural and creative industries to rethink and reshape their business models and that in most current business models the economic value of content is being displaced towards the end of the value chain thereby upsetting the system through which the creative community draws value from content, while facing losses resulting also from piracy;
Amendment 36 #
2016/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that digital platforms are a means of providing wider access to cultural and creative works and that consideration is to be made of how this process can function with more legal certainty and respect for right holders;
Amendment 47 #
2016/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission, to effectively address the circulation of illegal digital content and to examine the different options, focusing on copyright related contracts, forto improvinge fair remuneration of creators thereby rewarding creativity and innovation while promoting transparency in the copyright value chain in the digital environment, andto safeguarding national cultural and linguistic specificities and stimulatinge economic activity;
Amendment 48 #
2016/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recalls the outcome of the Public Consultation launched by the Commission on a regulatory environment for platforms and online intermediaries; highlights that participants recognise the benefits of online platforms in making creative content more accessible and communication easier, while at the same time participants also questioned the lack of transparency and legal certainty in this process vis-à-vis compliance with copyright;
Amendment 9 #
2016/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas mediation can be a useful tool to alleviate overloaded court systems in certain cases and subject to the necessary safeguards, notably it can contribute to reducing the length of court proceedings which - in excess - can be a violation of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights as well as Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights;
Amendment 13 #
2016/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the fact that in many Member States mediation systems have recently been subject to changes and revisions, and in others amendments to the applicable legislation are envisaged17 ; observes that most Member States are not only compliant, but are in fact exceeding the Mediation Directive’s requirements; _________________ 17 Croatia, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia and Spain.
Amendment 17 #
2016/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is concerned byRegrets the difficulty of obtaining comprehensive statistical data on mediation, including the number of mediated cases, the average length and success rates of mediation processes; regretnotes the fact that without a reliable database it is very difficult to further promote mediation and increase public trust in its effectiveness; notes on the other hand the increasing role of the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters in improving national data collection on the application of the Mediation Directive;
Amendment 28 #
2016/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission also to assess the need for an obligation to be introduced for Member States to create and maintain national registers of mediated proceedings;, which could be a source of information for the Commission but also used by national mediators to benefit from best practices across Europe; stresses that any such register must be established under full compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation 2016/6791a; _________________ 1a OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 22 #
2016/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that the new rules concerning mergers, divisions and transfers of registered office of undertakings should take account of the need to adopt ever more stringent standards of information, consultation and co-determination of workers, by analogy with the models introduced with the European company (SE)workers' right to representation, without this limiting undertakings' freedom of organisation;
Amendment 40 #
2016/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Acknowledges the importance of the inclusion in the Directive on cross- border mergers of the rules which apply to the European company (SE) regardingcertain rules regarding the important aspect of workers’ rights; hopefeels that the new provisions concerning workers’ rights will be so framed as to prevent certain undertakings from using the Directive cross- border mergers and divisions cross-border mergers with the sole aim of transferring their registered office or head office for fiscal, social and legal reasons; stresses the importance of eliminating ambiguities in the application of penalties for failure to respect the criteria of information, consultation and co- determination of workersould, in the field of workers' rights, be aligned with those laid down in the aforementioned Directive;
Amendment 45 #
Amendment 66 #
2016/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 – indent 3
Paragraph 18 – indent 3
- participation by, and safeguardingrepresentation of, workers, requiringunder the same forms of information and consultationrules already established for cross-border mergers,
Amendment 5 #
2016/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
P. whereas, in order to further reinforce the transparency of the legislative process, Parliament revised its Rules of Procedure so as to adapt its rules on interinstitutional negotiations during the ordinary legislative procedure, building on the provisions introduced in 2012; whereas, while all of Parliament’s negotiating mandates are public, the same does not hold true of the Council’s mandates; whereas the Parliament find this situation highly unsatisfactory;
Amendment 83 #
2016/2018(INI)
27. Welcomes the commitments made by the Commission as regards the scope of the explanatory memorandum accompanying each of its proposals; expresses particular satisfaction at the fact that the Commission will also explain how the measures proposed are justifiabled in the light of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; underlines in this regard the importance of a strengthened and comprehensive assessment and justification regarding compliance with the principle of subsidiarity and the European added value of the measure proposed;
Amendment 90 #
2016/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Welcomes the three Institutions’ commitment to exchanging views on modifications of the legal basis, as referred to in paragraph 25 of the new IIA; stresses the role and the expertise of its Committee on Legal Affairs in verifying legal bases31 ; recalls Parliament’s position that it will resist any attempt to undermine the legislative powers of Parliament by means of unwarranted modifications of the legal basis; invites the Council to pursue the dialogue with Parliament in case of disagreement over the proposed legal basis; _________________ 31 See Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, Annex V, point XVI.1.
Amendment 101 #
2016/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)
Paragraph 36 a (new)
36a. Deplores the fact that the examination procedure has frequently been used to take political, rather than technical decisions; recalls that the decision of Parliament – as co-author of a legislative act – to accept an implementing act and thus to vest the examination committee with certain powers, pursues the sole aim of alleviating the legislator from overly technical decisions which should be assessed and taken by experts with profound scientific knowledge; points out, at the same time, that Parliament does not wish to give away any political power when agreeing on an implementing act; stresses in this context that the Parliament's prerogatives must not be undermined during the examination procedure, which takes place in the presence of the Commission and representatives of the Member States, but not the Parliament as co-author of the basic act; believes that the current implementation procedure needs thorough revision in order to preserve Parliament’s prerogatives and to remain a useful procedure for technical issues to be harmonised at EU level;
Amendment 105 #
2016/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Notes with appreciation the fact that the Commission in paragraph 28 of the new IIA agreed to ensure that Parliament and the Council have equal access to all information on delegated and implementing acts, so that they will receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts; welcomes the fact that experts from Parliament and the Council will systematically have access to the meetings of Commission expert groups to which Member States’ experts are invited and which concern the preparation of delegated acts; calls on the Commission to abide by this commitment genuinely and consistently; notes that such access has already improved significantlbut is still not satisfactory;
Amendment 110 #
2016/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Deplores the fact that paragraphs 33 and 34 of the new IIA have not yet led to an improvement in the information flow from the Council, notably since there seems to be a general lack of information on the issues raised by the Member States within the Council and no systematic approach to facilitate the mutual exchange of views and information; notes with concern that the information flow usually varies greatly from Presidency to Presidency and varies between services of the Council’s General Secretariat; considers, therefore, that a coherently transparent approach is desired; suggests that the Council should as a rule conduct all its meetings in public as Parliament does;
Amendment 112 #
2016/2018(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 a (new)
Paragraph 43 a (new)
43a. Stresses the need for Parliament to preserve its integrity during the legislative process; in order to safeguard its integrity, warns against any attempt by other Institutions to interfere with Parliament’s decision-making procedure;
Amendment 24 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) In some cases, food business operators may be required or may want to indicate the origin of spirit drinks to draw consumers’ attention to the qualities of their product. Such origin indications should comply with harmonised criteria. Therefore, specific provisions on the indication of the country of origin or place of provenance in the presentation and labelling of spirit drinks should be laid down.
Amendment 26 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Concerning the protection of geographical indications, it is important to have due regard to the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (‘TRIPS Agreement’), and in particular Articles 22 and 23 thereof, and to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (‘GATT Agreement’) which were approved by Council Decision 94/800/EC.12Furthermore, the protection of geographical indications should be extended to goods brought, in the course of trade, into the Union without being released for free circulation, where such goods, including packaging, come from third countries. _________________ 12 Council Decision 94/800/EC of 22 December 1994 concerning the conclusion on behalf of the European Community, as regards matters within its competence, of the agreements reached in the Uruguay Round multilateral negotiations (1986- 1994) (OJ L 336, 23.12.1994, p. 1).
Amendment 32 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to take into account evolving consumer demands, technological progress, developments in the relevant international standards and the need to improve the economic conditions of production and marketing, the traditional ageing processes and, in exceptional cases, the law of the importing third countries, and in order to ensure the protection of geographical indications, while taking into account the importance of traditionnal practices, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the amendment of or derogations from the technical definitions and requirements of the categories of spirit drinks and the specific rules concerning some of them referred to under Chapter I of this Regulation, the labelling and presentation referred to under Chapter II of this Regulation, the geographical indications referred to under Chapter III of this Regulation and the checks and exchange of information referred under Chapter IV of this Regulation.
Amendment 36 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The delegated acts referred to in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph shall be limited to meeting demonstrated needs resulting from evolving consumer demands, technological progress, developments in relevant international standards or needs for product innovation, whilst taking into account the importance of traditional practices.
Amendment 45 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Where the origin of a spirit drink is indicated, it shall correspond to the country or territory of origin in accordance with Article 60 of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council16 . _________________ 16Regulation (EU) No 952/2013mean the place or region where the stage in the production process of the finished product which conferred ofn the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code (OJ L 269, 10.10.2013, p. 1)spirit drink its character and essential qualities took place.
Amendment 53 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) any other false or misleading indication as to the provenance, origin, nature or essential qualities of the product, on the inner or outer packaging, advertising material or documents relating to the product concerned, and the packpresentation or labelling of the product in a container, liable to convey a false impression as to its origin;
Amendment 55 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
The protection for geographical indications referred to in the first subparagraph shall be extended to goods brought, in the course of trade, into the Union without being released for free circulation, where such goods, including packaging, come from third countries.
Amendment 67 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1
1. Where, on the basis of the information available to the Commission from the scrutiny carried out pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 23(1), the Commission considers that the conditions for registration are not fulfilled, it shall adopt implementing acts rejecting the application. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 44(2)delegated acts, in accordance with Article 43, supplementing this Regulation, in order to reject the application.
Amendment 69 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 2
2. If the Commission receives no notice of opposition or no admissible reasoned statement of opposition under Article 24, it shall adopt implementdelegated acts, ing acts, without applying the procedure referred to in Article 44(2),cordance with Article 43, supplementing this Regulation, in order to registering the name.
Amendment 70 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) if an agreement has been reached, register the name by means of implementing acts adopted without applying the procedure referred to in Article 44(2),adopt delegated acts, in accordance with Article 43, supplementing this Regulation in order to register the name and, if necessary, amend the information published pursuant to Article 23(2) provided such amendments are not substantial; or
Amendment 71 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) if an agreement has not been reached, adopt implementing acts deciding on the registration. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 44(2)delegated acts, in accordance with Article 43, supplementing this Regulation, in order to decide on the registration.
Amendment 74 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The Commission mayis empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 43, and supplementing this Regulation, on its own initiative or at the request of any natural or legal person having a legitimate interest, adopt implementing actsin order to cancel the registration of a geographical indication in the following cases:
Amendment 76 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3
Article 29 – paragraph 3
Amendment 80 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall adopt implementdelegated acts ing acts, without applying the procedure referred to in Article 44(2),cordance with Article 43, supplementing this Regulation by establishing and maintaining a publicly accessible updated electronic register of geographical indications of spirit drinks recognised under this scheme (‘the Register’).
Amendment 85 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3
Article 32 – paragraph 3
3. A name shall not be protected as a geographical indication if the production or preparation steps which are compulsory for the relevant category of spirit drink, do not take place in the relevant geographical area.
Amendment 86 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. The registration of a trademark which contains or consists of a geographical indication listed in the Register shall be refused or invalidated if its use would lead to any of the situations referred to in Article 18(2).
Amendment 88 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – title
Article 34 – title
Amendment 89 #
2016/0392(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to paragraph 2, gGeographical indications of spirit drinks protected under Regulation (EC) No 110/2008, shall automatically be protected as geographical indications under this Regulation. The Commission shall list them in the Register.
Amendment 88 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
1. The objective of this Directive is to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market and remove obstacles to the exercise of fundamental freedoms, such as the free movement of capital and freedom of establishment, which result from differences between national laws and procedures on preventive restructuring, insolvency and second chance. This Directive aims at removing such obstacles by ensuring that viable enterprises in financial difficulties have access to effective national preventive restructuring frameworks which enable them to continue operating; that honest over indebted entrepreneurs have a second chance after a full discharge of debt after a reasonable period of time;
Amendment 95 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
6. All these differences translate into additional costs for investors when assessing the risks of debtors entering financial difficulties in one or more Member States and the costs of restructuring companies having establishments, creditors or assets in other Member States, such as is most clearly the case of restructuring international groups of companies. Many investors mention uncertainty about insolvency rules or the risk of lengthy or complex insolvency procedures in another country as a main reason for not investing or not entering into a business relationship with a counterpart outside their own country. This legal uncertainty acts as a disincentive for cross-border investment, which harms the proper functioning of the internal market.
Amendment 96 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
7. Those differences lead to uneven conditions for access to credit and to uneven recovery rates in the Member States. A higher degree of harmonisation in the field of restructuring, insolvency and second chance is thus indispensable for a well-functioning single market in general and for a working Capital Markets Union in particular. At the same time, a greater level of harmonisation would contribute even more towards common European commercial legislation.
Amendment 100 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In particular small and medium sized enterprises should benefit from a more coherent approach at Union level, since theySince small enterprises do not have the necessary resources to cope with high restructuring costs and to take advantage of the more efficient restructuring procedures in some Member States. Small and medium enterprises, especially when facing financial difficulties, often do not have the resources to hire professional advice, therefore early warning tools should be put in place to alert debtors to the urgency to act. In order to help such enterprises restructure at low cost, model restructuring pl, the latter should take into consideration the size of the enterprise in applying this Directive ansd should also be developed nationally and made available online. Debtors should be able to use and adapt them to their own needs and to the specificities of their businesshow de facto tolerance to small enterprises.
Amendment 101 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
13. In particular small and medium sized enterprises, which represent 99% of all businesses in the EU, should benefit from a more coherent approach at Union level, since they do not have the necessary resources to cope with high restructuring costs and to take advantage of the more efficient restructuring procedures in some Member Statare disproportionately more likely to be taken into liquidation rather than restructuring and they have to bear costs that are twice as high as those faced by larger companies for cross- border procedures, compared with domestic procedures. Small and medium enterprises, especially when facing financial difficulties, often do not have the necessary resources to hire professional advice,cope with high restructuring costs and take advantage of theref more early warning tools should be put fficient restructuring place to alert debtors to the urgency to actrocedures in some Member States. In order to help such enterprises restructure at low cost, model restructuring plans should also be developed nationally and made available onlineelectronically. Debtors should be able to use and adapt them to their own needs and to the specificities of their business. Taking into account their limited resources for hiring professional experts, early warning tools should be put in place to warn debtors of the urgent need to act quickly.
Amendment 107 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) Member States with a robust household debt distress procedure should provide for enterprises in difficulties to be subject to comparable rules.
Amendment 145 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Recital 40
40. Member States should also ensure that the practitioners in the field of restructuring, insolvency and second chance which are appointed by judicial or administrative authorities are properly trained and supervised in the carrying out of their tasks, that they are appointed in a transparent manner with due regard to the need to ensure efficient procedures and that they perform their tasks with integrity. Practitioners, with a view to the main objective of restoring the viability of the business. Practitioners should be rescuers not liquidators and they should also adhere to voluntarya codes of conduct aiming at ensurprofessional conduct with the aim of guaranteeing an appropriate level of qualification and training, and ensuring the transparency of the duties of such practitioners and the rules for determining their remuneration, the taking up of professional indemnity insurance cover and the establishment of oversight and regulatory mechanisms which should include an appropriate and effective regime for sanctioning those who have failed in their duties. Such standards may be attained without the need in principle to create new professions or qualifications.
Amendment 146 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
42. It is important to gather reliable data on the performance of restructuring, insolvency and discharge procedures in order to monitor the implementation and application of this Directive. Therefore Member States should intensify their efforts to collect and, aggregate data that isand supply this data to the Commission, whereby it should be sufficiently granular to enable an accurate assessment of how the Directive works in practice.
Amendment 147 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 44 a (new)
Recital 44 a (new)
44a. The Commission shall review the application of this Directive and shall present a report to the European Parliament and the Council, possibly accompanied by a proposal for new legislative acts to strengthen the legal framework on restructuring, insolvency, discharge and second chance procedures. The assessment should not focus solely on the material recovery rate but also on solvency and restoring viability. Particular attention should be paid to the impact on SMEs.
Amendment 155 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. This Directive does not apply to procedures which give rise to agreements binding only the signatory creditors or to those intended to implement them.
Amendment 160 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) 'insolvency procedure' means a collective insolvency procedure which entails a partial or total divestment of the debtor and the appointment of a liquidaton insolvency practitioner;
Amendment 163 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) ‘stay of individual enforcement actions' means a temporary suspension of the right to enforce a claim by a creditor against a debtoror group of creditors against a debtor or group of debtors, ordered by a judicial or administrative authority;
Amendment 175 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
(11) 'new financing' means any new funds, including the provision of credit, whether provided by an existing or a new creditor, that are necessary to implement a restructuring plan that are agreed upon in that restructuring plan and confirmed subsequently by a judicial or administrative authority;
Amendment 176 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12
(12) 'interim financing' means any funds, including the provision of credit, whether provided by an existing or new creditor, that is reasonably and immediately necessary for the debtor's business to continue operating or to survive, or to preserve or enhance the value of that business pending the confirmation of a restructuring plan;
Amendment 182 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point a a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point a a (new)
(aa) ‘repayment plan’ means a programme of payments of specified amounts on specified dates by a debtor to creditors as part of a restructuring plan;
Amendment 184 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point b a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point b a (new)
(ba) 'viable' means able to provide an appropriate projected return on capital after having covered all its costs, including depreciation and financial charges.
Amendment 188 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that debtors and entrepreneurs have access todevelop early warning tools which can detect a deteriorating business development and signal to the debtor or the entrepreneur, the entrepreneur and the employees’ representative or the employees themselves, where they have no representative, the need to act as a matter of urgency.
Amendment 200 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Preventive restructuring frameworks may consist of one or more procedures or measures. They do not affect in any way other existing procedures in the Member States which are based on a contractual agreement between creditors and the procedures to implement such an agreement.
Amendment 205 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Preventive restructuring frameworks shall be available on the application by debtors, or, if a Member State so decides, by creditors with the agreement of debtors.
Amendment 228 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that a stay of individual enforcement actions may beis ordered in respect of all types of creditors, including secured and preferential creditors. The stay may be general, covering all creditors, or limited, covering one or more individual creditors, opt for the possibility of the judicial or administrative authority not granting the provisional stay of individual enforcement actions or lifting accordance with national law stay of individual enforcement actions already granted in respect of that creditor or class of creditors, at the request of the creditors concerned.
Amendment 235 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall limit tThe duration of the stay of individual enforcement actions to a maximum period of no more thanshall be fixed by agreement between the parties directly involved at between two and six months, which may be extended four monthsan identical period.
Amendment 239 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
(ba) the obligation for the debtor to file for insolvency under national law arose during the period of the stay of individual enforcement actions.
Amendment 246 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 9
Article 6 – paragraph 9
Amendment 249 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 9
Article 6 – paragraph 9
9. Member States shall ensure that, where the judicial or administrative authority may determine that an individual creditor or a single class of creditors is or would be unfairly prejudiced by a stay of individual enforcement actions, and as a consequence the judicial or administrative authority may decide not to grant the stay of individual enforcement actions or may lift a stay of individual enforcement actions already granted in respect of that creditor or class of creditors, at the request of the creditors concerned.
Amendment 258 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that, during the stay period, creditors to which the stay applies may not withhold performance or terminate, accelerate or in any other way modify executory contracts to the detriment of the debtor forin respect of debts that came into existence prior to the stay. Member States may limit the application of this provision to essential contracts which are necessary for the continuation of the day-to-day operation of the business.
Amendment 262 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall ensure that nothing prevents the debtor from paying in the ordinary course of business claims of or owed to unaffected creditors and the claims of affected creditors that arise after the stay is granted and which continue to arise throughoutt any time during the period of the stay.
Amendment 264 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall require restructuring plans submitted forto be confirmationed by a judicial or administrative authority toand shall guarantee that plans are notified for assessment to employees’ representatives or to the debtors’ employees themselves, where they have no representative, for their opinion. Restructuring plans shall contain at least the following information:
Amendment 353 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. With regard to paragraph 1(a), the Commission shall provide guidelines for Member States to establish a set of criteria in order to define what constitutes dishonest action or bad faith in this context.
Amendment 370 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) the number of debtors who, after having undergone a procedure referred to in point (a)(iii), launched a new business;
Amendment 372 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g b (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g b (new)
(gb) the number of job losses, transfer of part or whole of the business, and impact of restructuring agreements on the employment situation;
Amendment 381 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
No later than [5 years from the date of start of application of implementing measures] and every 7 years thereafter, the Commission shall review the application of this Directive and shall present to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee a report on the application of this Directive, including on whether additional measureaccompanied, if possible, by a proposal for new legislative acts to consolidate and strengthen the legal framework on restructuring, insolvency and second chance should be considered. That review shall not focus solely on the material recovery rate but also on solvency and restoring viability. Particular attention shall be paid to the impact on SMEs.
Amendment 48 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Operators of retransmission services, that normally offer multiple programmes which use a multitude of which retransmit television or radio programmes including works andor other protected subject matter included in the retransmittedperform an act of communication to the public, whether the television andor radio programmes, have a very short time-frame for obtaining the necessary licences and hence also face a significant rights clearing burden. There is also a risk for right holders of having are retransmitted using the same technology as that used for the original broadcast or a different one and whetheir works and other protected subject matter exploited without authorisation or payment of remuneration not the retransmission is performed in the area of reception, actual or intended, of the original broadcast.
Amendment 53 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) To the extent that retransmission services that normally offer multiple programmes use a multitude of works and other protected subject matter included in the retransmitted television and radio programmes, they have the possibility, in the context of contractual freedom, of obtaining the necessary licences and thereby guaranteeing right holders equitable remuneration so that they can continue to offer a wide variety of content, also in the consumer's interest.
Amendment 92 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9a (new)
Recital 9a (new)
(9a) The country of origin principle provided for in Article 2 should not apply to ancillary online services which are primarily or solely targeted to a Member State other than that in which the broadcasting organisation has its principal establishment.Such a service, primarily or solely targeted at a particular Member State, is a service whose programme is clearly aimed at the population of a specific Member State other than that in which the broadcasting organisation has its principal place of establishment, whose audience is clearly limited to that population and for which it is unlikely that listeners or viewers will be found outside the State at which it is targeted. Aspects which make it possible to identify the target audience include in particular language, including the language used in subtitles, advertising, dubbing, the audience at which the promotion of the broadcasting service is aimed and/or the local character of the programming.
Amendment 119 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Operators of retransmission services offered on satellite, digital terrestrial, closed circuit IP-based, mobile and similar networks, provide services which are equivalent to those provided by operators of cable retransmission services when they retransmit simultaneously, in an unaltered and unabridged manner, for reception by the public, an initial transmission from another Member State of television or radio programmes, where this initial transmission is by wire or over the air, including by satellite but excluding online transmissions, and intended for reception by the public. They should therefore be within the scope of this Regulation and benefit from the mechanism introducing mandatory collective management of rights. Retransmission services which a, both offered offeren closed-circuit IP networks and on the open internet should be exincluded fromin the scope of this Regulation as those services have different characteristics. They are not linked to any particular infrastructure and their ability to ensure a controlled environment is limitewhere they are provided to a defined number of users (e.g. subscribers, registered users) and wthen compared for example to crefore comparable tor closed circuit IP-based networks.
Amendment 129 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In order to provide legal certainty to operators of retransmission services offered on satellite, digital terrestrial, closed circuit IP- based, mobile or similar networks, and to overcome disparities in national law regarding such retransmission services, rules similar to those that apply to cable retransmission as defined in Directive 93/83/EEC should apply. The rules established in that Directive include the obligation to exercise the right to grant or refuse authorisation to an operator of a retransmission service through a collective management organisation. This is without prejudice to Directive 2014/26/EU18 and in particular to its provisions concerning rights of right holders with regard to the choice of a collective management organisation. _________________ 18 Directive 2014/26/EU of the European ParliamentThe right of prohibition as such is maintained, and ofnly the Council of 26 February 2014 on collective management of copyright and related rights and multi- territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online use in the internal market, OJ L 84, 20.3.2014, p. 72–98way in which it is exercised is regulated to a certain extent. This also implies that it is always possible to decide whether or not to grant the right of retransmission.
Amendment 146 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) Broadcasters that transmit their programme carrying signals through a direct injection process to distributors (in accordance with the Bern Convention, these are third parties in relation to the broadcaster) for reception by the public should be jointly liable with their distributors for the single and indivisible acts of communication to the public and making available to the public, as defined in Article 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, which they carry out together. Such broadcasting organisations and such distributors should therefore obtain an authorisation from the right holders in question for their respective participation in such acts.
Amendment 168 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) This Regulation respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Whilst there may be an interference with the exercise of the rights of right holders insofar as mandatory collective management is required for the exercise of the right of communication to the public with regard to retransmission services, it is necessary to prescribe such a condition in a targeted manner for specific services and in order to allow more widespread cross- border dissemination of television and radio programmes by facilitating the clearance of these rights. It is possible to decide whether or not to grant this right, in view of contractual freedom. The possibility provided for the Member States to regulate the activities of collective management organisations does not impinge on the free contractual negotiation of rights provided for in this Regulation.
Amendment 185 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Since the objective of this Regulation, namely promoting the cross- border provision of ancillary online services and facilitating retransmissions of television and radio programmes originating in other Member States, cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale and effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve its objective. As concerns the cross-border provision of ancillary online services, this Regulation establishes enabling mechanisms to facilitate the clearance of copyright and related rights. This Regulation does not oblige broadcasting organisations to provide such services across borders. Neither does this Regulation oblige operators of retransmission services to include in their services television or radio programmes originating in other Member States. This Regulation concerns only the exercise of certain retransmission rights to the extent necessary to simplify the licensing of copyright and related rights for such services and only with regard to television and radio programmes originating in otherwith a view to providing such services in any Member States of the Union,.
Amendment 205 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) "retransmission" means any simultaneous, unaltered and unabridged retransmission, other than cable retransmission as defined in Directive 93/83/EEC and other than retransmission provided over an internet access service as defined in Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 of the European Parliament and of the Council19, intended for reception by the public of an initial transmission from another Member State, by wire or over the air, including that by satellite but excluding online transmission, of television or radio programmes intended for the reception by the public, provided that such retransmission is made by a party other than the broadcasting organisation which made the initial transmission or under whose control and responsibility such transmission was made. _________________ 19Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 laying down measures concerning open internet access and amending Directive 2002/22/EC on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services and Regulation (EU) No 531/2012 on roaming on public mobile communications networks within the Union, OJ L 310, 26.11.2015, p. 1, by wire or over the air, regardless of the technology or retransmission network used, provided that the retransmission takes place in a closed environment, of the initial broadcast of television or radio programmes intended for the reception by the public, provided that such retransmission is made by a party other than the broadcasting organisation which made the initial transmission or under whose control and responsibility such transmission was made.
Amendment 213 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) "Direct injection" means a two- or more step process by which broadcasting organisations transmit their programme- carrying signals for reception by the public to distributors (organisations other than the broadcasting organisation - see the Berne Convention) point to point via a private line – by wire or over the air, including by satellite – in such a way that the programme-carrying signals cannot be received by the general public during such transmission; the distributors then offer these programmes to the public simultaneously, in an unaltered and unabridged form, for viewing or listening on cable networks, microwave systems, digital terrestrial, IP-based and mobile networks or similar networks.
Amendment 222 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
(b b) 'Closed environment' means any environment in which a retransmission service provider provides only one retransmission service to consumers who, on a contractual basis, can access and use this service, and in which the retransmission service provider can guarantee full encryption of the television or radio programmes.
Amendment 231 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – title
Article 2 – title
Application of the principle of ‘country of origin’ to ancillary online services provided by, or under the supervision and responsibility of, a broadcasting organisation
Amendment 249 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(1 a) Paragraph 1 does not apply to online services which, taken as a whole, are directed mainly or solely at an audience in a Member State which is not the country in which the broadcasting organisation is based.
Amendment 250 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 b (new)
(1 b) Paragraph 1 applies only to the relaying and making available to the public of: - (i) works produced by a broadcasting organisation and which are not directly covered by a third-party license; - (ii) news and current affairs programmes
Amendment 252 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 c (new)
(1c) Paragraphs 1 and 1 (b) above do not affect contractual freedom in the context of copyright law and are without prejudice to the rights enshrined in Directive 2001/29/EC.Accordingly, copyright holders and rights users may agree, in particular, to limit the geographical area of rights affected by the country of origin principle, or may agree on a pan-European license for rights which are not affected by that principle.
Amendment 253 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 d (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 d (new)
(1d) Paragraph 1 shall not apply to an ancillary online service that is mainly targeted at a Member State other than the Member State in which the broadcasting organisation has its principal establishment.
Amendment 257 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
(2) When fixing the amount of the payment to be made for the rights subject to the country of origin principle as set out in paragraph 1, the parties shall take into account all aspects of the ancillary online service such as the features of the ancillary online service, the country of destination, the real and potential audience, and the language version.
Amendment 269 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a Applicable law to ancillary online services The acts of communication to the public occurring when providing an ancillary online service by or under the control and responsibility of a broadcasting organisation shall, for the purposes of exercising copyright and related rights relevant for these acts, be subject to the applicable law in the Member State in which the broadcasting organisation has its principal establishment.
Amendment 273 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – title
Article 3 – title
Exercise of the rights in retransmissionother than by cable by right holders other than broadcasting organisations
Amendment 277 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
(1) Holders of copyright and related rights other than broadcasting organisations may exercise their rights to grant or refuse the authorisation for a retransmission, other than by cable, only through a collective management organisation.
Amendment 278 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(1a) Where an author has transferred his or her right to retransmission to a broadcasting organisation or a producer, the author shall retain an unwaivable right to obtain from the retransmission operator or producer an equitable remuneration for the retransmission of his or her work.The administration of this right shall be entrusted to a collective management organisation representing authors.This provision shall not, however, rule out the conclusion of collective agreements and joint agreements between broadcasting organisations, producers' associations and other professional organisations concerning remuneration, provided that the author receives an equitable remuneration for the retransmission of his or her work;
Amendment 284 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Amendment 285 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
(3) Where more than one collective management organisation manages rights of that category for the territory of that Member State, the right holder shall be free to choose which of those collective management organisations is deemed to be mandated to manage his or her right. If in such a situation the right holder does not choose the collective management organisation, it shall be for the Member State for whose territory the operator of the retransmission service seeks to clear rights for a retransmission to indicate which of the collective management organisations is deemed to be mandated to manage the right of that right holder.
Amendment 296 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5
Article 3 – paragraph 5
(5) A Member State may provide that, where a right holder authorises the initial transmission within its territory of a work or other protected subject matter, the right holder shall be deemed to have agreed not to exercise his or her rights in retransmission, other than by cable, of an original broadcast from another Member State, on an individual basis but to exercise them in accordance with this Regulation.
Amendment 305 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3a Exploitation of broadcasting programmes through retransmission The retransmission by a broadcasting organisation of television or radio programmes which include works or other protected subject matter shall constitute an act of communication to the public, whether the retransmission service provider uses the same technology as that used for the original broadcast or a different one and whether or not the retransmission is performed in the area of reception, actual or intended, of the original broadcast.
Amendment 307 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – title
Article 4 – title
Exercise of the rights in retransmissionbyby broadcasting organisationsof the rights in retransmission, other than by cable, of an original broadcast ing organisations another Member State
Amendment 312 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a (new)
Amendment 30 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) The organisational and financial contribution of publishers in producing press publications needs to be recognised and further encouraged to ensure the sustainability of the publishing industry. It is therefore necessary to provide at Union level a harmonised legal protection for press publications in respect of digital uses. Such protection should be effectively guaranteed through the introduction, in Union law, of rights related to copyright for the reproduction and making available to the public of press publications in respect of digital uses.
Amendment 32 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
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.
Amendment 33 #
2016/0280(COD)
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 as well as the rights of distribution, rental and lending provided for in Directive 2006/115/EC. 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 96 #
2016/0280(COD)
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 digitaland Article 3 and 9 of Directive 2006/115/EC for the use of their press publications.
Amendment 98 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Search engines embrace a wide variety of services whose aim is in principle to enable the public to access resources disseminated over the Internet. However, the nature of the acts performed by these entities varies greatly from service to service. While text search engines supply a clickable hypertext link whose basic aim is to lead users to the reference online service, most search engines specialising in images directly display the works referenced in the search results, autonomously in relation to the online service from which they are derived. As the images can then be consulted in their original format and in high quality, these search engines therefore in terms of their functionalities more closely resemble image banks. Exploitation of graphic, plastic or photographic works therefore requires authorisation by the rightholders under Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC. In view of the very large number of images reproduced or communicated to the public by these search engines, it is desirable to leave it to the discretion of Member States to apply balanced solutions, with provision for equitable compensation.
Amendment 99 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) In accordance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, in Member States where commercial use of the freedom of panorama is not authorised, reproductions and representations by natural persons of works of architecture and sculptures permanently located in public places must always require the prior authorisation of the authors, their rightholders or collecting societies. Paragraph 37 of Parliament's resolution of 9 July 2015 on the implementation of Directive 2001/29/EC states that this field could benefit from more common rules, while remarking that differences may be justified to allow Member States to legislate according to their specific cultural and economic interests.
Amendment 101 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 b (new)
Recital 5 b (new)
(5b) The right of communication to the public and the right of making available to the public defined in Article 3 of the Directive, which implements the principles and rules laid down in Article 8 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty, to which the Union is a party, play a vital role in the information society. Union law should guarantee its effect and effectiveness in order to afford a high level of protection to rightholders.
Amendment 121 #
2016/0280(COD)
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. 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 andor legally accessible, for which in such instances no authorisation would be required.
Amendment 149 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) In the context of public-private partnerships, a private organisation should intervene only if it represents a structure with a non-commercial purpose and if it has legitimate access to the content.
Amendment 185 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21 a) Where user-generated content involves proportionate use of a quotation or of an extract of a protected work or other subject-matter for a legitimate purpose, such use should be protected by the exception provided in this Directive. This exception should only be applied in certain special cases which do not conflict with normal exploitation of the work or other subject-matter concerned and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rightholder. For the purpose of assessing such prejudice, the degree of originality of the user-generated content concerned, the length/extent of the quotation or extract used or the degree of economic harm should be examined, where relevant, while not precluding the legitimate enjoyment of the exception. This exception should be without prejudice to the moral rights of the authors of the work or other subject- matter concerned.
Amendment 213 #
2016/0280(COD)
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 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 for these cultural heritage institutions.
Amendment 227 #
2016/0280(COD)
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 of these protected works or other subject-matter are owned or permanently held by the cultural heritage institution, for example as a result of a transfer of ownership or licence agreementsf the work or other subject-matter or licence agreements, thereby enabling the file to be stored on the institution's server.
Amendment 234 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21a) Where content generated or made available by a user involves the short and proportionate use of a quotation or of an extract of a protected work or other subject-matter for a legitimate purpose, such use should be protected by the exception provided in this Directive. This exception should only be applied in certain special cases which do not conflict with normal exploitation of the work or other subject-matter concerned and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rightholder. For the purpose of assessing such prejudice, the degree of originality of the content concerned, the length/extent of the quotation or extract used, the professional nature of the content concerned or the degree of economic harm must be examined, where relevant, while not precluding the legitimate enjoyment of the exception. This exception should be without prejudice to the moral rights of the authors of the work or other subject- matter.
Amendment 235 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21a) Technological developments have given rise to information society services enabling their users to upload content and make it available in diverse forms and for various purposes, including to illustrate an idea, criticism, parody or pastiche. Such content may include short extracts of pre-existing protected works or other subject-matter that these users might have altered, combined or otherwise transformed.
Amendment 238 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 b (new)
Recital 21 b (new)
(21 b) Despite some overlapping with existing exceptions or limitations, any content that is uploaded or made available by a user that reasonably includes extracts of protected works or other subject-matter is not covered by Article 5 of Directive 2001/29/EC. A situation of this type creates legal uncertainty for both users and rightholders. It is therefore necessary to provide a new specific exception to permit the legitimate uses of extracts of pre-existing protected works or other subject-matter within content that is uploaded or made available by users.
Amendment 239 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 b (new)
Recital 21 b (new)
(21 b) Information society service providers cannot claim to be covered by the exception provided for in this directive, for the use of quotations or extracts from protected works or other subject-matter in content that is uploaded or made available by users, to relieve them of their responsibility or reduce the scope of their obligations according to the provisions of Article 13 of this directive.
Amendment 255 #
2016/0280(COD)
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 licencesto be used for out-of- commerce works to extend to the rights of rightholders that are not represented by the collective management organisation, in accordance to their legal traditions, practices or circumstances. Such mechanisms can include extended collective licensing and presumptions of representation. This directive should not anticipate any specific solutions developed in Member States to handle the mass digitisation of out-of-commerce works.
Amendment 284 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
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 publicationress agencies and publishers are facing problems in licensing the online use of their publications and recouping their investments. In the absence of recognition of publishers of press publicationThis is largely due to the fact that some news aggregators use press agencies' and publishers' content without purchasing a licence and without making suitable payment for the work provided. News aggregators are responsible for the content that they make publicly available. In the absence of recognition of press agencies and publishers as rightholders, licensing and enforcement in the digital environment isare often complex and inefficient.
Amendment 300 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) The organisational and financial contribution of press agencies and publishers in producing press publications needs to be recognised and further encouraged to ensure the sustainability of the publishing industry. It is therefore necessary to provide at Union level a harmonised legal protection for press publications in respect of digital uses. Such protection should be effectively guaranteed through the introduction, in Union law, of rights related to copyright for the reproduction and making available to the public of press publications in respect of digital and analogue uses.
Amendment 318 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
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 whichen such acts do not constitute communication to the public.
Amendment 322 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42 a (new)
Recital 42 a (new)
(42a) Member States should guarantee the right for authors and performers to get a fair, proportional and unwaivable right to remuneration for the making available, and the relevant reproduction acts, of their work on on-demand services. Such a right to fair remuneration should be administered according to national practices or legal requirements, without prejudice to the existing mechanisms, such as voluntary collective management agreements or extended collective licences.
Amendment 331 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) The rights granted to the publishers of press publications and press agencies 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. TheyArticles 2 and 3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC and Articles 3 and 9 of Directive 2006/115/EC, insofar as the use of press publications is concerned. Short extracts of copyrighted press publications constitute reproduction given their economic value. Their unauthorised use should therefore be prohibited unless they are being used in a private and non- commercial context. These rights 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. The protection afforded to press agencies and publishers by this Directive should include any content generated automatically by news aggregators.
Amendment 338 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34 a (new)
Recital 34 a (new)
(34 a) When extracts are re-used by an aggregator, it should be possible for the press agency or publisher to decide for specific reasons to award the aggregator a licence free of charge.
Amendment 347 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) The protection granted to publishers of press publications and press agencies 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 and press agencies 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 or press agencies, on the one side, and authors and other rightholders, on the other side.
Amendment 354 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Press agencies and publishers, including those of press publications, books orand scientific publications, often operate on the basis of the transfer of authors' rights by means of contractual agreements or statutory provisions. In this context, publishers make an investment with a view to the exploitation of the works contained in their publications and may in some instances be deprived of revenues where such works are used under exceptions or limitations such as the ones for private copying and reprography. In a number of Member States compensation for uses under those exceptions is shared between authors and publishers. In order to take account of this situation and improve legal certainty for all concerned parties, Member States should be allowed to determine that, when an author has transferred or licensed his rights to a publisher or press agency or otherwise contributes with his works to a publication and there are systems in place to compensate for the harm caused by an exception or limitation, publishers and press agencies are entitled to claim a share of such compensation, whereas the burden on the publisher to substantiate his claim should not exceed what is required under the system in place.
Amendment 358 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36 a (new)
Recital 36 a (new)
(36 a) The obligation to acquire licences should also apply to news aggregators.
Amendment 370 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37 a (new)
Recital 37 a (new)
(37 a) Despite the fact that more creative content is being consumed today than ever before, on services such as user- uploaded content platforms and content aggregation services, yielding significant profits, the creative sectors have not seen a comparable increase in revenues from this increase in consumption. The value of cultural and creative works has been diverted away from the authors, artists, producers and others rights holders, generating an unsustainable "value gap". This transfer of value, due to the lack of clarity regarding the status of these online services under copyright and e-commerce law, undermines the efficiency of the online market, distorts competition and drives down the overall value of cultural content online. It also limits consumer choice for new and innovative legitimate services in the European Digital Single Market and puts at risk cultural and creative industries that create significant jobs and growth for EU economy, as underlined by the European Parliament resolution of 13 December 2016 on a "coherent EU policy for cultural and creative industries (2016/2072(INI))"
Amendment 375 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37 a (new)
Recital 37 a (new)
(37 a) It should be clearly noted that the mechanism providing exemption from liability does not apply to services that play an active role in uploading copyrighted works or subject-matter. Accordingly, UUC services undertaking acts of communication to the public through their essential intervention in the act of communication to the public initiated by uploaders are not covered by Directive 2000/31/EC where copyright is concerned, and are therefore subject to the provisions of Directive 2001/29/EC in the same way as providers of online content services.
Amendment 376 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37 b (new)
Recital 37 b (new)
(37 b) Digital platforms are means of providing wider access to cultural and creative works and offer great opportunities for cultural and creative industries to develop new business models; consideration is to be made of how this process can function with more legal certainty and fairness and respect for right holders; importance of transparency and of ensuring a level playing field is necessary; in this regard, protection of right holders within the copyright and intellectual property framework is necessary in order to ensure recognition of values and stimulation of innovation, creativity, investment, to guarantee the success of a Digital Single Market, offering all diverse and quality cultural and creative works.
Amendment 379 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37 c (new)
Recital 37 c (new)
(37 c) This is why liability exemptions can only apply to genuinely neutral and passive online service providers, and not to services that play an active role in distributing, promoting and monetising content at the expense of creators.
Amendment 384 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Where information society service providers 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, they are obliged to 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 Council34 reproduction as well as an act of communication to the public, including the act of making content available, the process of which began with the uploading by their users of the copyrighted works and subject-matter, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholders who so request, covering rights of reproduction and communication to the public, 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. In respect of the liability exemption provided for in Article 14, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider plays an active role, including by optimising copyrighted uploaded content for the purpose of selection, categorisation or aggregation, or by promoting or recommending them, irrespective of the means used to that end. Where a service provider plays an active role it cannot be exempt from liability as provided for in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC. Unless they are acting in a professional capacity, the liability of service users for copyrighted acts is covered by the licensing contracts concluded by the rightholders with the service providers. _________________ 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 432 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 a (new)
Recital 38 a (new)
(38 a) In order to ensure the correct functioning of any licensing agreement, or to prevent unauthorised access to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by the users, information society service providers storing and disseminating this content and providing public access to it must take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure the protection of these copyrighted works and other subject- matter, for example by implementing effective technologies.
Amendment 433 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 b (new)
Recital 38 b (new)
(38 b) This obligation is also incumbent upon those information society service providers that can claim the liability exemption provided for in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC when they store or provide public access to a significant amount of copyrighted works and other subject-matter uploaded by their users. A service provider not taking appropriate action or not responding effectively to requests made by rightholders to enter into licensing agreements will not be able to claim the protection provided by Article 14 (1) of Directive 2000/31/EC.
Amendment 439 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) Collaboration between information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to large 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 shouldmust provide the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content and the services shouldmust 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. In cases when the measures and technologies established on the basis of this Directive affect the uploading of content that is covered by an exception or authorisation, service suppliers must be required to set up complaint and redress mechanisms for the benefit of the users whose content has been affected by these measures. Such mechanisms must maintain a balance between the need to ensure that content covered by exceptions to copyright or authorisations is not unduly affected by the measures, and the need to ensure that complaint and redress mechanisms do not unreasonably prejudice the effectiveness of the measures. To achieve this aim, the complaint and redress mechanisms must allow rightholders to receive adequate information to assess complaints and respond to them. The complaint and redress mechanisms must also allow a suitable period of time for rightholders to respond to complaints.
Amendment 454 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 a (new)
Recital 39 a (new)
(39 a) The technical measures established should make it possible, at the request of and in association with the rightholders, to recognise given target content. Their aim is not to impose a general obligation to check and run data searches on the content, and do not require the use of the personal data of the end user. These measures are therefore fully compatible with Article 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC and the European Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Amendment 456 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 b (new)
Recital 39 b (new)
(39 b) Member States should ensure that an intermediate mechanism exists enabling service providers and rightholders to find an amicable solution to any dispute arising from the terms of their cooperation agreements. To that end, Member States should appoint an impartial body with all the relevant competence and experience to assist the parties in the resolution of their dispute.
Amendment 457 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 c (new)
Recital 39 c (new)
(3 c) It should be recalled that, both in general and in the light of the references to Article 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC made in this directive, a copyrighted work and/or other subject-matter is communicated to the public and/or made available to the public when a natural or legal person affords access to it to persons outside their close and personal circle, defined as being their family or most immediate associates. For this purpose it makes no difference whether the latter can gain access to the copyrighted works and/or other subject-matter at the same place or in different places, and at the same time or at different times.
Amendment 459 #
2016/0280(COD)
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 be 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 or their successors in title is important for the transparency and balance in the system that governs the remuneration of authors and performers. The obligation to provide information must be transmitted with the rights and must therefore accompany the work however it is used and irrespective of who is using it or the location.
Amendment 466 #
2016/0280(COD)
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 requirementwill ensure that the representative organisations of all relevant stakeholders determine sector-specific requirements and establish standardised procedures and formats for presenting the information in each sector, promoting automated processing making use of digital technologies and international identifiers of works. 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.
Amendment 476 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Certain contracts for the exploitation of rights harmonised at Union level are of long duration, offering few possibilities for authors and performers to renegotiate them with their contractual counterparts or their successors in title. Therefore, without prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in Member States, there should by could institute a remuneration adjustment mechanism for cases where the remuneration originally agreed under a licence or a transfer of rights is disproportionately low compared to the relevant revenues and the benefits derived from the exploitation of the work or the fixation of the performance, including in light of the transparency ensured by this Directive. The assIt is essment of the situation should take account of the specific circumstances of each case as well as of the specificities and practices of the different content sectorsial that the contractual position of authors and performers be strengthened so that they can enjoy fair, non-assignable remuneration and so as to avoid power imbalances between the parties. Such a provision would apply only to the parties directly linked contractually. 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 or to terminate his or her contract.
Amendment 526 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2a (5) ‘lawful access’ means access to content obtained in accordance with the applicable legislation;
Amendment 527 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 b (new)
Article 2 b (new)
Article 2b (6) ‘automated image referencing service’ means any online service which reproduces or makes available to the public for indexing and referencing purposes graphic or art works or photographic works collected by automated means via a third-party online service;
Amendment 535 #
2016/0280(COD)
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, with the rightholders’ consent, text and data mining of works or other subject- matter to which they have lawful access for thenon-commercial purposes of scientific research.
Amendment 563 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Copies of content accessible for text and data mining (TDM) must be kept in a secure way. They may not be stored or preserved in any form beyond the end of the TDM project. Any copy preserved or stored for more than six months after the end of the project shall be considered an unlawful copy.
Amendment 577 #
2016/0280(COD)
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, to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved, provided that the use:
Amendment 584 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15a 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 for on-demand services, they retain the right to obtain additional fair remuneration for the direct exploitation of their work on these services, unless such remuneration is already guaranteed under their contract with the party to which they transferred or assigned their right. 2. The right to obtain fair remuneration guaranteed under paragraph 1 cannot be waived.
Amendment 588 #
2016/0280(COD)
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 or through a secure electronic network accessible only by the educational establishment's pupils or students and teaching staff, and lasts for the time required to illustrate the lesson;
Amendment 598 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) is confined to short extracts of written, printed or digital work, to works of which few copies were published or to individual articles from newspapers or periodicals which cannot be accessed individually and separately by those entitled to access them, and is accompanied by the indication of the source, including the author's name, unless this turns out to be impossible.
Amendment 601 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
The exception provided for paragraph 1 must allow the lesson to accessed by digital means both in the country in which the establishment providing it is situated and in that where the student is located;
Amendment 620 #
2016/0280(COD)
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 authorising the acts described in paragraph 1 for educational establishments.
Amendment 640 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Member States may provide for fair compensation for the harm incurred by the rightholders due to the use of their works or other subject-matter pursuant to paragraph 1. Article 5 Preservation of cultural heritage 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, designated as such by their Member States to make copies of any works or other subject-matter that are permanently in their collections, in any format or medium, on condition that it is not feasible to acquire copies of them, for the sole purpose of the preservation of such works or other subject-matter and to the extent necessary for such preservation.
Amendment 648 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Works permanently in a collection are those works which are the property of the cultural heritage institution, and not works held under licence and accessible via a third-party server.
Amendment 653 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Automated image-referencing services may also fall within the scope of this exception for the purpose of the preservation of such works or subject- matter and to the extent necessary for such preservation.
Amendment 658 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5a Use of extracts from pre-existing works and other subject-matter in content uploaded or made available by users (1) Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, point (a) of Article 5 and Article 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, and point (a) of Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC in order to allow for the use of extracts from pre- existing works and other subject-matter in content uploaded or made available by users, other than in the course of their work, for purposes such as criticism, review, illustration, caricature, parody or pastiche, provided that the extracts: (a) relate to works or other subject-matter that have been lawfully made available to the public; (b) are accompanied by the indication of the source, including the author’s name, unless this turns out to be impossible; and (c) are used in accordance with fair practice and in a manner that does not extend beyond the specific purpose for which they are being used. (2) Any contractual provision contrary to the exception provided for in this Article shall be unenforceable. (3) This exception shall be without prejudice to the provisions of Article 13 of this Directive.
Amendment 672 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Accessing content covered by an exception provided for in this Directive shall not confer on users any entitlement to use it pursuant to another exception. 2. Article 5(5) and the first, third, fourth and fifth subparagraphs of Article 6(4) of Directive 2001/29/EC shall apply to the exceptions and the limitation provided for under this Title.
Amendment 723 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that where parties wishing to conclude an agreement for the purpose of making available audiovisual works on video-on-demand platforms face difficulties relating to the licensing of rights, they may rely on the assistance of an impartial body with relevant experience. That body shall provide assistance with negotiation and help reach agreements. This paragraph shall not apply to the licensing of copyrighted works and subject matter by the organisations referred to in Articles 3(a) et 2(3) of Directive 2014/26/EC.
Amendment 729 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10a Member States shall require producers and the transferees of the rights to make every effort to ensure continuous exploitation of European audiovisual works, for example by making such works available to the public on video-on- demand platforms. Member States shall take appropriate measures to ensure compliance with the provisions of paragraph 1, for example by encouraging the conclusion of professional agreements between organisations representing authors, on the one hand, and producers and other stakeholders, on the other, as well as video-on-demand platforms, so as to ensure the continuous exploitation of audiovisual works.
Amendment 730 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 b (new)
Article 10 b (new)
Article 10b These provisions shall be without prejudice to the application of the rules relating to media chronology, the freedom of a producer or distributor to accord exclusive rights to the exploitation of the audiovisual works in question and the freedom of a broadcaster or on-demand video platform to acquire and distribute or make available on demand the works of its choice, in line with its editorial freedom and responsibility.
Amendment 737 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – title
Article 11 – title
Protection of press publications concerning digital uses
Amendment 753 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide publishers of press publications and press agencies 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.
Amendment 775 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. Articles 5 to 8 of Directive 2001/29/EC and Directive 2012/28/EU shall apply mutatis mutandis in respect of the rights referred to in paragraph 1News aggregators shall use press agencies' and publishers' content and shall be responsible for the content that they make publicly available.
Amendment 776 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Publishers and news agencies must also be safeguarded, by licensing arrangements for example, when it comes to the mass exploitation of their content, particularly with regard to content aggregators or rightholders.
Amendment 794 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Member States may provide for an exception or limitation to the rights referred to in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC so that works can be made available to the public by means of automated image referencing, provided that rightholders are compensated fairly.
Amendment 795 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Chapter 3 a (new)
Chapter 3 a (new)
Chapter 3 a Protection of sport event organizers Member States shall provide sport event organizers with the rights provided for in Article 2 and Article 3 (2) of Directive 2001/29/EC and Article 7 of Directive 2006/115/EC.
Amendment 805 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – title
Article 13 – title
Use of protected content by information society service providers storing and giving access to large amounts of works and otheworks or subject-matter uploaded by their users
Amendment 808 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. IWhere information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts ofoffer or make accessible to the public copyrighted works or subject- matter made available by their users, they shall conclude with rightholders so requesting licensing agreements for rights of reproduction and communication with public, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided for in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC . Under the terms of the licensing agreements, these service providers shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the proper functioning of agreements licensing the use of their works or other subject-matter. An information society service provider who fails to put in place technical measures quickly and efficiently to respond to requests from rightholders under this Article shall not benefit from the protection provided for in Article 14 (1) of Directive 2000/31/EC. Unless they are acting in a professional capacity, the liability of service users for copyright acts is covered by the licensing contracts concluded with the service providers. Information society service providers playing an active part but not required by rightholders to conclude a licensing agreement for works or other subject- matter uploaded by their usersstored by them and to which they provide public access shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders in cooperation with the service providers. Information society service providers eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC that nevertheless store and make available to the public a significant quantity of copyrighted works or other subject-matter shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the proper 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, for their part, shall provide information society service providers with the necessary details to ensure the proper functioning of measures taken by the service providers.
Amendment 840 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
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, for example regarding content uploaded by users and withdrawn by service providers for no valid reason. The rightholders concerned must deal with the complaint within a reasonable period and provide adequate justification for the rights claimed by them.
Amendment 849 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Regarding disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 1, for example as regards the application of a possible exception or authorisation for use for the content concerned, such mechanisms may not unduly detract from the effectiveness of the measures referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 860 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall facilitate, where appropriate, the cooperation between the information society service providers and rightholders through stakeholder dialogues to define best practices, such as appropriate and proportionate content recognition technologies, taking into account, among others, the nature of the services, the availability of the technologies and their effectiveness in light of technological developments. The Commission shall encourage the exchange of best practices across the European Union.
Amendment 873 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13a Member States shall provide that disputes between successors in title and information society services regarding the application of Article 13(1) may be subject to an alternative dispute resolution system. Member States shall establish or designate an impartial body with the necessary expertise, with the aim of helping the parties to settle their disputes under this system. The Member States shall inform the Commission of the establishment of this body no later than (date mentioned in Article 21(1)).
Amendment 876 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Chapter 4 a (new)
Chapter 4 a (new)
CHAPTER 2a PROTECTION OF AUDIOVISUAL AUTHORS FOR THE MAKING AVAILABLE OF THEIR WORKS Article -14 1. Member States shall provide that when an audiovisual author or performer has transferred his/her making available to the public right to a producer, that author or performer shall retain the right to obtain equitable remuneration that is proportionate to the revenues generated by the exploitation of the work, provided that these measures are not included in the initial contract. 2. That right to equitable and proportional remuneration shall be non-transferable and may not be waived.
Amendment 933 #
2016/0280(COD)
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, appropriate 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 or unexpected compared to the subsequent relevant revenues and benefits derived from the exploitation of the works or performances, provided that these measures are not included in the initial contract. Member States may provide that this right expires if it is not exercised within a reasonable period from the act of exploitation in question.
Amendment 992 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Directive 2001/29/EC
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – point g a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – point g a (new)
2a. In Article 12(4) the following point is added: "(ga) to add publishers and press agencies to the list of beneficiaries of related rights listed in Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC as regards the reproduction right."
Amendment 30 #
2016/0190(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) To this end, the Union is to adopt, among others, measures in the field of judicial cooperation in civil matters having cross-border implications, particularly when necessary for the free movement of persons and for the proper functioning of the internal market.
Amendment 34 #
2016/0190(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) Within the meaning of Article 11 of this Regulation, jurisdiction rules are also applicable to all children who are present on Union territory and whose habitual residence cannot be established with certainty. The scope thereof extends in particular to refugee children and children who have been internationally displaced either for socioeconomic reasons or because of disturbances occurring in their country.
Amendment 49 #
2016/0190(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In exceptional cases, the authorities of the Member State of habitual residence of the child may not be the most appropriate authorities to deal with the case. In the best interests of the child, aAs an exception and under certain conditions, the authority having jurisdiction may transfer its jurisdiction in connection with a specific case to an authority of another Member State if this authority is better placed to hear the case. However, in this case the second authority should not be allowed to transfer jurisdiction to a third authority . Prior to any transfer of competence, the best interests of the child must be considered and fully taken into account.
Amendment 63 #
2016/0190(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) In all cases concerning children, and in particular in cases of international child abduction, before or after referral to judicial and administrative authorities should consider the possibility of achieving amicable solutions through mediation and other appropriate means, the parties should have recourse in a timely manner, if possible, to mediation and other appropriate means in order to achieve an amicable and prompt solution, assisted, where appropriate, by existing networks and support structures for mediation in cross-border parental responsibility disputes. Such efforts should not, however, unduly prolong the return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Convention.
Amendment 67 #
2016/0190(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) In addition, the aim of making cross-border facilitigation concerning children less time consuming ng the free movement of Europeand costlyitizens justifies the abolition of the declaration of enforceability prior to enforcement in the Member State of enforcement for all decisions on parental responsibility matters. That will, in particular, make cross-border litigation concerning children less time consuming and costly. While Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 only abolished this requirement for decisions granting access and certain decisions ordering the return of a child, this Regulation now provides for a single procedure for the cross-border enforcement of all decisions in matters of parental responsibility. As a result, subject to the provisions of this Regulation, a decision given by the authorities of a Member State should be treated as if it had been given in the Member State of enforcement.
Amendment 73 #
2016/0190(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)
Recital 37 a (new)
(37a) Any refusal to recognise a decision as defined in this Regulation on the ground that recognition would be manifestly contrary to the public policy of the Member State concerned must be in accordance with Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Amendment 91 #
2016/0190(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) Any long-term placement of a child abroad should be in accordance with Article 24(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (right to maintain personal contact with parents) and with the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, notably Articles 8, 9 and 20. In particular, when considering solutions, due regard should be paid to the possibility of placing siblings in the same host family or in the same establishment, to the desirability of continuity in a child's upbringing and to the child's ethnic, religious, cultural and linguistic background.
Amendment 127 #
2016/0190(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
When exercising their jurisdiction under Section 2 of this Chapter, the authorities of the Member States shall ensure that a child who is capable of forming his or her own views is given the genuine and effective opportunity to express those views freely during the proceedingscan actually and effectively express those views during the proceedings. The child must be in a position to express himself or herself, free of all pressure, in particular parental pressure, if necessary solely before the authorities in charge of the case.
Amendment 140 #
2016/0190(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. As early as possible during the proceedings, the court shall examine whether the parties are willing to engage in mediation to find, in the best interests of the child, an agreed solution, provided that this does not unduly delay the proceedings. The court, if it regards mediation as appropriate, shall invite the parties to have recourse thereto.
Amendment 163 #
2016/0190(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) if such recognition is manifestly contrary to the public policy of the Member State in which recognition is sought, though refusal may not result in any form of discrimination prohibited by Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; or
Amendment 180 #
2016/0190(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 64 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. An authority of a Member State may request the Central Authority of another Member State to provide information on the national law of that Member State with regard to issues that fall within the scope of this Regulation and are relevant for the examination of a case under this Regulation. The authority of the Member State to which a request is submitted shall respond as soon as possible.
Amendment 47 #
2016/0152(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Considering that some regulatory and administrative barriers for traders have been removed across the Union in certain services sectors as a result of the implementation of Directive 2006/123/EC, in terms of material scope, consistency should be ensured between this Regulation and Directive 2006/123/EC. As a consequence, the provisions of this Regulation should apply inter alia to non- audio-visual electronically supplied services, the main feature of which is the provision of access to and use of copyright protected works or other protected subject matter, subject however to the specific exclusion provided for in Article 4 and the subsequent evaluation of that exclusion as provided for in Article 9. Audiovisual media services are as much cultural services as they are economic services. Such services ensure cultural diversity, education and media pluralism. They are vectors of knowledge. Their essential role in our democracies justifies the application of specific rules. Audio-visual media services, including services the main feature of which is the provision of access to broadcasts of sports events and which are provided on the basis of exclusive territorial licenses, are excluded from the scope of this Regulation. Access to retail financial services, including payment services, should therefore also be excluded, notwithstanding the provisions of this Regulation regarding non-discrimination in payments.
Amendment 133 #
2016/0152(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) This Regulation should be regularly evaluated, with a view to proposing amendments where necessary. The first evaluation shcould concentrate on an analysis of situations in which differences in treatment cannot be justified under Directive 2006/123/EC, in particular, on the possible extension of the prohibition of Article 4(1)(b) to electronically supplied services, the main feature of which is the provision of access to and use of copyright protected works or other protected subject matter, provided that the trader has the requisite rights for the relevant territories.
Amendment 158 #
2016/0152(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. This Regulation does not apply where the trader provides electronically supplied services, the main feature of which is the provision of access to and use of copyright protected works or other protected subject matter,
Amendment 159 #
2016/0152(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. This Regulation does not affect copyright rules or related rights, in particular the rules set out under Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council1a. _________________ 1aDirective 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1).
Amendment 189 #
2016/0152(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) where the trader provides electronically supplied services, other than services the main feature of which is the provision of access to and use of copyright protected works or other protected subject matter;
Amendment 227 #
2016/0152(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Amendment 29 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Establishing jurisdiction requires an assessment of factual situations against the criteria laid down in Directive 2010/13/EU. The assessment of such factual situations might lead to conflicting results. In the application of the cooperation procedures provided for in Articles 3 and 4 of Directive 2010/13/EU, it is important that the Commission can base its findings on reliable facts. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA) should therefore be empowered to provide non-binding opinions on jurisdiction upon the Commission's request as it is composed of national independent regulatory authorities in the field of audiovisual media services.
Amendment 41 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) The right of persons with an impairment and of the elderly to participate and be integrated in the social and cultural life of the Union is linked to the provision of accessible audiovisual media services. Therefore, Member States should take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure that media service providers under their jurisdiction actively seek to make content accessible to those with a visual or hearing disability by 2027. The accessibility requirements should be met through a progressive and continuous process, while taking into account the practical and unavoidable constraints that could prevent complete accessibility, such as programmes or events broadcast in real time. Appropriate accessibility measures could be developed through self-regulation and co-regulation
Amendment 83 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32 a (new)
Recital 32 a (new)
(32a) This Directive, in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in particular Article 11 thereof, aims at enshrining the independence of audiovisual media regulators into Union law by ensuring that such regulators are legally distinct and functionally independent from the industry and government, in that they neither seek nor take instructions from the industry or from any government, operate in a transparent and accountable manner as set out in law, and have sufficient powers.
Amendment 87 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35 a (new)
Recital 35 a (new)
(35a) This Directive formalises the role of ERGA as an independent, expert advisor to the Commission, and as a forum for the exchange of experiences and best practices between the national regulators. ERGA is entrusted with a specific advisory role with regard to issues of jurisdiction and the issuing of opinions on Union codes of conduct based on co- regulation.
Amendment 91 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) ERGA has made a positive contribution towards consistent regulatory practice and has provided high level and independent advice to the Commission on implementation matters. This calls for the formal recognition and reinforcement of its role in this Directive. The group should therefore be re-established by virtue of this Directive.
Amendment 93 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) The Commission should be free to consult ERGA on any matter relating to audiovisual media services and video- sharing platforms. ERGA should assist the Commission by providing its expertise and advice and by facilitating exchange of best practices. In particular, the Commission should consult ERGA in the application of Directive 2010/13/EU with a view to facilitating its convergent implementation across the Digital Single Market. Upon the Commission's request, ERGA should provide opinions, including on jurisdiction and Union rules and codes of conduct in the area of protection of minors and hate speech as well as audiovisual commercial communications for foods high in fat, salt/sodium and sugars.
Amendment 96 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) This Directive is without prejudice to the ability of Member States to impose obligations to ensuretake measures to ensure non-discriminatory discoverability and accessibility of to content of general interest under defined general interest objectives such as media pluralism, freedom of speech and cultural diversity. Such obligations should only be imposed where they are necessary toproportionate and meet general interest objectives clearly defined by Member States in conformity with Union law. Such obligations should, moreover, only be imposed when there is a threat to the diversity of opinion. In this respect, Member States should in particular examine the need for regulatory intervention against the results of the outcome of market forces. Where Member States decide to imposntroduce discoverability rules, they should only impostake proportionate obligations onmeasures with regard to undertakings, in the interest of legitimate public policy considerations.
Amendment 105 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The last substantive amendment to Directive 89/552/EEC of the Council27 , later codified by Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council28 , was made in 2007 with the adoption of Directive 2007/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council29 . Since then, the market of audiovisual media services has evolved significantly and rapidly. Technical developments allow for new types of services and user experiences. The viewing habits, particularly of younger generations, have changed significantly. While the main TV screen remains an important device to share audiovisual experiences, many viewers have moved to other, portable devices to watch audiovisual content. Traditional TV content accounts still for a major share of the average daily viewing time. However, new types of content, such as short videos or user-generated content, gain increasing importance and new players, including providers of video-on- demand services, social media and video- sharing platforms, are now well- established. __________________ 27 Directive 89/552/EEC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 October 1989 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (OJ L 298, 17.10.1989, p. 23). 28 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1). 29 Directive 2007/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2007 amending Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities (OJ L 332, 18.12.2007, p. 27).
Amendment 112 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Directive 2010/13/EU should remain applicable only to those services the principal purpose of which is the provision of programmes in order to inform, entertain or educate. The principal purpose requirement should be also considered to be met if the service has audiovisual content and form which is dissociable from the main activity of the service provider, such as stand-alone parts of online newspapers featuring audiovisual programmes or user- generated videos where those parts can be considered dissociwhen a video subsection of a media service is independent from the rest of the service and not indissociably complementary4a . As social media services represent an important access point to information for consumers and rely increasingly on audiovisual content generated or made available fromby their main activity. Social media serviusers, it is neces sare noty to included, except if they provide a service that falls under the definition of them within this Directive when their services meet the criterias defining a video- sharing platform. A service should be considered to be merely an indissociable complement to the main activity as a result of the links between the audiovisual offer and the main activity. As such, channels or any other audiovisual services under the editorial responsibility of a provider may constitute audiovisual media services in themselves, even if they are offered in the framework of a video-sharing platform which is characterised by the absence of editorial responsibility. In such cases, it will be up to the providers with editorial responsibility to abide by the provisions of this Directive. __________________ 4aJudgment of the Court of Justice of 21 October 2015, New Media Online GmbH v Bundeskommunikationssenat, C-347/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:709.
Amendment 112 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3 – point b
Article 1 – point 3 – point b
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 5 b a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 5 b a (new)
ba. The following paragraph is inserted: 5ba. The Commission shall decide on which Member State has jurisdiction within one month following the notification referred to in paragraph 5b or the opinion provided by ERGA.
Amendment 116 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5 – point a
Article 1 – point 5 – point a
1a. Member States shall inform European Commission, regulatory authorities of other Member States and ERGA about more detailed or stricter rules adopted in accordance with paragraph 1.
Amendment 127 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 10
Article 1 – point 10
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 7
Article 7
(10) Article 7 is deleted; replaced by the following: Article 7 1. Member States shall ensure that media service providers under their jurisdiction make their services progressively accessible to people with a visual or hearing disability aiming for complete accessibility by the end of 2027. 2. With regard to the implementation of this Article, Member States shall encourage self-regulatory and co- regulatory codes of conduct. The Commission and ERGA shall encourage media service providers to exchange best practices across the Union. 3. By ... [three years after the entry into force of this Directive], and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the European Economic and Social Committee a report on the application of this Article.';
Amendment 141 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In order to empower viewers, including parents and minors, in making informed decisions about the content to be watched, it is necessary that audiovisual media service providers provide sufficient information about content that may impair minors' physical, mental or moral development. This cshould be done, for instance, through a system of content descriptors indicating the nature of the content. Content descriptors could be delivered through written, graphical or acoustic means.
Amendment 141 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 11 a (new)
Article 1 – point 11 a (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a (new)
(11a) The following article is inserted : Article 9a Member States remain free to take appropriate measures ensuring the non- discriminatory appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest. Such measures shall be proportionate and meet general objectives such as media pluralism, freedom of speech, and cultural diversity clearly defined by Member States in accordance with Union law. Such obligations should only be imposed where they are necessary to meet general interest objectives clearly defined by Member States in conformity with Union law. In this respect, Member States should, in particular, examine the need for regulatory intervention against the results of the outcome of market forces. Where Member States decide to impose discoverability rules, they should only impose proportionate obligations on undertakings, in the interest of legitimate public policy considerations.'
Amendment 142 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) The right of persons with an impairment and of the elderly to participate and be integrated in the social and cultural life of the Union is linked to the provision of accessible audiovisual media services. Therefore Member States should take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure that media service providers under their jurisdiction actively seek to make content accessible to those with visual or hearing disability by 2027. The accessibility requirements should be met through a progressive and continuous process, while taking into account the practical and unavoidable constraints that could prevent a complete accessibility, such as programmes or events broadcasted in real time. Appropriate accessibility measures could be developed through self-regulation and co-regulation
Amendment 168 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
Amendment 180 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Sponsorship represents an important means of financing audiovisual media services, video-sharing platforms, user-generated videos or programmes while promoting a legal or physical person's name, trade mark, image, activities or products. As such, for sponsorship to constitute a valuable form of advertising technique for advertisers, users generating videos, video-sharing platforms providers and audiovisual media service providers, sponsorship announcements can contain promotional references to the goods or services of the sponsor, while not directly encouraging the purchase of the goods and services. Sponsorship announcements should continue to clearly inform the viewers of the existence of a sponsorship agreement. The content of sponsored programmes should not be influenced in such a way as to affect the audiovisual media service provider's editorial independence.
Amendment 186 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The liberalisation of product placement has not brought about the expected take-up of this form of audiovisual commercial communication. In particular, the general prohibition of product placement with some exceptions has not created legal certainty for audiovisual media service providers. Product placement should thus be allowed in all audiovisual media services and video-sharing platforms, subject to exceptions.
Amendment 187 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Product placement should not be admissible in news and current affairs programmes, consumer affairs programmes, religious programmes and children programmes with a significanand content aimed at children’s audience. In particular, evidence shows that product placement and embedded advertisements can affect children’s behaviour as children are often not able to recognise the commercial content. There is thus a need to continue to prohibit product placement in programmes with a significanand content aimed at children’s audience. Consumer affairs programmes are programmes offering advice to viewers, or including reviews on the purchase of products and services. Allowing product placement in such programmes would blur the distinction between advertising and editorial content for viewers who may expect a genuine and honest review of products or services in such programmes. The provision of goods or services free of charge, such as samples, production props or prizes, should only be considered to be product placement if the goods or services involved are of significant commercial value.
Amendment 197 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall designate one or more independent national regulatory authorities. Member States shall ensure that they are legally distinct and functionally independent ofrom governments or any other public or private body. This shall be without prejudice to the possibility for Member States to set up regulators having oversight over different sectors.
Amendment 199 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) AsEven though the increase in the number of new services has led to a greater choice for viewers, broadcasters are given greater flexibility with regard to the insertion ofit remains necessary to keep protecting the integrity of programmes and consumers from disproportionally frequent advertising and teleshopping spots w. There this does not unduly impair the integrity of programme. Yetfore, in order to safeguard the specific character of the European television landscape, interruptions for cinematographic works and films made for television as well as for some categories of programmes that still need specific protection should remain limited and not be subject to further flexibility.
Amendment 200 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18 a (new)
Recital 18 a (new)
(18a) Isolated advertising and teleshopping spots significantly disrupt television viewing, disproportionally affect the integrity of programmes and raise legitimate concerns with regard to their impact on consumers, particularly children, as they give undue prominence to a particular product or service. This Directive should therefore not allow isolated advertising and teleshopping spots, without any exception.
Amendment 201 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 30 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall ensure that the nomination process of the Head of a national regulatory authority or the members of the collegiate body fulfilling that function within a national regulatory authority is transparent and guarantees the requisite degree of independence for the fulfilment of its functions.
Amendment 204 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that national regulatory authorities exercise their powers impartially and transparently and in accordance with the objectives of this Directive, in particular media pluralism, non-discrimination, cultural diversity, consumer protection, internal market and the promotion of fair competition.
Amendment 206 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
National regulatory authorities shall not seek or take instructions from any other body, public or private, in relation to the exercise of the tasks assigned to them under national law implementing Union law. This shall not prevent supervision in accordance with national constitutional law.
Amendment 208 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
Amendment 212 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 30 – paragraph 5
Article 30 – paragraph 5
5. The Head of a national regulatory authority or the members of the collegiate body fulfilling that function within a national regulatory authority, may be dismissed only if they no longer fulfil the conditions required for the performance of their duties which are laid down in advance in national law. A duly justified dismissal decision shall be made public and a statement of reasons shall be made available to the public.
Amendment 216 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 30 – paragraph 6
Article 30 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall ensure that independent national regulatory authorities have separate annual budgets. The budgets shall be made public. Member States shall also ensure that national regulatory authorities have adequate financial and human resources to enable them to carry out the task assigned to them and to actively participate in and contribute to ERGAeffectively to the tasks carried out by ERGA under this Directive.
Amendment 224 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
Amendment 226 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Providers of on-demand audiovisual media services should promote the production and distribution of European works by ensuring that their catalogues contain a minimum share of European works and that those are given enough prominence. The quality of the European works acquired should be equivalent to the rest of the catalogue, in order to guarantee a fair representation of the European production, cultural diversity and know-how. The prominence obligation should allow users of the service to easily discover and find European works through, for example, a dedicated presence on the homepage, targeted recommendations or dedicated categories.
Amendment 250 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) In order to ensure that obligations on promotion of European works do not undermine market development and to allow for the entry of new players in the market, companies with no significant presence on the market should not be subject to such requirements. This is in particular the case for companies with a low turnover and low audiences as regards to the targeted market and small and micro enterprises as defined in Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC33 . It could also be inappropriate to impose such requirements in cases where – given the nature or theme of the on-demand audiovisual media services or the competition with equivalent European works – they would be impracticable or unjustified. __________________ 33 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment 262 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) There are new challenges, in particular in connection with video-sharing platforms and social media, on which users - particularly minors - increasingly consume audiovisual content. In this context, harmful content and hate speech storedavailable on video-sharing platforms have increasingly given rise to concern. It is necessary, in order to protect minors from harmful content and all citizens from content containing incitement to violence or, hatred or terrorism, to set out proportionate rules on those matters.
Amendment 275 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) An important share of the content stored on video-sharing or social media platforms is not under the editorial responsibility of the video-sharing platform provider. However, those providers typically determine the organisation of the content, namely programmes or user-generated videos, including by automatic means or algorithms. Therefore, those providers should be required to take appropriate measures to protect minors from content that may impair their physical, mental or moral development and protect all citizens from incitement to terrorism or from incitement to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to sex, race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin.
Amendment 296 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) It is appropriate to involve the video-sharing platform providers as much as possible when implementing the appropriate measures to be taken pursuant to this Directive. Co-regulation should therefore be encouraged. With a view to ensuring a clear and consistent approach in this regard across the Union, Member States should not be entitled to require video-sharing platform providers to take stricter measures to protect minors from harmful content and all citizens from content containing incitement to violence or hatred than the ones provided for in this Directive, under the monitoring of the competent national regulatory bodies. However, it should remain possible for Member States to take suchrequire stricter measures where that content is illegal, provided that they comply with Articles 14 and 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC, and to take measures with respect to content on websites containing or disseminating child pornography, as required by and allowed under Article 25 of Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and the Council35 . It should also remain possible for video-sharing platform providers to take stricter measures on a voluntary basis in accordance with Union law and communicative freedoms. Video-sharing platforms should also properly inform users having generated the content affected by such measures on the reasons justifying those measures and provide effective ways to contest them. __________________ 35 Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (OJ L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1).
Amendment 304 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) When taking the appropriate measures to protect minors from harmful content and to protect all citizens from content containing incitement to terrorism, violence or hatred in accordance with this Directive, the applicable fundamental rights, as laid down in the Charter on Fundamental Rights of the European Union, should be carefully balanced. That concerns in particular, as the case may be, the right to respect for private and family life and the protection of personal data, the freedom of expression and information, the freedom to conduct a business, the prohibition of discrimination and the right of the child.
Amendment 307 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) The video-sharing platform providers covered by this Directive provide information society services within the meaning of point (a) of Article 2 of Directive 2000/31/EC. Those providers are consequently subject to the rules on the internal market set out in Article 3 of that Directive, if they are established in a Member State. It is appropriate to ensure that the same rules apply to video-sharing platform providers which are not established in a Member State with a view to safeguarding the effectiveness of the measures to protect minors and citizens set out in this Directive and ensuring a level playing field in as much as possible, in as far as those providers have either a parent company or a subsidiary which is established in a Member State or where those providers are part of a group and another entity of that group is established in a Member State. To that effect, arrangements should be made to determine in which Member State those providers should be deemed to have been established. Given the wide audience of video-sharing platforms and social media, it is appropriate that the Member State having jurisdiction over such a platform coordinate with the other Member States concerned for the regulation of those platforms. The Commission should be informed of the providers under each Member State's jurisdiction in application of the rules on establishment set out in this Directive and in Directive 2000/31/EC.
Amendment 332 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) This Directive is without prejudice to the ability of Member States to impose obligations to ensure non-discriminatory discoverability and accessibility of to content of general interest under defined general interest objectives such as media pluralism, freedom of speech and cultural diversity. Such obligations should only be imposed where they are necessary to meet general interest objectives clearly defined by Member States in conformity with Union law. Such obligations should moreover only be imposed when there is a threat to the diversity of opinion. In this respect, Member States should in particular examine the need for regulatory intervention against the results of the outcome of market forces. Where Member States decide to impose discoverability rules, they should only impose proportionate obligations on undertakings, in the interest of legitimate public policy considerations.
Amendment 352 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i
(i) a service as defined by Articles 56 and 57 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, where the principal purpose of the service or a dissociable section thereof is devoted to providingis the provision of programmes, under the editorial responsibility of a media service provider, in order to inform, entertain or educate, to the general public by electronic communications networks within the meaning of point (a) of Article 2 of Directive 2002/21/EC. Such an audiovisual media service is either a television broadcast as defined in point (e) of this paragraph or an on-demand audiovisual media service as defined in point (g) of this paragraph;;
Amendment 362 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a a – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a a – point i
(i) the service consists of the storage or allows the making available of a large amount of programmes or user- generated videos, for which the video- sharing platform provider does not have editorial responsibility;
Amendment 371 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article – paragraph 1 – point a a – point ii
Article – paragraph 1 – point a a – point ii
(ii) the organisation of the stored content is determined by the provider of the service including by automatic means or algorithms, in particular by hosting, displaying, tagging and sequencing;
Amendment 388 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point d
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a
(ba) 'user-generated video' means a set of moving images with or without sound constituting an individual item that is created and/or uploaded to a video-sharing platform by one or more users;
Amendment 411 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Chapter II – Article –2 (new)
Chapter II – Article –2 (new)
Amendment 415 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 b (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Chapter II – Article –2 a (new)
Chapter II – Article –2 a (new)
(2b) The following article is inserted: 'Article -2a 1. Member States shall ensure that audiovisual commercial communications provided by media service providers and video-sharing platform providers under their jurisdiction comply with the following requirements: (a) audiovisual commercial communications shall be readily recognisable as such. Surreptitious audiovisual commercial communication shall be prohibited; (b) audiovisual commercial communications shall not use subliminal techniques; (c) audiovisual commercial communications shall not: (i) prejudice respect for human dignity; (ii) include or promote any discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, nationality, religion or belief, disability, descent, age or sexual orientation; (iii) encourage behaviour prejudicial to health or safety; (iv) encourage behaviour grossly prejudicial to the protection of the environment; (d) all forms of audiovisual commercial communications for cigarettes, electronic cigarettes and other tobacco products shall be prohibited; (e) audiovisual commercial communications for alcoholic beverages shall not be aimed specifically at minors and shall not encourage immoderate consumption of such beverages; (f) audiovisual commercial communication for medicinal products and medical treatment available only on prescription in the Member State within whose jurisdiction the media service provider falls shall be prohibited; (g) audiovisual commercial communications shall not cause physical or moral detriment to minors. Therefore they shall not directly exhort minors to buy or hire a product or service by exploiting their inexperience or credulity, directly encourage them to persuade their parents or others to purchase the goods or services being advertised, exploit the special trust minors place in parents, teachers or other persons, or unreasonably show minors in dangerous situations. 2. Member States and the Commission shall encourage the development of co-regulatory codes of conduct regarding inappropriate audiovisual commercial communications. Those codes should aim at reducing the exposure of minors to audiovisual commercial communications for alcoholic beverages, avoid their exposure to audiovisual commercial communications advocating doctrines or beliefs and limit their exposure to audiovisual commercial communications of food and beverage that do not fit national or international nutritional guidelines.'
Amendment 420 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 c (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Chapter II – Article –2 b (new)
Chapter II – Article –2 b (new)
Amendment 422 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 d (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 d (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Chapter II Article –2 c (new)
Chapter II Article –2 c (new)
Amendment 424 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 e (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 e (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Chapter II – Article –2 d (new)
Chapter II – Article –2 d (new)
(2e) The following article is inserted: 'Article -2d Member States shall ensure that media service providers and video-sharing platform providers under their jurisdiction do not transmit cinematographic works outside periods agreed with the rights holders.'
Amendment 426 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 f (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 f (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Chapter II – Article –2 e (new)
Chapter II – Article –2 e (new)
(2f) The following article is inserted: 'Article -2e 1. Member States shall ensure that audiovisual media service providers and video-sharing platform providers under their jurisdiction shall make easily, directly and permanently accessible to the recipients of a service at least the following information: (a) the name of the media service provider or video-sharing platform provider; (b) the geographical address at which the media service provider or video- sharing platform provider is established; (c) the details of the media service provider or video-sharing platform provider, including its electronic mail address or company-website, which allow it to be contacted rapidly in a direct and effective manner; (d) the Member State having jurisdiction over the media service providers or video-sharing platform providers and the competent regulatory bodies or supervisory bodies. 2. Member States may waive the requirements laid down in paragraphs 1(b) and/or (d) for audiovisual media services providers operating through a video-sharing platform where such requirements would be disproportionate given its purpose and its low turnover or low audience in regards to the targeted market.'
Amendment 427 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 g (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 g (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Chapter II – Article –2 f (new)
Chapter II – Article –2 f (new)
Amendment 439 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a a (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
(aa) In Article 2, paragraph 4 is amended as follows: 4. Media service providers to whom the provisions of paragraph 3 are not applicable shall be deemed to be under the jurisdiction of a Member State in the following cases: (a) they use a satellite up-link situated incapacity appertaining to that Member State; (b) although they do not use a satellite up-link situated capacity appertaining thato a Member State, they use a satellite capacity appertaining to that Member State. (The amendment seeks to amend a provision within the existing act - Article 2, paragraph 4 -up-link situated in that Member State. Or. en that was not referred to in the Commission proposal)
Amendment 459 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 5 b a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 5 b a (new)
(ba) The following paragraph is inserted: 5ba. The Commission shall decide within one month following the notification referred to in paragraph 5b or the opinion provided by ERGA.
Amendment 464 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States may provisionally derogate from paragraph 1, without prejudice to the communicative freedoms, if an audiovisual media service provided by a media service provider under the jurisdiction of another Member State:
Amendment 467 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) manifestly, seriously and gravely infringes Articles 6 or 12, or both-2 (1);
Amendment 473 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) prejudices or presents a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public securityorder, including the safeguarding of national security and defence; or
Amendment 503 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
6. Member States may, in urgent cases, derogate from the conditions laid down in points (b) and (c) of paragraph 3. Where this is the case, the measures shall be notified in the shortest possible timewithin one month after their adoption to the Commission and to the Member State which has jurisdiction over the media service provider, setting out the reasons for which the Member State considers that there is such urgency that derogating from those conditions is necessary.
Amendment 509 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 3 – paragraph 7
Article 3 – paragraph 7
7. Without prejudice to the Member State’s possibility of proceeding with the measures referred to in paragraph 6, the Commission shall examine the compatibility of the notified measures with Union law in the shortest possible timewithin two months after receiving the notification. Where it comes to the conclusion that the measures are incompatible with Union law, the Commission shall require the Member State concerned to refrain from taking any intended measures or urgently to put an end to those measures.
Amendment 525 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a a (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall inform European Commission, regulatory authorities of other Member States and ERGA about more detailed or stricter rules adopted according to paragraph 1.
Amendment 568 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – introductory part
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 5
Article 5
(7) in Article 5, point (d) is replaced by the following: is deleted.
Amendment 572 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – introductory part
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 6
Article 6
(8) Article 6 is replaced by the following:deleted.
Amendment 582 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 6 a
Article 6 a
Amendment 607 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 7
Article 7
(10) Article 7 is deletedreplaced by the following : 'Article 7 1. Member States shall ensure that media service providers under their jurisdiction make their services progressively accessible to people with a visual or hearing disability aiming for a complete accessibility by the end of 2027. 2. With regard to the implementation of this Article, Member States shall encourage self and co-regulatory codes of conduct. The Commission and ERGA shall encourage media service providers to exchange best practices across the Union. 3. By ..; [three years after the entry into force of this Directive] and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament, to the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee a report on the application of this Article.';
Amendment 621 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – introductory part
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 9
Article 9
(11) Article 9 is amended as follows:deleted.
Amendment 662 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a (new)
(11a) The following article is inserted : 'Article 9a Member States remain free to take appropriate measures ensuring the non- discriminatory appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest. Such measures shall be proportionate and meet general objectives such as media pluralism, freedom of speech, and cultural diversity clearly defined by Member States in accordance with Union law. Such obligations should only be imposed where they are necessary to meet general interest objectives clearly defined by Member States in conformity with Union law. In this respect, Member States should in particular examine the need for regulatory intervention against the results of the outcome of market forces. Where Member States decide to impose discoverability rules, they should only impose proportionate obligations on undertakings, in the interest of legitimate public policy considerations.';
Amendment 666 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – introductory part
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 10
Article 10
(12) in Article 10, point (b) is replaced by the following: is deleted
Amendment 706 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – introductory part
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 12
Article 12
(14) Article 12 is replaced by the following and moved to Chapter III:deleted.
Amendment 766 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 a (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Amendment 775 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Amendment 810 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. The daily proportion of television advertising spots and teleshopping spots within the period between 7:00 and 23:00a given clock hour shall not exceed 20 %.
Amendment 822 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) announcements made by the broadcaster in connection with its own programmes and ancillary products directly derived from those programmes or with programmes from other entities belonging to the same media group;
Amendment 831 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
‘(ca) neutral frames used to separate programmes and advertising spots;’
Amendment 838 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a
Article 28 a
Amendment 958 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 b – paragraph 1– subparagraph 3
Article 28 b – paragraph 1– subparagraph 3
For the purposes of applying the second subparagraph, where there are several subsidiaries each of which are established in different Member States, or where there are several other entities of the group each of which are established in different Member States, the Member States concerned shall ensure that the provider designates in which ofit shall be deemed to have been established in these Member States it shall be deemed to have been established where the majority of the workforce operates.
Amendment 961 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 b – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 28 b – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where, in applying paragraph 1, the Member States concerned do not agree on which Member State has jurisdiction, they shall bring the matter to the Commission's attention without undue delay. The Commission may request ERGA to provide an opinion on the matter within 15 working days from the submission of the Commission's request.
Amendment 1003 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 30 – paragraph 5
Article 30 – paragraph 5
5. The Head of a national regulatory authority or the members of the collegiate body fulfilling that function within a national regulatory authority, may be dismissed only if they no longer fulfil the conditions required for the performance of their duties which are laid down in advance in national law. A duly justified dismissal decision shall be made public and a statement of reasons shall be made available to the public.
Amendment 1007 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 30 – paragraph 6
Article 30 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall ensure that independent national regulatory authorities have separate annual budgets. The budgets shall be made public. Member States shall also ensure that national regulatory authorities have adequate financial and human resources to enable them to carry out the task assigned to them and to actively participate in and contribute to ERGAeffectively to the tasks carried out by ERGA under this Directive.
Amendment 1039 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 33 – paragraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 2
By [date – no later than four years after adoption] at the latest, and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the European Economic and Social Committee a report on the application of this Directive and, if necessary, make further proposals to adapt it to the developments in the field of audiovisual media services, in particular in the light of technological developments, the evolution of consumer practices, the competitiveness of the sector and the level of media literacy in all Member States. The report shall also assess the issue of advertising practices, in particular when targeting children, the effective promotion of European works, and the effectiveness of the self and co regulation practices in all Member States.
Amendment 42 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Transparency is essential for ensuring the well-functioning of the Single Market. In recent years, the challenge posed by corporate income tax avoidance has increased considerably and has become a major focus of concern within the Union and globally. The European Council in its conclusions of 18 December 2014 acknowledged the urgent need to advance efforts in the fight against tax avoidance both at global and Union level. The Commission in its communications entitled ‘Commission Work Programme 2016 - No time for business as usual’16 and ‘Commission Work Programme 2015 - A New Start’17 identified as a priority the need to move to a system whereby the country in which profits are generated is also the country of taxation. The Commission also identified as a priority the need to respond to oEur soopean cietiezens’ call for fairness and tax transparency. transparency and therefore act as a reference model for other countries. It is essential that transparency take into account reciprocity with competitors. __________________ 16 COM(2015) 610 final of 27 October 2015. 17 COM(2014) 910 final of 16 December 2014.
Amendment 49 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The European Parliament in its resolution of 16 December 2015 on bringing transparency, coordination and convergence to corporate tax policies in the Union18 acknowledged that increased transparency in the area of corporate taxation can improve tax collection, make the work of tax authorities more efficient and, ensure increased public trust and confidence in tax systems and governments and improve investment decision-making based on more accurate risk profiles of companies. __________________ 18 2015/2010(INL)
Amendment 73 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Enhanced transparency and public scrutiny of corporate income taxes borne by multinational undertakings carrying out activities in the Union is an essential element to further foster corporate responsibility, to contribute to the welfare through taxes, to promote fairer tax competition within the Union through a better informed public debate and to restore public trust in the fairness of the national tax systems. Such public scrutiny can be achieved by means of a report on income tax information, irrespective of where the ultimate parent undertaking of the multinational group is established.
Amendment 94 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In order to ensure a level of detail that enables citizens to better assess the contribution of multinational undertakings to welfare in each Member State, theonly key information, which does not act as an obstacle towards the undertaking's competitiveness, should be broken down by Member State. Moreover, information concerning the operations of multinational enterprises should also be shown with a high level of detail as regards certain tax jurisdictions which pose particular challenges. For all other third country operations, the information should be given in an aggregate number. in order to ensure the proportionality of this proposal and its reasonable feasibility.
Amendment 99 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) To ensure that cases of non- compliance are disclosed to the public, statutory auditor(s) or audit firm(s) should check whether the report on income tax information has been submitted and presented in accordance with the requirements of this Directive and made accessible on the relevant undertaking’s website or on the website of an affiliated undertaking. Cases of infringements by undertakings and branches to the reporting on income tax information, giving rise to penalties by Member States, in conformity with Article 51 of Directive 2013/34/EU, should be reported in a public registry managed by the European Commission.
Amendment 125 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The report on income tax information shall be published in a common template available in an open data format and made accessible to the public on the website of the undertaking on the date of its publication in at least one of the official languages of the Union. On the same date, the undertaking shall also file the report in a public registry managed by the European Commission.
Amendment 143 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The report on income tax information shall be published in a common template available in an open data format and made accessible to the public on the date of its publication on the website of the subsidiary undertaking or on the website of an affiliated undertaking in at least one of the official languages of the Union. On the same date, the undertaking shall also file the report in a public registry managed by the European Commission.
Amendment 150 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
The report on income tax information shall be published in a common template available in an open data format and made accessible to the public on the date of its publication on the website of the branch or on the website of an affiliated undertaking in at least one of the official languages of the Union. On the same date, the undertaking shall also file the report in a public registry managed by the European Commission.
Amendment 171 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point a
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) names of undertakings, a brief description of the nature of the activities and geographical location;
Amendment 175 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the number of employeeworked man-hours;
Amendment 184 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b c (new)
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b c (new)
(bc) value of tangible assets other than cash or cash equivalents, and annual cost of maintaining those assets;
Amendment 194 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point f
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) the amount of income tax paid which is the amount of income tax paid during the relevant financial year by undertakings and branches resident for tax purposes in the relevant tax jurisdiction; and
Amendment 195 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
(fa) stated capital;
Amendment 223 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 3 a (new)
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States shall allow non- listed branches or subsidiaries controlled by an ultimate parent undertaking organised under the laws of a third tax jurisdiction outside the Union, other than a tax haven jurisdiction, to not publicly disclose information under this Article if 80 per cent or more of the group's activities are carried out in one tax jurisdiction, outside the Union and not a tax haven, and in relation to one business line only.
Amendment 229 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 3 b (new)
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Member States may allow information required to be disclosed pursuant to this Article to be omitted when its nature is such that it would be seriously prejudicial to the commercial position of the undertakings to which it relates, including when only a single affiliated undertaking operates in a tax jurisdiction which is not listed in the common Union list of certain tax jurisdictions drawn up pursuant to Article 48g. Any such omission shall be disclosed in the report, and shall require prior authorisation from the competent authority. Member States shall justify to the Commission their decision to exempt with regard to the disclosure of one or more required items of information.
Amendment 234 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 5
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 5
5. The report on income tax information shall be published in a common template available in an open data format and made accessible on the website in at least one of the official languages of the Union. On the same date, the undertaking shall also file the report in a public registry managed by the European Commission.
Amendment 260 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 i – paragraph 1
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 i – paragraph 1
The Commission shall report on the compliance with and the impact of the reporting obligations set out in Articles 48a to 48f. The report shall include an evaluation of whether the report on income tax information delivers appropriate and proportionate results, and assess cost- benefits of lowering the consolidated net turnover threshold beyond which undertakings and branches are required to report on income tax information as well as evaluating the possible necessity to take further complementary measures, taking into account the need to ensure a sufficient level of transparency and, the need for preserving and ensuring a competitive environment for undertakings and private investment.
Amendment 265 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 i a (new)
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 i a (new)
Article 48ia Common template for the report The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, lay down the common template to which Article 48b(1), (3), (4) and (6) and Article 48c(5) refer. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 50(2).
Amendment 268 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Directive 2013/34/EU
Article 51 – paragraph 1
Article 51 – paragraph 1
Amendment 152 #
2015/2330(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to foster, at Member State level, forms of cooperation involving governments, enterprises, educational institutions and social partners in accordance with national customs and traditions, with a view to adapting Member States’' education and training systems to combat skills mis-matches and meeting the needs of the labour market;
Amendment 159 #
2015/2330(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes with concern, that data on government spending in education confirm an increasing risk of investment gaps in human capital, including digital skills; Notes further that educational efforts primarily are focused on the younger part of the workforce, however, many countries need a broader focus on educating the workforce including adult education and vocational training opportunities; Underlines that insufficient investments in education, especially in digital skills, poses a threat to Europe's competitive position and to the employability of Europe's work force; encourages therefore Member States to prioritize broad education in digital skills;
Amendment 369 #
2015/2330(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Calls onEncourages the Member States to implement the necessary measures for the inclusion of refugees; stresse and migrants legally residing in the EU; considers that such an approach will require the allocation of funds that, in so fragile a situation, cannot be provided solely by Member States; calls on the Commission to provide the funding required to develop such a strategy as part of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF);
Amendment 385 #
2015/2330(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to work together on removing the obstacles to fair labour mobility, ensuring that EU mobile workers are not treated abusivelyequally with non-mobile workers;
Amendment 8 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas in 2014 three, of the 41 national chambers, three (the Danish Folketing, the Dutch Tweede Kamer and the UK House of Lords) issued reports with detailed proposals on how to strengthen the role of national parliaments in the decision- making process;
Amendment 9 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas by means of the Cooperation Agreement between the European Parliament and the Committee of the Regions signed on 5 February 2014 both institutions commit themselves to cooperating in order to ensure the respect of the subsidiarity principleenhance the legitimacy of the European Union;
Amendment 11 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas national parliaments continue to observe that the increasing number of delegated powers in the Union’s legislative acts makes it difficult to effectively evaluate whether final rules would comply with the principle of subsidiaritydelegated powers in the Union’s legislative acts are conferred where flexibility and efficiency are needed and cannot be delivered by means of the ordinary legislative procedure; whereas the adoption of rules essential to the subject envisaged is reserved to the legislators;
Amendment 18 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the continuedimportance to consideration of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, which are guiding principles for the European Union when it chooses to act; stresses that subsidiarity and democratic legitimacy are closely intertwined concepts; highlights that subsidiarity checks can be considered an important tool for reducing the so- called ‘democratic deficit’; points out that national parliaments have a vitaln important role to play in ensuring that decisions are taken as closely as possible to the citizen;
Amendment 25 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. NotWelcomes the decrease in the number of reasoned opinions received from national parliaments in 2014; points out, however, that such a decrease might be as a result of the declining number of legislative proposals by the Commission and not of a loss of interest on the part of national parliaments; draws attention to the fact that in 2014 no Commission proposal received a sufficient number of reasoned opinions to triggerwas subject to the ‘yellow’ or ‘orange card procedures’ under Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality;
Amendment 31 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is concerned byNotes the fact that some national parliaments have highlighted that, in a number of the Commission’s legislative proposals, the justification of subsidiarity and proportionality is insufficient or non-existent in substance; stresses, in this connection, the need for the European institutions to make it possible for national parliaments to scrutinise legislative proposals by ensuring that the Commission to provides detailed and comprehensive grounds for its legislative decisions, including on subsidiarity and proportionality, in accordance with Article 5 of Protocol No 2 to the TFEU;
Amendment 41 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Expresses concern that the Impact Assessment Board (‘IAB’) considered more than 32 % of impact assessments (‘IAs’) reviewed by them in 2014 to have included an unsatisfactory analysis of the principles of subsidiarity or proportionality, or both; nNotes the crucial importance of impact assessments as tools for aiding decision-making in the legislative process, and stresses the need, in this context, for proper consideration to be given to issues relating to subsidiarity and proportionality; welcomes, in this connection, the package of better regulation measures adopted by the Commission on 19 May 2015, which place new emphasis on subsidiarity and proportionality in the contextthe importance of impact assessments;
Amendment 45 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 51 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the reports made by a number of national parliaments as a valuable contribution to the debate on the role of national parliaments in the EU decision-making process and takes note of the proposals included therein; notes, in this connection, that these reports suggest that reasoned opinions should not only concern compliance with the principle of subsidiarity, but also compliance with the principle of proportionality and the legal basis for the proposal; believes that the practicability of these proposals depends on a revision of the Treaties and the Protocols thereto; encourages other national parliaments to share their views on the role that national parliaments should play in the EU decision-making process;
Amendment 58 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Suggests that in anyerefore that the next review of the Treaties and the Protocols thereto consideration should be given to whether reasoned opinions should be limited to examining subsidiarity grounds, to the appropriate number of national parliament responses required to trigger a ‘yellow’ or ‘orange card’ procedure, and to what the effect should be in cases where the threshold for these procedures is reached; believes that consideration should be given to the introduction of a ‘red card’ mechanism whereby the consideration of a proposal by the EU co- legislators should be stayed if a significant number of national parliaments expresses concern on subsidiarity grounds, unless the proposal is amended to accommodate those concerns or if it should also include the principle of proportionality;
Amendment 67 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Is of the opinion that the introduction of a ‘green card’ mechanism could also be considered, which would afford national parliaments the opportunity to propose the introduction, amendment or repeal of Union legislation; suggests, in this connection, that consideration should be given to the number of national parliaments needed iesent legislative proposals to the Commission forder to trigger such a procedure, and to the extent of its impact examination;
Amendment 74 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes note of the request from a number of national parliaments to extend the eight-week period in which theyRecalls that the period in which the national parliaments can issue a reasoned opinion underis eight weeks according to Article 6 of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; notes, in this regard, that the current timeframe for national parliaments to carry out subsidiarity checks is often deemed insufficient; considers that a twelve-week period would be more appropriate;. Stresses that this period is the result of striking a balance between the desire to consult national parliaments and the need to avoid an excessively slow legislative process.
Amendment 79 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that reasoned opinions issued by national parliaments in accordance with Article 7(1) of Protocol No 2 are to be duly taken into accountconsideration by all institutions involved during the decision- making process of the Union and, in this connection, calls on the EU institutions to make the appropriate arrangements to ensure this;.
Amendment 80 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recalls that the principle of proportionality enshrined in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) requires ‘that the content and form of Union action shall not exceed what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaties’; emphasises that the Court of Justice has stated that the principle of proportionality ‘requires that measures implemented through provisions of European Union law be appropriate for attaining the legitimate objectives pursued by the legislation at issue and must not go beyond what is necessary to achieve them’ and that ‘in the fields in which the European Union legislature has a broad legislative power’ the lawfulness of a measure adopted in this context can be affected only if the measure is manifestly inappropriate with respect to the objective which the competent institutions are seeking to pursue, although the European legislator must nonetheless ‘base its choice on objective criteria’ and, when assessing the burdens associated with various possible measures, ‘examine whether objectives pursued by the measure chosen are such as to justify even substantial negative economic consequences for certain operators’;.
Amendment 81 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to systematically carry out enhanced proportionality assessments with detailed evaluations of the different legislative options at its disposal so as to discard alternatives with a disproportionate impact or which are unnecessarily burdensome on the individuals and undertakings concerned, in particular SMEs, and to provide a sufficiently detailed description of all the different alternatives that had been considered so as to allow better scrutiny of its proposals on proportionality grounds; considers that the enlargement of the scope of reasoned opinions so as to includeRecalls the importance of impact studies, particularly as regards respect of the principle of proportionality would be desirable;.
Amendment 88 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Suggests assessing whether appropriate criteria in the form of non- binding guidelines should be laid down at EU level for the evaluation of compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; considers that these criteria should not unduly restrict the discretion that national parliaments should enjoy when assessing the compliance of the proposals with the subsidiarity and proportionality principles;
Amendment 90 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Welcomes the Declaration from the Presidents of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, the French National Assembly, the German Bundestag, and the Luxembourg Chamber of Deputies, which underlined „that more, not less, Europe is needed to respond to the challenges we face, both internally and externally";
Amendment 94 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – indent 1
Paragraph 14 – indent 1
Amendment 99 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – indent 3
Paragraph 14 – indent 3
– suggests that guidelines could be prepared outlining criteria for reasoned opinions on subsidiarity issues;
Amendment 101 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – indent 4
Paragraph 14 – indent 4
– proposes mobilisingencourages national parliaments to undertake comparative evaluations of ex ante assessments which they have conducted and ex postshare their remarks on the assessments drawn up by the Commission;
Amendment 103 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 105 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that legislative proposals may change substantially in the course of the legislative procedure and, in this connection, reiterates that consideration should be given to the introduction of further subsidiarity checks and impact assessments when a major amendment is likely to be adopted and at the conclusion of the legislative negotiations and in advance of the adoption of the final text, in order that compliance with subsidiarity can be guaranteed and that assessments including proportionality can be made;impact assessments at the beginning of the legislative procedure are an important and necessary instrument for compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. Stresses that these guiding principles, which ensure that the European Union is close to its citizens, must guarantee the effectiveness of the EU institutions while avoiding excessive bureaucracy.
Amendment 74 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 a (new)
Citation 25 a (new)
– having regard to Article 11 TEU on the inclusion of civil society and citizens in decision-making in the EU
Amendment 75 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 b (new)
Citation 25 b (new)
– having regard to the Council of Europe's 'Code of Good Practice for Civil Participation in the Decision-Making Process'
Amendment 222 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T a (new)
Recital T a (new)
Ta. whereas civil society plays an important role in building and strengthening democracy, monitoring, and restraining the power of the state and promoting good governance, transparency, effectiveness, openness, responsiveness and accountability;
Amendment 301 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recommends that the European Ombudsman develops the DRF recommendations to the institutions of the Union in consultation with NGOs and other civil society organisations;
Amendment 343 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Recommends that the Commission engages in a meaningful dialogue with civil society and ensure that its contribution and role is built into any pact or mechanism on Democracy, Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights.
Amendment 346 #
2015/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Recommends that any inter- parliamentary debate on DRF should include civil society and considers that civic participation and strength of civil society should be taken into consideration as indicator for Democracy;
Amendment 8 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that whilst it is impossible to hold back the digital revolution, it is possible to shape its course; digital technologies bring tremendous opportunities for productivity gains, growth and job-creating leading to quality employment; acknowledges the importance of the digital revolution as fuel for enterpreneurship, digital transformation of industry, the development of new business models, ideas and innovative start-ups; stresses that according to the European Commission, The Digital Single Market has the potential to generate Euro 250 billion in additional growth in Europe thereby creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs; stresses that productivity gains historically have resulted in overall employment growth and increased wealth and that the ultimate beneficiary of digital transformation of industry will be the consumer;
Amendment 13 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Urges the Commission to overhaul Directive 2010/13/EU1 without delay, doing away with the distinction between linear and non-linear services, encouraging the use of editorially screened content to which the country-of- origin principle applies and fleshing out the general social objectives of audiovisual regulationConsiders that the review of the Directive 2010/13/EU1should be based on an assessment of the changes in technology, business models but also changing viewing patterns to ensure the regulatory framework meets cultural policy objectives and incentivises investments in cultural content and in platforms disseminating that content; __________________ 1 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1).
Amendment 16 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that stimulating growth, innovation, consumer choice and competitiveness is of the utmost importance and believes that the digital single market is key to achieving this objective by removing barriers to trade, streamlining processes for online businesses and supporting creators, investors and consumers; calls in this regard for competitiveness tests on all new proposalall new proposals to be subject to competitiveness tests and to detailed impact assessments examining their effects on growth, SMEs and employment as well as their potential costs and benefits;
Amendment 23 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Asks the Commission to assess the appropriateness of the Country-of-origin principle in the digital era;
Amendment 24 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recognises that the Digital Single Market can only become a reality when there is access to high performance broadband infrastructure throughout the regions of the EU in both urban and rural areas;
Amendment 24 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Welcomes the communication of the Commission" Towards a Connected Digital Single Market Act" and the included commitment to modernise the copyright framework to adapt them to the digital age while at the same time ensuring the right balance between a fair remuneration of the author, the public interest of dissemination of knowledge and preserving cultural diversity;
Amendment 28 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Notes that only 1.7% of EU enterprises make full use of advanced digital technologies while 41% do not use them at all; stresses that if the EU is to maintain and improve its competitiveness digitalisation of all sectors is crucial;
Amendment 28 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses the potential of the Digital Single Market to stimulate social and generational inclusion which requires a regulatory framework that makes private investment in creative infrastructure commercially attractive as this will ultimately be beneficial to creators and end-users;
Amendment 31 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Encourages Europe's audiovisual industry to keep on developing attractive and complementary on-line services, so as to enrich the range of European audiovisual content on offer;
Amendment 33 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -2 a (new)
Paragraph -2 a (new)
-2a. Calls on distributors to publish all available information concerning the technological measures necessary to ensure interoperability of their content;
Amendment 35 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -2 b (new)
Paragraph -2 b (new)
-2b. Insists on the need to pursue the Commission’s Work Programme with a view to the adoption of a series of digital- market-related measures to modernise copyright rules, adapting them to the digital era;
Amendment 36 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -2 c (new)
Paragraph -2 c (new)
-2c. Underscores the crucial role played by the legal framework for copyright in sustaining the creative process and enabling authors to earn a living as professionals in the cultural and creative industries; with reference in this regard to the recent studies by, respectively, the European Parliament on Contractual Arrangements applicable to Creators and the Commission on remuneration of authors, calls on the Commission to ensure that the core element of any reform of copyright law is the equitable remuneration of authors for the use of their work on line;
Amendment 37 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Emphasises that, in this environment in which many services are on offer, it is important that the best possible referencing is provided for European services, which are essential to promoting European cultural diversity;
Amendment 53 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that platforms and intermediaries should be regulated in such a way as to rule out discrimination to a large extent and guarantee ththe European Commission should develop an innovation-friendly policy that fosters competition and innovation for online platforms and intermediaries to ensure findability of editorially screenedcreased creation and dissemination of cultural content;
Amendment 53 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for targeted, evidence-based reforms to enhance cross-border access to legally available online content but stresses the importance of not mandating pan- European licences; calls instead for reforms to enable the enhanced portability of legally acquired content to be prioritised, and for the introduction of commercial models for flexible licensing, benefiting consumers without undermining either the principle of territoriality for exclusive rights or that of freedom of contract, both of which play a fundamental role in the financing of audiovisual works;
Amendment 54 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to undertake a thorough assessment of the impact which digitalisation will have on the number and types of jobs available and to gather informin cooperation with Member States and consultation with regional and local authorities and the social partners to identify new forms of employment and required skills in the digitally-driven economy and to develop recommendations on new forms of employment, such as crowdsourcing and crowdworkinghow to better match skills and jobs in the digital economy; stresses in this regard the importance of vocational training as a tool proven to increase the match between skills with jobs;
Amendment 65 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses the importance of the contribution made by cultural content to the development of the European digital economy; observes that a large part of the revenue generated by Internet intermediaries is directly or indirectly linked to the use of this cultural content;
Amendment 68 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that 35% of the EU population is at risk of exclusion from the Digital Single market in particular those over 50 and people with disabilities and in this context stresses that accessible technologies can help deliver digital inclusion and improve access to the labour market;
Amendment 69 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Is convinced that accessibility is best achieved and most cost effective when incorporated from the outset using a universal design approach and that it also represents a potential business opportunity;
Amendment 70 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Emphasises that any reform of the copyright framework should take as a basis a high level of protection, since rights are crucial to intellectual creation and provide a stable, clear and flexible legal base that fosters investment and growth in the creative and cultural sector, whilst removing legal uncertainties and inconsistencies that adversely affect the functioning of the internal market;
Amendment 73 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that any initiative to modernise copyright is preceded by a wide-ranging study of its likely impact on the production, financing and distribution of audiovisual works, and also on cultural diversity;
Amendment 74 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that as job and skills profiles become more complex, new demands are being placed on training, vocational training and further education; emphasises the importance of social dialogue in efforts to bring course content up to date andensure a better match between skills and jobs; is concerned that according to the Commission 47 % of the EU- workforce lack sufficient digital skills and that this skills-shortage might cause up to 900.000 unfilled vacancies until 2020; calls on the Commission, as a matter of urgency, to develop a skills strategies-strategy which can meet this skills-shortage through education for the younger part of the population, vocational training, exchange of best practices and through training in partnership with the social partners for the older part of the population;
Amendment 75 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Asks the Commission to ensure in this respect fair remuneration for creators and rightholders and to guarantee that persistence and perseverance is exercised throughout the creative supply chain;
Amendment 83 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that further efforts are needed to overhaulreview copyright law and that any revised provisions should apply to allonly where it is strictly necessary, while taking into account the convergence of media;
Amendment 84 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that further efforts are needed to overhaul copyright law and that any revised provisions should apply to all mediawhile taking into account the differences between the digital and the analogical environment;
Amendment 85 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses the importance of improving clarity and transparency of the copyright regime, in particular with regard to copyright levies;
Amendment 86 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Underlines that the revision of copyright exceptions should only be based on proven needs and without prejudice to the European cultural diversity, to its financing and to the fair remuneration of authors;
Amendment 90 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Member States, in the context of overall VAT reform, to consider the possibility of making e-books subject to the same rate of VAT as cultural goods;
Amendment 97 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recalls that the financing of audiovisual content relies for a significant part on the principle of territoriality of rights, which allowed a strong cultural diversity within the European production.
Amendment 106 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Underlines that "premium access" through the presale of rights is one of the core conditions for financing audiovisual content, as it allows a return on investment and new resources to finance future audiovisual content;
Amendment 106 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that internet service providers should bear greater responsibility for illegal content made available on the internet and should, along with other actors in the supply chain such as payment providers, play a significant role in tackling copyright abuses; Encourages the actors of the supply chain to exchange information and good practices, and to take coordinated and proportionate actions to fight commercial scale infringement on the basis of sector agreements;
Amendment 107 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that internet service providers should the Commission, together with membear greater responsibility for illegal content made available states, should promote due diligence along the internet and should, along with other actors in the supply chain such as payment providers, play a signifsupply chain, including internet service providers, domain registrars and payment providers, as well exchange of best practices, guidelines and better public ant role in tackling copyright abusesd private sector cooperation to combat illegal content, tackling copyright abuses, and reduce divergences of enforcement across Europe;
Amendment 110 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Underlines that audiovisual content may have different market value from a Member State to another, depending on the characteristics of the national market, and requires targeted and specific promotion campaign to get the content to its public;
Amendment 112 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Calls the Member States to extend the scope of the quotation exception, without prejudice to the authors' moral rights, to short audiovisual quotations for non- advertisement and non-political uses, provided that the work used is clearly credited, that the quotation does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not prejudice the legitimate interests of the authors;
Amendment 114 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the establishment of the Europe-wide grand coalition for digital jobs, and encourages businesses to jointhe social partners' active participation with the aim of realizing the potential of the digital economy to create growth and new jobs leading to quality employment; encourages the Europe-wide grand coalition for digital jobs to develop recommendations for new forms of learning, i.e. online learning, employer- designed short-courses etc., to keep pace with the evolving digital technology and changes; encourages additionally educational institutions to respond to the opportunities in the digital economy by developing flexible learning profiles including enhanced opportunities for vocational training which match the demands of the labour market;
Amendment 114 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 e (new)
Paragraph 3 e (new)
3e. Calls for further dialogue between the rightholders, the online platforms and the creators relying on these platforms in order to achieve a mutually beneficial cooperation, where copyrights are protected while allowing and encouraging innovative ways of creating;
Amendment 118 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Emphasis that the agreements between the actors of the supply chain as well as the process to fight commercial scale infringements should be transparent for the authorities, the online services and the consumers;
Amendment 121 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls for the status of and arrangements governing the responsibility of intermediaries and online platforms to be clarified as part of the future reform of copyright law in order to restore the balance of interests involved, which is not safeguarded at present; takes the view that these online intermediaries generate income from cultural works and content, but this income is not shared with the creators; considers it vital, therefore, not to hamper the development of the digital single market, while at the same time guaranteeing fair remuneration for creators;
Amendment 123 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that creative works, which represent one of the main sources that guarantee the functioning of the digital economy and sustain information technology sector stakeholders, should be the subject of a fair transfer of value to the benefit of their authors;
Amendment 124 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that the legal thinking behind Directive 93/83/EEC2 provides a suitable point of departure foEncourages the Commission to take on further measures to improve cross-border access to legal content in the digital single market.; __________________ 2 Council Directive 93/83/EEC of 27 September 1993 on the coordination of certain rules concerning copyright and rights related to copyright applicable to satellite broadcasting and cable transmission (OJ L 248, 6.10.1993, p. 15).
Amendment 124 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Insists that any measures taken by the actors of the supply chain to fight commercial scale infringements should be justified and include the possibility of effective and user-friendly remedies for adversely affected parties;
Amendment 127 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls on the Commission to consider solutions aimed at remedying the displacement of the value of creative works from content to services; stresses the need to adjust the definition of the status of intermediary to match the current digital environment;
Amendment 128 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that the legal thinking behind Directive 93/83/EEC2 already provides a suitable point of departure for measures to improve cross-border access to content in the digital single market, and stresses that the principle of this directive was to address a technology – namely satellite technology – which is no longer relevant in an on-demand digital market. __________________ 2 Council Directive 93/83/EEC of 27 September 1993 on the coordination of certain rules concerning copyright and rights related to copyright applicable to satellite broadcasting and cable transmission (OJ L 248, 6.10.1993, p. 15).
Amendment 130 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Recalls that under Article 5 of Directive 2000/31/EC, providers of online services are obliged to clearly indicate their identity, and that compliance with this requirement is vital to ensuring consumer confidence in e-commerce;
Amendment 131 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Recalls, in the Member States in which this is permitted by law, the practical limitations and the current limited effectiveness in the long run of judicial blocking of websites and of the notice and take down system; Emphasise therefore the need to reinforce the efficacy of these measures or to find new measures to fight copyright infringement, without prejudice to the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and to the principle of proportionality;
Amendment 133 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission to ensure compliance with the principles of internet neutrality, which is vital where media convergence is concerned;
Amendment 141 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Encourages the Commission and the Member States to set the basis for mutual recognition of the digital skills developed by European citizens through the education system or through training programs.
Amendment 144 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission to encourage portability of content and interoperability while respecting economic models based on territoriality of rights in Europe, particularly as regards the financing of audiovisual production; observes that territoriality is at the heart of the economy in this sector of copyright, and that therefore it must not be jeopardised, particularly not by a system of pan- European licences;
Amendment 149 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Emphasises the need to protect the continuity of cultural and creative jobs in the digital era by ensuring that artists and creators receive fair value for cultural and creative works disseminated on Internet platforms;
Amendment 150 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that in order to achieve a meaningful enforcement of copyright, full information as regards to the identity of the rightholders and, where relevant, to the duration of the legal protection, should be easily accessible for the public;
Amendment 152 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that the announced ICT standardisation plan should also aim at enabling multidevice interoperability;
Amendment 153 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls the Commission and the Member States to set up a European certificate or grading system to establish a common assessment of the digital skills developed by European citizens, following the example of the European common framework of reference for language learning and teaching.
Amendment 155 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Notes that copyright infringements committed by the public find one of its sources in the difficulty to find easily the desired content within the legal offer; calls, therefore, for a wide range of user- friendly legal offers to be developed and promoted to the public;
Amendment 160 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Underlines the importance of proper training for teachers on digital skills, on the way to teach these skills efficiently to students, and on how to use these skills to support the learning process in general.
Amendment 162 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the Commission’s aim to withdraw the proposal on a Common European Sales Law and the intention to propose rules for digital content; notes the proposal to introduce the ‘home option’ in order to bring down barriers to cross- border trade; insists on the need for comprehensive evidence and consultation with stakeholders before this approach is pursued, in particular as regards the impact it would have on the current protection provided to consumers under national law, especially in terms of remedies for failure to comply with the terms of contracts for online sales.
Amendment 165 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4d. Underline the importance of enhancing the portability within the European Union of online services of legally acquired and legally made available content, whilst fully respecting copyrights and the interests of right- holders.
Amendment 168 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the need to develop employee data protection measures whichat the Digital Single Market and EU privacy and data regulations should provide a covher new forms of data collection (relations between humans and robots)ent and stable framework to facilitate innovation, trade and entrepreneurship while ensuring adequate protection of data;
Amendment 168 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. WelcomesRegrets that the Commission’s aim to withdraew theits proposal onfor a Common European Sales Law and the intention to propose rules for digital content; notes the proposal to introduce the ‘home option’ in order to bring down barriers to cross- border trade; insists on the need for comprehensive evidence and consultation with stakeholders before this approach is pursued, in particular as regards the impact it would have on the current protection provided to consumers under national law, especially in terms of remedies for failure to comply with the terms of contracts for online sales.without consulting the European Parliament, recalls that Parliament adopted its first reading position with vast majority on 26.02.2014, Welcomes however the Commission’s intention to propose rules for digital content; reiterates Parliaments repeated request that any new proposal should be based on EP’s first reading position;
Amendment 169 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 e (new)
Paragraph 4 e (new)
4e. Stresses that cross-border access to legally made available audiovisual content should not hinder its financing process and subsequently the European cultural diversity.
Amendment 174 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 f (new)
Paragraph 4 f (new)
4f. Underlines that the legal audiovisual online offer should be furthermore developed in order to enhance the accessibility to a wide and diverse content for the consumers, with various language and subtitle options.
Amendment 177 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 g (new)
Paragraph 4 g (new)
4g. Calls the Member States to optimise the media chronology, in order to accelerate the availability of audiovisual content for the consumers, while maintaining a sustainable first and second window of diffusion.
Amendment 11 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas now that humankind stands on the threshold of an era when ever more sophisticated robots, bots, androids and other manifestations of artificial intelligence (”AI”) seem poised to unleash a new industrial revolution, which is likely to leave no stratum of society untouched, it is vitally important for the legislature to consider all itsits legal and ethical implications;
Amendment 28 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas at the same time the development of robotics and AI may result in a large part of the work now done by humans being taken over by robots, so raising concerns about the future of employment and the viability of social security systems if the current basis of taxation is maintained, creating the potential for increased inequality in the distribution of wealth and influenceand a discussion must be held on the future of research and development and employment;
Amendment 44 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the causes for concern also include physical safety, for example when a robot's code proves fallible, and the potential consequences of system failure or hacking of connected robots and robotic systems at a time when increasingly autonomous applications come into use or are impending whether it be in relation to cars and drones or to care robots and robots used for maintaining public order and policing;
Amendment 59 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the ‘soft impacts’ on human dignity may be difficult to estimate, but will still need to be considered if and when robots replace human care and companionship, and whereas these questions of human dignity also cancan also arise in the context of 'repairing' or enhancing human beings;
Amendment 174 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that the potential for empowerment through the use of robotics is nuanced by a set of tensions or risks relatingshould be seriously assessed with regard to human safety, privacy, integrity, dignity, autonomy and data ownership;
Amendment 258 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines the importance of appropriate training and preparation for doctors and care assistants in order to secure the highest degree of professional competence possible, as well as to protect patients' health; underlines the need to define the minimum professional requirements that a surgeon must meet in order to be allowed to use surgical robots; emphasises the special importance of training for users to allow them to familiarise themselves with the technological requirements in this field; draws attention to the rising trend towardsgrowing risk of self- diagnosis using a mobile robot which makes diagnoses and might take over the role of a doctor;
Amendment 276 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 287 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Bearing in mind the effects that the development and deployment of robotics and AI might have on employment and, consequently, on the viability of the social security systems of the Member States, consideration should be given to the possible need to introduce corporate reporting requirements on the extent and proportion of the contribution of robotics and AI to the economic results of a company for the purpose of taxation and social security contributions; takes the view that in the light of the possible effects on the labour market of robotics and AI a general basic income should be seriously considerTakes the view that the effects that robotics and AI might have on the labour market should be studied, and invites all Member States to do so;
Amendment 349 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 – point f
Paragraph 31 – point f
Amendment 375 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex (after subheading ‘Disclosure of use of robots and artificial intelligence by undertakings’)
Annex (after subheading ‘Disclosure of use of robots and artificial intelligence by undertakings’)
Amendment 56 #
2015/2094(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. having regard to the increase in recent years in the proportion of female domestic workers who are migrants,
Amendment 127 #
2015/2094(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Supports the promotion ofgood representation of women workers within professional organisations working to safeguard their labour rights of women workers;
Amendment 141 #
2015/2094(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses how important it is to ensure the professionalisation of the sector so as to foster the creation of quality jobs and bring better working conditions and access to training, and ensure the validation of acquired experience;
Amendment 188 #
2015/2094(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses the necessity of adapting European migration policies to the needs of the labour market in terms of domestic workers, in order to protect female migrants from ending up in illegal work situations.
Amendment 18 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas delays in access to the labour market and long periods of unemployment adversely affect career prospects, pay, health and social mobility;
Amendment 20 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas young people are an asset to the European economy and whereas they should commit themselves to acquiring the skills sought by the labour market, anticipating tomorrow’s needs;
Amendment 23 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas young people fall into three main groups – students, workers and the unemployed – and whereas distinct political approaches should be adopted for each of these groups in order to ensure that members of the group always have access to the labour market, which means that young students must have the skills needed by the labour market, young workers must update their skills and training throughout their careers and, in the case of young unemployed people, the distinction must take into account the fact that they are active job-seekers or NEETs;
Amendment 25 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A d (new)
Recital A d (new)
Ad. whereas the financial crisis of 2008 created additional problems in the access of young people to the jobs market, as youth unemployment is more sensitive to the economic cycle than overall unemployment because young people are generally less experienced;
Amendment 33 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas disadvantaged people may beare often excluded from the possibility of developing their talents and skills;
Amendment 62 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that skills development is one of the key elements of integrated employment and social policies and that it can make it possible to generate long-term growth, promote European competitiveness, combat unemployment and build a more inclusive European society;
Amendment 72 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that providers of education and training and businesses should work together to devise qualifications which faithfully reflect the actual skills that holders of those qualifications have acquired throughout their lives;
Amendment 86 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the need to build up partnerships between local authorities, education and employment services and the business community to support the creation, implementation and monitoring of employment strategies and action plans; calls for closer co-operation between schooling and vocational education, public administration, business and civil society, especially youth organisations;
Amendment 128 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that the promotion of entrepreneurship is an important factor in promoting an active approach towards one’s own carrier; believes that it is the responsibility of public bodies, businesses and the media to promote entrepreneurship; reiterates the need to develop mobility within businesses;
Amendment 155 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses that training in the workplace and high-quality apprenticeships, backed by partnerships between schools, training establishments and businesses, are ways of improving youth access to the labour market and a better use of these opportunities could enlarge the pool of potential candidates for vacancies and also improve their preparedness for work;
Amendment 164 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recalls that good quality educational and training guidance at all stages of education is necessary and can lower the risk of early school-leaving as well as help to overcome difficulties in accessing the labour market; stresses that language learning and digital literacy are fundamental;
Amendment 184 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Urges that a system of training and studies be established which adopts innovative but accessible approaches, and which focuses on developing basic skills as well as intellectual and technical capacities;
Amendment 199 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the Quality Framework for Traineeships and the European Alliance for Apprenticeships; calls for additional measures to be taken to provide compulsory social protection;
Amendment 200 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Stresses the need to provide high- quality careers guidance services based on reliable information about careers and job prospects, to help young people to make the best career choices;
Amendment 204 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that the dual model of education as well as the acquisition of practical, social and communication skills is of high importance; emphasises that these accomplishments will increase young people’s confidence in the system, make it easier for them to enter the labour market and improve their training and their predisposition to work;
Amendment 207 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Calls for the development of a single European framework for apprenticeship in order to train young people who have chosen technical training in readiness for European mobility;
Amendment 216 #
2015/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recalls that traineeships and apprenticeships should lead to employment and condemns the abuse of such arrangements; calls for Member States to withdraw the incentives which they give to businesses if the latter use traineeships and apprenticeship contracts merely to obtain cheap labour;
Amendment 21 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas in the area of adoption, the basic principle must always beit is essential that any decision should be takentaken is always in the interest of the child;
Amendment 44 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the adoption procedure concerns children who at the time adoption is applied for have not yet attained 18 years of age or the age of majority in their country of origin;
Amendment 54 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas the placement of siblings in the same adoptive family should be encouraged as far as possible, in order to spare them further trauma arising from their separation;
Amendment 78 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)
Recital L a (new)
La. whereas a good balance needs to be struck between the right of the adopted child to know its true identity and the right of the biological parents to protect theirs;
Amendment 87 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas obtaining the child’s consent to adoption should be considered whenever possible where, under the laws of the country of origin, the child has sufficient understanding;
Amendment 93 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas the European Union does not have competence to take decisions affecting the substantive law on adoptions ofmeasures aimed at enhancing judicial cooperation between the Member States;
Amendment 111 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U
Recital U
U. whereas greater efficiency and greater transparency will enable improvements in domestic adoption procedures and make international adoption easier; whereas it is therefore of the utmost importance to adopt legislation providing for the automatic recognition in a Member State of a domestic adoption order granted in another Member State,
Amendment 132 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses the utmost importance of ensuring that adoption provides a child with a stable and happy home;
Amendment 146 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls therefore on the authorities in the Member States to take all necessary measures for the well-being of the child while legal remedies are being exhausted, and throughout all the legal proceedings involved in the adoption, providing the child with protection and care appropriate to his or her harmonious development;
Amendment 156 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls moreover on the Member States to pay very particular attention to unaccompanied minors who have applied for or have refugee status, ensuring they receive the protection, assistance and care that Member States are required to furnish by virtue of their international obligations, preferably by placing them in foster families in the interim period;
Amendment 168 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Stresses that Member States, in cooperation with the Hague Conference, need to set up a framework enabling guaranteed transparency in procedures and an active role in combating child trafficking for the purposes of adoption;
Amendment 171 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Stresses that a reliable birth registration system will ensure that a child receives an identity from birth and may prevent child trafficking for adoption purposes;
Amendment 185 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to publish on the European e-Justice Portal relevant legal and procedural information on adoption law and practice in all the Member States;
Amendment 190 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses the need to cooperate closely, through European authorities such as Europol, to prevent the cross- border trafficking of children for adoption purposes;
Amendment 198 #
2015/2086(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. States that there is a clear need for European legislation to provide for the automatic cross-border recognition of domestic adoption orders;
Amendment 1 #
2015/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
– having regard the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding geographical indications;
Amendment 16 #
2015/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas consumers should be able to make informed choices when purchasing goods by being able to identify the origin and quality of the products;
Amendment 19 #
2015/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the national laws currently protecting non-agricultural products give rise to different degrees of protection in Member States and, whereas that fact poses a difficulty to effective protection in Europe as a whole and whereas that is not in conformity with the aims of the internal market;
Amendment 24 #
2015/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that a protection instrument should be established at European level, specifically for non-agricultural products, as this would enhance the prestige of locally based manufacturing and handicraft production, support local economic development and employment in the areas concerned, boost tourism and strengthen consumer confidence;
Amendment 34 #
2015/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Maintains that a link with the territory of production is essential in order to identify the special know-how and designate the quality of the productand authenticity of the product irrespective of how well-known it is;
Amendment 36 #
2015/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers, therefore, that ithere should be different ways of expressing that link: when it is possible to distinguish between the fact of making things in a protected area out of raw materials from that area and the mere fact of making something there, that distinction should be madea requirement that a product’s place of production be within a protected area even though the raw materials used in the production process may not necessarily come from that area;
Amendment 41 #
2015/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Maintains that the label/distinguishing sign/mark/logo for non-agricultural GIs should be simple, easily recognisable, and written in the language of the product’s place of origin and/or that of the country into which it is imported;
Amendment 42 #
2015/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Considers that, to maximise the GI protection of non-agricultural products, the ban on incorrect use of GIs should apply, not only where there is a the risk of consumers being misled or where there is any unfair competition, even in cases where a product’s actual origin is clearly indicated; proposes, therefore, that the additional protection provided for in Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement, initially applicable only to wines and spirits, be extended to cover the GIs of non-agricultural products;
Amendment 47 #
2015/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Suggests that there should be procedures for regional public authorities and/or chambers of commerce to monitor the fulfilment of these criteria at all stages of the production process so as to ensure that product specifications are met; considers that if such monitoring procedures are properly followed it will not be necessary to place a time limit on the GI protection of non-agricultural products or to require that it be renewed;
Amendment 52 #
2015/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Suggests that the rules on the relationship between trademarks and GIs should apply to the GI protection of non- agricultural products;
Amendment 24 #
2015/2041(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers that effective protection of whistle blowers would help to increase both public interest and democratic accountability in the European Institutions;
Amendment 25 #
2015/2041(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Calls on the Commission to draw up a regulatory framework for whistle blowers, with the aim of keeping their identity secret and protecting them against any form of reprisal;
Amendment 32 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the Commission, Parliament and the Council should record and disclose all input received from lobbyists/interest representatives on draft policies, laws and amendments as a ‘legislative footprint’; suggests that this legislative footprint should consist of a form annexed to reports, detailing all the lobbyists with whom those in charge of a particular file have met in the process of drawing up each report and a second document listing all written input receiveddetail all the lobbyists with whom those in charge of a particular file have met in the process of drawing up each report and introduce, on a voluntary basis, the recording and disclosure of written input received from lobbyists/interest representatives on draft policies, laws and amendments as a ‘legislative footprint’;
Amendment 42 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls onWelcomes the Commission to expand and improve its existing's initiative as laid out in its decision of 25 November 2014 on the publication of information on meetings held between Members of the Commission and organisations or self- employed individuals; considers that the recording of meeting data should be expanded to include everyone involved in the EU’s policy-making process;
Amendment 52 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 65 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Suggests that the Code of Conduct should be amended so as to make it mandatory for rapporteurs and committee chairs to adopt the same practice of exclusively meeting lobbyists registered lobbyists and publishwith the institutions and publish, on a voluntary basis, information on such meetings online and for rapporteurs to pu, with the aim of helping to establish a legislative footprint;
Amendment 74 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Suggests that this information should include the date, venue and purpose of the meeting;
Amendment 77 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 99 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 112 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Insists that registered law firms should declare in the lobby register all clients on whose behalf they perform coveredlobbying activities in the institutions;
Amendment 164 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Believes that the members ofaccess to the Advisory Committee chosen from amongmust be restricted to Members of the European Parliament should be complemented by a majority of externally chosen members who must be qualified experts in the field of ethics regulation and should be drawn from an open call and include members of civil societyalone, in order to preserve the secrecy of any investigations or orders of reference that the Advisory Committee might deal with as part of its duties;
Amendment 175 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Takes the view that members of the Advisory Committee are entitled to call, on an ad hoc basis, on qualified experts in the field of ethics regulation, in the form of hearings in particular;
Amendment 181 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Believes that the Code of Conduct should be amended to empower the enlarged Advisory Committee to adopt final decisions instead of the Presidentccess all the data it requires in order to analyse all aspects of a matter, including the findings of any investigations conducted by OLAF, so that it can take final decisions in full knowledge of the facts;
Amendment 215 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Believes, in this connection, that the Advisory Committee should draw up a list of criteria on the basis of which it may be established what types of activity could result in a conflict of interests;
Amendment 232 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Recommends that the transitional allowance should be taken away from Members who take up a gainful occupation after leaving Parliament, from the moment that they take up that occupation;
Amendment 244 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Believes that the Code of Conduct should be amended to provide for a three- year ‘cooling-off period’ during which Members may not engage in lobbying work in the area of their parliamentary responsibilities, and that that period should be of equivalent length to that during which they are theoretically eligible for a transitional allowance (between six and 24 months, depending on their length of service – Article 13(2) of the Statute for Members of the European Parliament);
Amendment 254 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 308 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Calls for citizens to have the same right of appeal when requesting information as they enjoy when requesting specific documents that are of public interest;
Amendment 314 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Considers that Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 should be updated as a matter of urgency, as required by the Treaty of Lisbon, by widening its scope to encompass all EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies currently not covered, such as the European Council, the European Central Bank, the European Court of Justice, Europol and Eurojustthe European Council, the European Central Bank and the Eurogroup;
Amendment 339 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Believes, therefore, that detailed reports on the proceedings of preparatory meetings within the Council should be as public as meetings of Parliament’s committeesmade available to the public;
Amendment 348 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Believes that the chairs of Parliament’s committees should proactively publish minutes and all documents used indetails of the matters on which agreement has been reached between the parties at trialogue meetings;
Amendment 357 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls on the Presidency of the Council to include all trialogue documents in the documents register to allow for access in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, where those documents have been used in negotiations that resulted in an agreement;
Amendment 391 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Believes that, when the Commission engages in trade negotiations, it should publish the negotiation mandates, all negotiating positions, all requests and offers and all consolidated draft negotiation texts prior to each negotiation round, so that the European Parliament and national parliaments, as well as civil society organisations and the wider public, can make recommendations thereon before the negotiations are closed for comments and the agreement goes to ratification;
Amendment 410 #
2015/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Believes that decisions taken or prepared in the Eurogroup, in the Economic and Financial Committee, ‘informal’ Ecofin Council meetings and Euro summits must become transparent and accountable, including through the publication of their minutes;
Amendment 7 #
2015/2040(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Points out that it is for the Commission to identify any conflict of interest which might prevent one of its Members from performing his or her duties, and takes the view, therefore, that the Commission should be in a position to check and guarantee the accuracy and completeness of the declarations of financial interests submitted by Commissioners-designate prior to their hearings before Parliament;
Amendment 15 #
2015/2040(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Takes the view that the hearings conducted by the committees responsible are important as a means not only of assessing nominees’ personalities and political priorities, but also of verifying their aptitude and ability to perform their intended duties; emphasises that nominees for posts as Commission Vice- Presidents should be treated in the same way as all other nominees;
Amendment 16 #
2015/2040(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Emphasises the need to achieve gender parity among the members of the College of Commissioners;
Amendment 21 #
2015/2040(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes the view that therearings should be more flexibility, especially as regards the time allowed fororganised in a more flexible way, in particular by doing away with the restrictions on their duration, which would allow time, for example, for spontaneous supplementary questions.;
Amendment 24 #
2015/2040(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Takes the view that rules, in particular concerning deadlines, should be laid down to govern hearings of replacement nominees, so that the latter are not placed at a disadvantage vis-à-vis the Commissioners-designate originally heard; calls, therefore, for rules governing hearings of Commissioners- designate to be set out in an interinstitutional agreement;
Amendment 32 #
2015/2039(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the important role of the Bologna Process in the creation of a Europe of Knowledge; highlights that the dissemination of knowledge, education and research are key elements of the Lisbon Strategy and that they contribute to foster European Citizenship;
Amendment 98 #
2015/2039(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Member States, and on the EU as a whole, to strengthen mobility by fostering foreign languages learning, removing administrative obstacles, providing adequate financial support mechanism and guaranteeing the transferability of grants and credits;
Amendment 50 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) This Directive should cover all contracts for the sale of goods concluded between a consumer and a seller, including distance sales contracts. While online sales of goods constitute the vast majority of distance sales in the Union, this Directive should cover all distance sales channels, including phone and mail orders, in order to avoid any unjustified distortions of competition and to create a level playing field for all businesses selling at a distance.
Amendment 62 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Fully harmonised consumer contract law rules will make it easier for traders to offer their products in other Member States. Businesses will have reduced costs as they will no longer need to take account of different consumer mandatory rules. They will enjoy more legal certainty when selling at a distance to other Member States through a stable contract law environment.
Amendment 64 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Increased competition among retailers is likely to result in wider choices at more competitive prices being offered to consumers. Consumers will benefit from a high level of consumer protection and welfare gains through targeted fully harmonised rules. This in turn would increase their trust in the, especially in cross- border commerce at a distance and, in particular, online. Consumers will be more confidently buy at a distance about making cross-border knowpurchases ing they would knowledge that they enjoy the same rights across the Union.
Amendment 66 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) This Directive covers rules applicable to the online and other distance sales of goods only in relation to key contract elements needed to overcome contract-law related barriers in the Digital Ssingle Mmarket. For this purpose, rules on conformity requirements, remedies available to consumers for lack of conformity of the goods with the contract and modalities for their exercise should be fully harmonised and the level of consumer protection as compared to Directive 1999/44/EC, should be increased.
Amendment 77 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In order to balance the requirement of legal certainty with an appropriate flexibility of the legal rules, any reference to what can be expected of or by a person in this Directive should be understood as a reference to what can reasonably be expected. The standard of reasonableness should be objectively ascertained, having regard to the nature, subject and purpose of the contract, to the circumstances of the case and to the usages and practices of the parties involved. In particular, the reasonable time for completing a repair or replacement should be objectively ascertained, having regard to the nature of the goods and the lack of conformity, if no time limit for repair or replacement is provided for in the contract.
Amendment 93 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) In order to allow businesses to rely on a single set of rules across the Union, it is necessary to fully harmonise the period of time during which the burden of proof for the lack of conformity is reversed in favour of the consumer. Within the first two yearsix months, in order to benefit from the presumption of lack of conformity, the consumer should only establish that the good is not conforming, without needing to demonstrate that the lack of conformity actually existed at the relevant time for establishing conformity. In order to increase legal certainty in relation to available remedies for lack of conformity with the contract and in order to eliminate one of the major obstacles inhibiting the Digital Single Market, a fully harmonised order in which remedies can be exercised should be provided for. In particular, the consumer should enjoy a choice between repair or replacement as a first remedy which should help in maintaining the contractual relation and mutual trust. Moreover, enabling consumers to require repair should encourage a sustainable consumption and could contribute to a greater durability of products.
Amendment 99 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Where the seller has not remedied the lack of conformity through repair or replacement without significant inconvenience for the consumer and within a reasonable time or within the time limit for replacement or repair laid down in the contract, the consumer should be entitled to a price reduction or to terminate the contract. In particular any repair or replacement needs to be successfully accomplished within this reasonable period. What is a reasonable time should be objectively ascertained considering the nature of the goods and the lack of conformity. If upon the laps of, once the reasonable period has lapsed, the seller has failed to successfully remedy the lack of conformity, the consumer should not be obliged to accept any further attempts by the seller in relation to the same lack of conformity.
Amendment 141 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) be of the quantity, quality and description required by the contract, – including those referred to in any pre- contractual commitment or declaration – which includes that where the seller shows a sample or a model to the consumer, the goods shall possess the quality of and correspond to the description of this sample or model;
Amendment 143 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 144 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where digital content is supplied over a period of time, the supplier shall, for the duration of that period, ensure that the digital content respects the rights of third parties, including those based on intellectual property, so that the digital content can be used in accordance with the contract.
Amendment 147 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) be delivered along with such accessories including packaging, installation instructions or other instructions as the consumer may reasonably expect to receive; and
Amendment 154 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
At the time relevant for establishing the conformity with the contract as determined by Article 8, the goods must be free from any right of a third party, including based on intellectual property, so that the goods can be used in accordance with the contract. If the contract concerns cultural content, and therefore works necessarily protected by copyright, the conformity of the contract implies that all copyright laws have been complied with.
Amendment 165 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) the seller has not completed repair or replacement within a reasonable time or within the time limit specified by the seller in the contract;
Amendment 166 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) the seller has declared, or it is equally clear from the circumstances, that the seller will not bring the goods into conformity with the contract within a reasonable time, or within the time limit specified by the seller in the contract.
Amendment 184 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. The consumer shall exercise the right to terminate the contract by notice to the seller given by any means laid down in the contract.
Amendment 86 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) For the achievement of a genuine digital single market, the harmonisation of certain aspects concerning contracts for supply of digital content, taking as a base a high level of consumer protection for consumers and all parties linked to the contract, including rights-holders and online service providers, is necessary.
Amendment 137 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) This Directive should fully harmonise a set of key rules that are so far not regulated at Union level. It should include therefore rules on conformity of the digital content, remedies available to consumers in cases of lack of conformity of digital content with the contract and certain modalities for the exercise of those remedies. This Directive should also harmonise certain aspects concerning the right to terminate a long term contract, as well as certakes into account the fact that certain long-term contracts make sense because they give consumers more favourable conditions than short-term contracts. It should therefore be ensured that such contracts contain aspects concerning the modification of the digital contenific conditions so as not to distort the supplier's initial intention of providing advantages to consumers who opted for this type of contract.
Amendment 175 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In the digital economy, information about individuals is often and increasingly seen by market participants as having a value comparable to money. Digital content is often supplied not in exchange for a price but against counter-performance other than money, i.e. by giving access to personal data or other data. Those specific business models apply in different forms in a considerable part of the market and can provide value to consumers by reducing costs and increasing innovation and choice of digital content and services. Introducing a differentiation depending on the nature of the counter-performance would discriminate between different business models; it would provide an unjustified incentive for businesses to move towards offering digital content against data. A level playing field should be ensuredOn the other hand, providing the same rights to consumers when they supply personal data by way of counterperformance other than money might incentivise consumers to opt for the supply of digital content in exchange for the supply of personal data rather than the payment of money. There should therefore be a balance between the rights and remedies provided for. In addition, defects of the performance features of the digital content supplied against counter- performance other than money may have an impact on the economic interests of consumers. Therefore, the applicability of the rules of this Directive should as far as possible not depend on whether a price is paid for the specific digital content in question.
Amendment 180 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) Consideration should be given to the fact that some business models are based partly or wholly on the processing and analysis of data which may offer value to consumers by reducing costs and increasing innovation and product diversity in the digital sector.
Amendment 183 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 b (new)
Recital 13 b (new)
(13b) Regulation (EU) 2016/679 on the protection of personal data, however, affords the consumer the right to object to the use or assignment of personal data concerning him so that he can protect himself against various forms of commercial prospectíon on the part of professionals using his personal data without his formal authorisation.
Amendment 196 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) As regards digital content supplied not in exchange for a price but against counter-performance other than money, this Directive should apply only to contracts where the supplier requests and the consumer actively provides data, such as name and e-mail address or photos, directly or indirectly to the supplier for example through individual registration or on the basis of a contract which allows access to consumers' photos. This Directive should not apply to situations where the supplier collects data necessary for the digital content to function in conformity with the contract, for example geographical location where necessary for a mobile application to function properly, or for the sole purpose of meeting legal requirements, for instance where the registration of the consumer is required for security and identification purposes by applicable laws. This Directive should also not apply to situations where the supplier collects information, including personal data, such as the IP address, or other automatically generated information such as information collected and transmitted by a cookie, without the consumer actively supplying it, even if the consumer accepts the cookie. It should also not apply to situations where the consumer is exposed to advertisements exclusively in order to gain access to digital content. In the cases listed above, the supplier may not in any circumstances use the data communicated to him for any other commercial purpose on behalf of a third party, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 208 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Digital content is highly relevant in the context of the Internet of Things. However it is opportune to address specific issues of liability related to the Internet of Things, including the liability for data and machine-to-machine contracts, in a separate way. The information generated by these flows should be covered by data protection standards. With a view to the protection of natural persons, due account should therefore be taken of digital developments. It is essential, therefore, that this Directive should address the security concerns linked to exchanges of information and data provided by the Internet of Things.
Amendment 220 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) This Directive should not deal with copyright and other intellectual property related aspects of the supply of digital contentaspects of the supply of digital content covered by copyright and other intellectual property rights. Therefore it should be without prejudice to any rights and obligations according to copyright law and other intellectual property laws.
Amendment 226 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) There are various ways for digital content to reach consumers. It is opportune to set simple and clear rules as to the modalities and the time for performing the supplier's main contractual obligation to supply digital content to the consumer. Considering that the supplier is not in principle responsible for acts or omissions of an internet provider or an electronic platform which the consumer selected for receiving the digital content, it should be sufficient for the supplier to supply the digital content to this third party. With regard to the time of supply, in line with market practices and technical possibilities, the digital content should be supplied immediately, unless the parties decide to agree otherwise in order to cater for other supply modelsable to adapt to a technical problem encountered by a third party (a content resale platform, for example) or to other supply models. If the supplier acts as a distributor for a creator of digital content, it must be clear for the consumer that he is entitled only to reimbursement or a replacement, but on no account to repair, a process which can be dealt with only by the creator.
Amendment 247 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) When applying the rules of this Directive, suppliers should make use of standards, open technical specifications, good practices and codes of conduct, including in relation to the commonly used data format for retrieving the content generated by the user or any other content provided by the consumer, whether established at the international level, the European level or at the level of a specific industry sector. In this context, the Commission may consider the promotion ofcalls for the development of international and European standards and the drawing up of a code of conduct by trade associations and other representative organisations that could support the uniform implementation of the Directive.
Amendment 254 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Conformity should cover material as well as legal defects. Third party rights might effectively bar the consumer from enjoying the digital content or some of its features in accordance with the contract if those third party rights are infringed, and if when the third party rightfully compels the supplier to stop infringing those rights and to discontinue offering the digital content in question. Legal defects are particularly important for digital content, which, by its nature, is subject to intellectual property rights. Therefore the content supplier should be obliged to ensure that the digital content is free from anyguarantee that third-party rights have been respected. If the rights of a third party, for example a copyright claim related to the digital content, which precludes the consumer from enjoying the digital content in accordance with have been violated, that party may hold the supplier liable and call upon it to cease supplying the content in question. In that event, the supplier will be legally liable vis-à-vis the contractsumer.
Amendment 269 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) The supplier should be liable to the consumer for the lack of conformity with the contract and for any failure to supply the digital content. Moreover, given that digital content may be supplied over a period of time, it is justified that the supplier should be liable for anythe supplier may be found liable if a lack of conformity which occurs during that period, if the consumer proves that no change has been made to the contract, in particular as concerns the digital environment and/or technical specifications.
Amendment 295 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) As a second step, if no way has been found to bring the digital content in line with the contract, and if the consumer shows that he has given the supplier all the necessary elements for making the installation of the content compatible with the digital environment or technical specificities, the consumer should be entitled to have the price reduced or the contract terminated. The right of a consumer to have the contract terminated should be limited to those cases where for instance bringing the digital content to conformity is not possible and the non- conformity impairs the main performance features of the digital content. WUnder those conditions, where the consumer terminates the contract, the supplier shouldall reimburse the price paid by the consumer or, where the digital content is supplied not in exchange for a price but against access to data provided by the consumer, the supplier shouldall refrain from using it, from transferring that data to third parties or allowing third parties to access it after terminatis soon ofas the contract is terminated. Fulfilling the obligation to refrain from using data should mean in the case whenmeans, if the counter- performance consists of personal data, that the supplier shouldabsolutely must take all measures in order to comply with data protection rules by deleting it or rendering it anonymous in such a way that the consumer can not longer be identified by any means likely reasonably to be used either by the supplier or by any other person. Without prejudice to obligations of a controller under Directive 95/46/EC the supplier should not be obliged to undertake any further steps in relation to data which the supplier has lawfully provided to third parties in the course of the duration of the contract for the supply of the digital content.
Amendment 308 #
2015/0287(COD)
(38) Upon termination the supplier should also refrain from usingmay not use the content generated by the consumer. However, in those cases where more than one consumer generated particular content, the supplier is entitled to continue to use the content generated by the consumer where those other consumers make use of it.
Amendment 313 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) In order to ensure that the consumer benefits from effective protection in relation to the right to terminate the contract, the supplier should allow the consumer to retrieve allconsumer must be able to retrieve the monetisable data uploaded by the consumsupplier, produced by the consumer with the use of the digital content or generated through the consumer's use of the digital content. This obligation should extend tocovers the data which the supplier is obliged to retain underrequired effectively to retain in relation to the contract for the supply of the digital content as well as to data which the supplier has effectively retained in relation to the contract. Steps should be taken, however, to ensure that this process does not infringe the supplier's intellectual property rights, where relevant, and does not impose too great a technical burden on him.
Amendment 329 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Due to its nature the digital content is not subject to wear and tear while being used and it is often supplied over a period of time rather than as a one-off supply. It is, therefore, justified for digital content supplied over a period of time as part of long-term contracts not to provide a period during which the supplier should be held liable for any lack of conformity which exists at the time of the supply of the digital content. Consequently Member States should refrain from maintaining or introducing such a period. However for digital content supplied as a one-off supply, it should be justified to introduce a limitation period of two years as from the time of supply of the digital content. Member States should remain free to rely on national prescription rules in order to ensure legal certainty in relation to claims based on the lack of conformity of digital content.
Amendment 432 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
9. 'interoperacompatibility' means the ability of digital content to perform all its functionalities in interaction with a concrete digital environment;
Amendment 451 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive shall apply to any contract where the supplier supplies digital content to the consumer or undertakes to do so and, in exchange, a price is to be paid or the consumer actively provides counter- performance other than money in the form of personal data or any other datasupplied voluntarily.
Amendment 499 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 6
Article 3 – paragraph 6
6. Where a contract includes elementobligations in addition to the supply of digital content, this Directive shall only apply to the obligations and remedierights and obligations of the parties as supplier and consumer of the digital content.
Amendment 540 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The supplier of digital content shall only be held accountable for delays to the provision of content if it is shown that those delays were not caused by problems with the distribution platform or internet access.
Amendment 557 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) be of the quantity, quality, duration and version and shall possess, functionality, interopera and compatibility and other performance features such as accessibility, continuity and security, as required by the contract including in any pre-contractual information which forms integral part of the contract;
Amendment 592 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. If the contract concerns cultural content, and therefore works necessarily protected by copyright, the conformity of the contract implies that all copyright laws have been complied with.
Amendment 598 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
5. In order to conform with the contract the digital content must also meet the requirements of Articles 7 and 8.
Amendment 613 #
2015/0287(COD)
It is therefore essential that the supplier and the consumer conclude a contract on the compatibility of the content with the consumer's digital environment.
Amendment 622 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. At the time the digital content is supplied to the consumer, the digital content shall be free of anyrespect all the rights of a third partyies, including those based on intellectual property, so that the digital content can be used in accordance with the contract.
Amendment 629 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Where the digital content is supplied over a period of time, the supplier shall, for the duration of that period, keep ensure that the digital content supplied to the consumer free of anyspects the rights of a third partyies, including thatose based on intellectual property, so that the digital content can be used in accordance with the contract.
Amendment 639 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The burden of proof with respect to the conformity with the contract at the time indicated in Article 10 shall be on the supplier within the first six months from the time when the digital content is supplied.
Amendment 676 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) where the contract provides that the digital content shallis to be supplied over a period of time, any lack of conformity which occurs during the duration ofat period. The burden of proof shall remain on the supplier throughout that period.
Amendment 694 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
In the case of a failure to supply the content, this regulation shall take into account the exceptional circumstances in which a contract may be required to apply, including those in which the order and delivery take place in another country and the supplier has difficulty in enforcing his rights with the service providers, especially if they are established in a Member State which the client has visited on an occasional and temporary basis. Under these circumstances it is necessary to ensure that the supplier is not penalised at once by immediate termination of the contract but to take the trouble to verify the situation in which the transaction took place.
Amendment 793 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the supplier shall take all measures which could be expectedare necessary in order to refrain from the use of the counter-performance other than moneypersonal data which the consumer has provided in exchange for the digital content and any other data collected by the supplier in relation to the supply of the digital content including any content provided by the consumer, with the exception of the content which has been generated jointly by the consumer and by others who continue to make use of the content;
Amendment 802 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the supplier shall provide the consumer with technical means to retrieve all content provided by the consumer and any other data produced or generated through the consumer's use of the digital content to the extent that data has been retained by the supplier. The consumer shall be entitled to retrieve the content free of charge, without significant inconvenience, in reasonable time and in a commonly used data format; these provisions shall apply without prejudice to the provisions protecting commercial and industrial confidentiality and intellectual property rights.
Amendment 803 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) upon request by the consumer, the supplier shall provide the consumer with technical means to retrieve all content provided by the consumer and any other data produced or generatedhis or her personal data , provided the data in question have not been deleted or rendered anonymous, and all content provided by the consumer through the consumer's use of the digital content, where technically feasible, to the extent that datacontent has been retained by the supplier and is portable to other services. The consumer shall be entitled to retrieve the content free of charge, without significant inconvenience, in reasonable time and in a commonly used data format;
Amendment 863 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. The supplier shall be liable to the consumer for any economicdigital damage to the digital environment of the consumer caused by a lack of conformity with the contract or a failure to supply the digital content. Damages shall put the consumer as nearly as possible into the position in which the consumer would have been if the digital content had been duly supplied and been in conformity with the contract.
Amendment 910 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Where the contract provides for the supply of the digital content for an indeterminate period or where the initial contract duration or any combination of renewal periods exceed 12 months, the consumer shall be entitled, this directive takes into account the fact that, where long- term contracts (those valid for more than 12 months) give consumers more favourable conditions than short-term contracts, in order to obtain them the consumer must respect the terms of that contract. If he decides to terminate the contract anbefore the end of the period of validity stime after the expiration of the first 12 months periodpulated in the contract, the penalties that are provided for in the contract and of which he was informed at the time of signature will apply automatically.
Amendment 984 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall, not later than on [the date of five years after entry into force] review the application of this Directive and submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council. The report shall examine, inter alia, the case for harmonisation of rules applicable to contracts for the supply of digital content against counter-performance other than that covered by this Directive, in particular supplied against advertisement or indirect collection of data. , active provision of personal data or indirect collection of data. The report shall also assess the impact of this Directive on consumer behaviour and on general practices of companies, in particular with regard to the scope of this Directive.
Amendment 21 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Since the internal market comprises an area without internal frontiers relying, inter alia, on the free movement of services and persons, it is necessary to provide that consumers can use online content services which legally offer access to content such as music, games, films or sporting events not only in their Member State of residence but also when they are temporarily present in other Member States of the Union. Therefore, barriers that hamper temporary access and use of such online content services cross border should be eliminated.
Amendment 33 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) There are a number of barriers which hinder the provision of these services to consumers temporarily present in another Member State. Certain online services include content such as music, games or films which are protected by copyright and/or related rights under Union law. In particular, the obstacles to cross- border portability of online content services stem from the fact that the rights for the transmission of content protected by copyright and/or related rights such as audiovisual works are often licensed on a territorial basis as well as from the fact that online service providers may choose to serve specific markets only. These practices play a strong role in the financing of European cultural content and respond to the needs of European markets. While such practices should not hamper the legitimate access to and use of online content services by consumers when they are temporarily present in another Member State, the territorial licencing system remains vital for the continuation of a strong European cultural diversity.
Amendment 61 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In order to ensure the cross-border portability of online content services it is necessary to require that online service providers enable their subscribers to use the service in the Member State of their temporary presence by providing them access to the same content on the same range and number of devices, for the same number of users and with the same range of functionalities as those offered in their Member State of residence. This obligation is mandatory and therefore the parties may not exclude it, derogate from it or vary its effect. Any action by a service provider which would prevent the subscriber from accessing or using the service while temporarily present in a Member State and not infringe this Regulation, for example restrictions to the functionalities of the service or to the quality of its delivery, would amount to a circumvention of the obligation to enable cross-border portability of online content services and therefore would be contrary to this Regulation.
Amendment 64 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Online content services which are provided without payment of money are also included in the scope of this Regulation to the extent that providers verify the Member State of residence of their subscribers. Online content services which are provided without the payment of money and whose providers do not verify the Member State of residence of their subscribers should be outside the scope of this Regulation as their inclusion would involve a major change to the way these services are delivered and involve disproportionate costs. As concerns verification of the subscriber's Member State of residence, information such as a payment of a licence fee for other services provided in the Member Statea robust and secure electronic mean of residence, the existence of a contract for internet or telephone connection, IP address or other means of authentictification, in particular the notified eIDs in accordance with the eIDAS regulation, should be relied upon, if ithey enables the provider to have reasonable indicators as to the Member State of residence of its subscribers.
Amendment 67 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) In order to ensure that providers of online content services comply with the obligation to provide cross-border portability of their services without acquiring the relevant rights in another Member State, it is necessary to stipulate that those service providers which lawfully provide portable online content services in the Member State of residence of subscribers are always entitled to provide such services to those subscribers when they are temporarily present in another Member State. This should be achieved by establishing that the provision, the access to and the use of such online content service should be deemed to occur in the Member State of the subscriber's residence. This Regulation and in particular the legal mechanism localising the provision of, the access to and the use of an online content service in the Member State of residence of the subscriber does not prevent a service provider from offering its subscriber who is temporarily present in another Member State an online content service that the provider lawfully provides in that Member State.
Amendment 73 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21a) The providers and holders of rights relevant for the provision of online content services should not be allowed to circumvent the application of this Regulation by choosing the law of a third country as the law applicable to contracts between them or to contracts between providers and subscribers.
Amendment 75 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) Should a subscriber fail to provide the necessary information and the provider is unable to verify the Member State of residence as required under this Regulation as a result, the provider should not provide cross-border portability of the online content service to such a subscriber under this Regulation.
Amendment 80 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Service providers should ensure that their subscribers are properly informed about the conditions of enjoyment of online content services in Member States other than the Member State of residence of the subscribers. The Regulation enables right holders to require that the service provider make use of effective means in order to verify that the online content service is provided in conformity with this Regulation. It is necessary, however, to ensure that the required means are reasonable, adapted to the nature of the online content service concerned and do not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve this purpose. Examples of the necessary technical and organisational measures may include sampling of IP address instead of constant monitoring of location, transparent information to the individuals about the methods used for the verification and its purposes, and appropriate security measures. Considering that for purposes of the verification what matters is not the location, but rather, in which Member State the subscriber is accessing the service, precise location data should not be collected and processed for this purpose. Similarly, where authentication of a subscriber is sufficient in order to deliver the service provided, identification of the subscriber should not be required.
Amendment 82 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Service providers should ensure that their subscribers are properly informed about the conditions of enjoyment of online content services in Member States other than the Member State of residence of the subscribers. The Regulation enables right holders to requires that the service provider make use of effective means in order to verify that the online content service is provided in conformity with this Regulation. It is necessary, however, to ensure that the required means leave room for service providers to innovate with the online means of authentication they provide to consumers to subscribe and access online content, are reasonable and do not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve this purpose. Examples of the necessary tTechnical and organisational measures may include sampling of IP addressshould be based on electronic means of identification at the time of subscription instead of constant monitoring of location, on transparent information to the individuals about the methods used for the verification and its purposes, and appropriate security measures. Considering that for purposes of the verification what matters is not the location, but rather, in which Member State the subscriber is accessing the service, precise location data should not be collected and processed for this purpose. Similarly, where authentication of a subscriber is sufficient in order to deliver the service provided, identification of the subscriber should not be required. The subscriber should be able to access the information on the Member state of residence verified and registered at the time of subscription.
Amendment 86 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25 a (new)
Recital 25 a (new)
(25a) This Regulation does not affect the application of Directive 2014/26/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council1a and in particular Title III of that Directive. The rules provided for in this Regulation are consistent with the objective facilitating the lawful access to content which is protected by copyright and related rights as well as services linked thereto. __________________ 1a Directive 2014/26/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on collective management of copyright and related rights and multi- territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online use in the internal market (OJ L 84, 20.3.2014, p. 72).
Amendment 89 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) As the Regulation will therefore apply to some contracts and rights acquired before the date of its application, it is also appropriate to provide for a reasonable period between the date of entry into force of this Regulation and the date of its application allowing right holders and service providers to make the arrangements necessary to adapt to the new situation, as well as allowing service providers to amend the terms of use of their services. Changes to the terms of use of online content services offered in packages combining an electronic communications service and an online content service made strictly in order to comply with this Regulation should not trigger any right for subscribers under national laws transposing the regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services to withdraw from contracts for the provision of such electronic communications services.
Amendment 90 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Online content services which are provided without payment of money are also included in the scope of this Regulation to the extent that providers verify the Member State of residence of their subscribers. Online content services which are provided without the payment of money and whose providers do not verify the Member State of residence of their subscribers should be outside the scope of this Regulation as their inclusion would involve a major change to the way these services are delivered and involve disproportionate costs. As concerns verification of the subscriber's Member State of residence, information such as a payment of a licence fee for other services provided in the Member Statea robust and secure electronic mean of residence, the existence of a contract for internet or telephone connection, IP address or other means of authentictification, in particular the notified eIDs in accordance with the eIDAS regulation, should be relied upon, if ithey enables the provider to have reasonable indicators as to the Member State of residence of its subscribers.
Amendment 101 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In order to ensure the cross-border portability of online content services it is necessary to require that online service providers enable their subscribers to use the service in the Member State of their temporary presence by providing them access to the same content on the same range and number of devices, for the same number of users and with the same range of functionalities as those offered in their Member State of residence. This obligation is mandatory and therefore the parties may not exclude it, derogate from it or vary its effect, except in cases where providing online content service portability is based on the physical constraints of an external product and would involve the online content service provider entering into and concluding separate contractual relations with a third-party manufacturer. Any action by a service provider which would prevent the subscriber from accessing or using the service while temporarily present in a Member State, for example restrictions to the functionalities of the service or to the quality of its delivery, would amount to a circumvention of the obligation to enable cross-border portability of online content services and therefore would be contrary to this Regulation.
Amendment 104 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point c
Article 2 – point c
(c) "Member State of residence" means the Member State where the subscriber is habitually residing, established on the basis of Article 3b, where the subscriber has his or her actual and stable residence to which he or she returns regularly;
Amendment 111 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point d
Article 2 – point d
(d) "Temporarily present" means a transitory presence of a subscriber in a Member State other than the Member State of residence determined with the provider of the online content service;
Amendment 114 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e – subparagraph 2 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e – subparagraph 2 – point 2
(2) without payment of money provided that the subscriber's Member State of residence is verified by the provider on the basis of electronic identification means, in particular notified eIDs in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 910/2014;
Amendment 116 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Service providers should ensure that their subscribers are properly informed about the conditions of enjoyment of online content services in Member States other than the Member State of residence of the subscribers. The Regulation enables right holders to requires that the service provider make use of effective means in order to verify that the online content service is provided in conformity with this Regulation. It is necessary, however, to ensure that the required means leave room for service providers to innovate with the online means of authentication they provide to consumers to subscribe and access online content, are reasonable and do not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve this purpose. Examples of the necessary tTechnical and organisational measures may include sampling of IP addressshould be based on electronic means of identification at the time of subscription instead of constant monitoring of location, on transparent information to the individuals about the methods used for the verification and its purposes, and appropriate security measures. Considering that for purposes of the verification what matters is not the location, but rather, in which Member State the subscriber is accessing the service, precise location data should not be collected and processed for this purpose. Similarly, where authentication of a subscriber is sufficient in order to deliver the service provided, identification of the subscriber should not be required. The subscriber should be able to access the information on the Member state of residence verified and registered at the time of subscription.
Amendment 128 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3a Opt-in The provider of an online content service provided without payment of money may choose to enable a subscriber who is temporarily present in a Member State to access and use the online content service provided that: (a) it determines and verifies the Member State of residence of its subscribers in accordance with this Regulation; (b) it informs the relevant holders of copyright and related rights or those holding any other rights in the content of an online content service, as well as its subscribers, within a reasonable time period before enabling such access and use; and (c) it applies the provisions of this Regulation from the moment it enables the cross-border portability for its subscribers.
Amendment 130 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 a (new)
Recital 23 a (new)
Amendment 137 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 b (new)
Recital 23 b (new)
23b. Holders of copyright and related rights or those holding any other rights in the content of an online content service should have a right to be informed of the verification process used by the service provider to establish a subscriber’s Member State of residence.
Amendment 140 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Amendment 148 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27 a (new)
Recital 27 a (new)
27a. Member States should create or designate a body with responsibility for monitoring the application of this Regulation, in order to guarantee that it is applied properly, to provide the online content service providers, the relevant rights holders and consumers with a national one-stop shop, and to enable the Commission to easily gather and exchange relevant data. In view of the impact of this Regulation along the whole value chain, that body also needs to be able to receive and offer interpretation on possible disagreements that may arise regarding the way in which this Regulation is applied. The body would have an obligation to report regularly to the Commission on disputes that might be caused by the implementation of the Regulation in order to help it to draft its guidelines.
Amendment 152 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Since the objective of this Regulation, namely the adaptation of the legal framework so that cross-border portability of online content services is provided in the Union, cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States andbut can therefore, by reason of its scale and effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve itsthat objective. Therefore, this Regulation does not substantially affect the way the rights are licensed and does not oblige right holders and service providers to renegotiate contracts. Moreover, this Regulation does not require that the provider takes measures to ensure the quality of delivery of online content services outside the Member State of residence of the subscriber. Finally, this Regulation does not apply to service providers who offer services without payment of money and who do not verify the subscriber's Member State of residence. Therefore, it does not impose any disproportionate costs,
Amendment 156 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
It shall apply from [date: 612 months following the day of its publication].
Amendment 178 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e – point 2
(2) without payment of money provided that the subscriber's Member State of residence is verified by the provider on the basis of electronic identification means, in particular notified eIDs in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 910/2014;
Amendment 209 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Amendment 229 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Amendment 240 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7a Implementation and reporting 1. Member States shall create or designate a body to monitor the proper implementation of this Regulation on its territory and shall inform the Commission of the existence of the body. 2. The body created or designated in accordance with paragraph 1 shall receive and examine complaints regarding abuse or insufficient measures taken by online content service providers or rights holders in the Member State in application of this Regulation, in particular for the application of Article 3b. The body shall also issue opinions on complaints. 3. The Commission shall produce guidelines, where necessary, on the basis of the complaints that were reported to the bodies created or designated in accordance with paragraph 1.
Amendment 242 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 b (new)
Article 7 b (new)
Article 7b Evaluation The Commission shall produce an evaluation report three years after the date of application of this Regulation to assess its implementation, particularly as regards the notion of temporary presence and the mechanisms concerning the determination and verification of the Member State of residence. The Commission shall accompany this evaluation report with legislative or non- legislative proposals to improve the implementation of this Regulation.
Amendment 22 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) To partially finance the contribution from the Union budget, the available envelopes of the Horizon 2020 – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation 2014-2020, provided by Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of will be progressively authorised by the European Parliament and of the Council2, and the Connecting Europe Facility, provided by Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council3, should be reduced. Those programmes serve purposes that are not replicated by the EFSI. However, the reduction of both programmes to finance the guarantee fund is expected to ensure a greater investment in certain areas of their respective mandates than is possible through the existing programmes. The EFSI should be able to leverage the EU guarantee to multiply the financial effect within those areas of research, developmentEuropean Council in the framework of the annual budgetary procedures 2014- 2020. A constructive and flexible approach should be therefore used by the budgetary authority, without jeopardising the long term grant-based financing scheme envisaged by Horizon 2020 and the Connecting Europe Facility. In order to achieve the goals of the Europe 2020 Strategy, the links of the knowledge triangle - Education, Research and iInnovation and transport, telecommunications and energy infrastructure compared to if the resources had been spent via grants within the planned Horizon 2020 and Connecting Europe Facility programmes. It is, therefore, appropri-should be reinforced through long-term financing strategy and stability, avoiding cuts to programmes related to redirect part of the funding presently envisaged for those programmes to the benefit of EFSI. ucation, culture and research. __________________ 3 Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing the Connecting Europe Facility, amending Regulation (EU) No 913/2010 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 680/2007 and (EC) No 67/2010 (OJ L 348, 20.12.2013, p. 129).
Amendment 4 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1
Citation 1
– having regard to Articles 4, 26, 34, 114 and 11867 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (hereinafter ‘TFEU’),
Amendment 5 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 5 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1
Citation 1
– having regard to Articles 4, 26, 34, 114, 118 and 11867 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),
Amendment 7 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
– having regard to the UNESCO Convention of 20 October 2005 on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions,
Amendment 11 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2
Citation 2
– having regard to Articles 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 22 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
Amendment 12 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2
Citation 2
– having regard to Articles 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 22 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
Amendment 13 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that the European cultural markets are naturally heterogeneous because of the European cultural and linguistic diversity, notes that this diversity should be considered as a benefit rather than an obstacle to the Single Market;
Amendment 15 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
– having regard to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, in particular to the three-step test established therein,
Amendment 16 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 g (new)
Paragraph 1 g (new)
1g. Stresses that the copyright framework and its effective enforcement, that attain and safeguard a fair remuneration for artists, creators and rightholders play a vital role in encouraging creativity, fostering cultural diversity and ensuring the creation of new creative and cultural content across the Union;
Amendment 16 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
– having regard to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, and expressly to the Three Steps Test,
Amendment 18 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
– having regard to the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions of the 20th October 2005,
Amendment 20 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
– having regard to the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS),
Amendment 27 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 h (new)
Paragraph 1 h (new)
1h. Emphasizes that any reform of the copyright framework should take as a basis a high level of protection, since rights are crucial to intellectual creation and provide a stable, clear and flexible legal base that fosters investment and growth in the creative and cultural sector, whilst removing legal uncertainties and inconsistencies that adversely affect the functioning of the internal market;
Amendment 27 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9
Citation 9
Amendment 28 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9
Citation 9
Amendment 30 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Recalls that the Union, as well as the Member States, are parties to international treaties on copyright that involve a certain number of obligations and guarantees that should be respected;
Amendment 33 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Supports the initiatives aimed at enhancing the portability, within the Union, of online services of legally acquired and legally made available content, whilst fully respecting copyrights and the interests of right-holders;
Amendment 36 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
Citation 17 a (new)
- having regard to the Commission Green Paper of 13 July 2011 on the online distribution of audiovisual works in the European Union: opportunities and challenges towards a digital single market (COM(2011 427 final),
Amendment 37 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 f (new)
Paragraph 1 f (new)
1f. Notes that several studies have demonstrated that the cultural and creative sectors, often copyright intensive, already account for up to 4.5% of GDP and up to 8.5 million jobs in the Union and are not only essential for cultural diversity but also significantly contribute to social and economic development;
Amendment 37 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
Citation 17 a (new)
- having regard to the Green Paper of the Commission on the online distribution of audiovisual works in the European Union: opportunities and challenges towards a digital single market (COM(2011)427)),
Amendment 39 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 42 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19 a (new)
Citation 19 a (new)
- having regard to the report on the online distribution of audiovisual works in the European Union (A7-0262/2012),
Amendment 43 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the ability to link one resource to another is one of the fundamental building blocks of the Internet, but stresses that under certain circumstances, embedding and linking should notcan be considered as acts of communication to thea new public and thus should not be subject to Article 3 of the directiveerefore can constitute an infringement to copyrights;
Amendment 43 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 a (new)
Citation 20 a (new)
- having regard to the September 2013 joint EPO and OHIM study entitled 'Intellectual property rights intensive industries: contribution to economic performance and employment in the European Union',
Amendment 51 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 53 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European legal framework for copyright and related rights is central to the promotion of creativity and innovation, to safeguarding cultural diversity and to access to knowledge and information;
Amendment 56 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 68 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that the room for manoeuvre left to Member States in accordance with the subsidiarity principle has enabled them to adapt exceptions and limitations to their social and economic circumstances;
Amendment 68 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the objective of Directive 2001/29/EC on the harmonisation of certain aspectwas to adapt the rules ofn copyright and related rights in the information society was aimed at adapting legislation on copyright and so as to take account of technological developments, promote the dissemination of knowledge and culture, enhance legal certainty and, at the same time, ensure a high level of intellectual property protection, with a view to safeguarding the autonomy and dignity of crelated rights to reflect technological developmentors and performers and to encouraging investment in creative and innovative activities in order to foster growth and European industrial competitiveness;
Amendment 72 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas Directive 2001/29/EC also addresses a number of EU obligations under international law, including the provisions of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, of the WIPO Copyright Treaty and of the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty;
Amendment 75 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas any political initiative concerning the digital single market must be in keeping with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and in particular Articles 11, 13, 14, 16, 17 and 22 thereof;
Amendment 76 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that exceptions and limitations are properly implemented; calls on Member States, at the same time, to provide all possible information concerning best practices and the obstacles encountered in the implementation of those exceptions and limitations, in order to promote equal access to cultural diversity across borders within the internal market and to improve legal certainty;
Amendment 81 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Notes the need to carry out an in-depth study of exceptions for research and education purposes before contemplating any changes to the relevant Community rules;
Amendment 85 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5d. Acknowledges the importance of libraries for access to knowledge; encourages stakeholders to find appropriate solutions to enable libraries to fulfil their potential in the digital environment whilst respecting rightholders’ interests;
Amendment 92 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights protects the freedom of expression, thefreedom of information, freedom of the arts and scientific researchce, the right to education and the freedom to conduct a business, personal data and intellectual property;
Amendment 98 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses the fact that exceptions and limitations should be applied whilst taking account of the specific individual features of digital and analogue environments and should neither conflict with the normal exploitation of the work nor unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author or rightholder; they are established for very specific reasons and should be strictly interpreted by the Member States;
Amendment 99 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 100 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 103 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that digital levies should be moadernised in light of the development of digital technologies more transparent and optimised to safeguard rightholder and consumer rights and by taking into account Directive 2014/26/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on collective management of copyright and related rights and multi-territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online use in the internal market;
Amendment 110 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 111 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 112 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Suggests a review of the liability and status of service providers to guarantee the legal dissemination of culture across the EU and in accordance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Unnd fair remuneration for creation andin the European Convention on Human RightsU;
Amendment 114 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 c (new)
Paragraph -1 c (new)
–1c. Points out that copyright is the tangible means of ensuring that creators are remunerated and that the creative process is funded;
Amendment 116 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Recognizes that commercial copyright infringing activities pose a serious threat to the functioning of the digital single market and to the development of the legal offer of diversified cultural and creative content online;
Amendment 120 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas creative works are one of the main sources nourishing the digital economy and information technology players such as search engines, social media and platforms for user-generated content, but virtually all the value generated by creative works is transferred to those digital intermediaries, which refuse to pay authors or negotiate extremely low levels of remuneration;
Amendment 121 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Amendment 126 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. having regard to the competitive advantage and growing power of a number of Internet intermediaries and to the negative impact of this situation on authors' creative potential and on the development of services offered by other distributors of creative works;
Amendment 127 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Emphasises that any revision of Directive 2001/29/EC should continue to safeguard the principle of fair remuneration for rightholders; calls for a reaffirmation of the principle of territoriality, enabling each Member State to safeguard the fair remuneration principle within the framework of its own cultural policy;
Amendment 129 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)
Recital E c (new)
Ec. whereas the Commission’s priority and the focus of its 2014-2019 programme is the creation of growth and jobs;
Amendment 130 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Points out that the existence of copyright and related rights inherently implies territoriality; emphasises that there is no contradiction between that principle and measures to ensure the portability of content;
Amendment 131 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E d (new)
Recital E d (new)
Ed. whereas many creative on-line services have developed thanks to the application of the Directive, and consumers have never before had access to such a wide range of creative and cultural works – with more than 3 000 on-line on-demand audiovisual services, 2 million titles available as e-books, 230 digital music services and 43 million licensed musical works;
Amendment 134 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E e (new)
Recital E e (new)
Ee. whereas users need access to a plentiful and diverse supply of high- quality content;
Amendment 146 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative of conducting a consultation on copyright, which attracted great interest from civil society with more than 9 500 replies, 58.7 % of which came from end usersall those concerned11; __________________ 11 Commission, DG MARKT, Report on the responses to the Public Consultation on the Review of the EU Copyright Rules, July 2014, p. 5.
Amendment 147 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative of conducting a consultation on copyright, which attracted great interest from civil society with more than 9 500 replies, 58.7 % of which came from end users11 all relevant stakeholders; __________________ 11 Commission, DG MARKT, Report on the responses to the Public Consultation on the Review of the EU Copyright Rules, July 2014, p. 5.
Amendment 156 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes with concern that the vast majority of end-user respinterest the increased range of condtents report facing problems when trying to access online services across the Member States, particularly where technological protection measures are used to enforce territorial restrictions that has been available to users lawfully since the implementation of Directive 2001/29/EC;
Amendment 167 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that the creative and cultural sectors, as represented by authors, performers, publishers, producers, broadcasters, collective rights management bodies and other rightholders, as well as the majority of Member States, share the view that the current legal framework is suitable and sufficiently flexible to address in a sustainable way the demand for content available on-line throughout the Member States;
Amendment 168 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes with concern the growing number of illegal on-line services and the increasing incidence of piracy and, more generally, of infringements of intellectual property rights, a trend that poses a serious threat to Member States’ economies and to creativity in the European Union;
Amendment 172 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Points out that copyright-intensive industries employ more than seven million people in the Union; asks the Commission, therefore, to ensure that, in line with the principles of better regulation, any legislative initiative to modernise copyright be preceded by an exhaustive ex-ante assessment of its impact in terms of growth and jobs, as well as its potential costs and benefits;
Amendment 175 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Emphasises that any revision of EU copyright law must be properly focused and must be based on convincing data, with a view to securing the continued development of Europe’s creative industries;
Amendment 213 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 230 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Points out that, in the fragile ecosystem which produces and finances creative work, exclusive rights and freedom of contract are key components because they make for improved risk sharing, enable a range of players to get involved in joint projects for a culturally diverse audience and underpin the incentive to invest in professional content production;
Amendment 233 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 f (new)
Paragraph 4 f (new)
4f. Draws attention to the fact that multi- territorial licensing, as provided for in Directive 2014/26/EU on collective management of copyright, is an option when broadcasters want Europe-wide coverage;
Amendment 235 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 h (new)
Paragraph 4 h (new)
4h. Points out that the financing, production and co-production of films and television content depend to a great extent on exclusive territorial licences granted to local distributers on a range of platforms reflecting the cultural specificities of the various markets in Europe; that being so, emphasises that the ability, under the principle of freedom of contract, to select the extent of territorial coverage and the type of distribution platform encourages investment in films and television content and promotes cultural diversity; calls on the Commission to ensure that any initiative to modernise copyright is preceded by a wide-ranging study of its likely impact on the production, financing and distribution of films and television content, and also on cultural diversity;
Amendment 242 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 243 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 257 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to safeguard public domain works, which are by definition not subject to copyright protection and should therefore be able to be used and re-used without technical or contractual barriers; also calls on the Commission to recognise the freedom of rightholders to voluntarily relinquish their rights and dedicate their works to the public domain;
Amendment 272 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to harmonise the term of protection of copyright to a duration that does not exceed the current international standards set out in the Berne ConventionNotes that the term of protection has been harmonised at EU level since 2006 (with Directive 2006/116/EC); notes that Directive 2011/77/EU provides for simplification of the system, aligning the term of protection of related rights with that of copyright and setting out rules on co-authored works; encourages further rationalisation in the directive’s application throughout the EU;
Amendment 279 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to harmonise the term of protection of copyright to a duration that does not exceed the current international standards set out in the Berne Conventionmaintain the high level of harmonisation of the term of protection of copyright, in accordance with the Berne Convention; emphasises that the term of protection for holders of related rights should also be harmonised;
Amendment 292 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that exceptions and limitations in the digital environment should be enjoyed without any unequal treatment as compared with those granted in the analogue worldmust be applied in such a way as to take account of the particular respective characteristics of the digital and analogue environments;
Amendment 315 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Views with concern the increasing impact of differences among Member States in the implementation of exceptions, which creates legal uncertainty and has direct negative effects on the functioning of the digital single market, in view of the development of cross-border activitiesNotes that the room for manoeuvre left to Member States under the subsidiarity principle has made it possible to adapt the exceptions to social and economic realities in the Member States without creating obstacles to the functioning of the internal market;
Amendment 335 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to make mandatory all the exceptions and limitations referred to in Directive 2001/29/EC, to allowensure the proper application of the exceptions and limitations and to provide all the information necessary to promote equal access to cultural diversity across borders within the internal market and to improve legal certainty;
Amendment 343 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to make mandatoryensure the proper implementation of all the exceptions and limitations referred to in Directive 2001/29/EC, to allowand to provide all necessary information to promote an equal access to cultural diversity across borders within the internal market and to improve legal certainty, while ensuring respect for the principle of subsidiarity, cultural diversity and evidence of clear cross-border impact;
Amendment 352 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 h (new)
Paragraph 11 h (new)
11h. Recalls the importance of SMEs in the cultural and creative industries in terms of job creation and growth in the European Union; stresses that the vast majority of SMEs in the cultural and creative industries take advantage of the flexibility of copyright rules to produce, invest and distribute cultural and creative works but also to develop innovative solutions which enable users to gain access to creative works on line adapted to the preferences and specificities of local markets;
Amendment 359 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes with interest the development of new forms of use of works on digital networks, in particular transformative uses, and stresses in this connection the need for service-providers and technical intermediaries on the Internet to remunerate rightholders for the use of works on their platforms and networks;
Amendment 361 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes with interest the development of new forms of use of works on digital networks, in particular transformative uses, and stresses that these should be subject to the same level of copyright protection while keeping the best balance between an efficient protection that provides for a proper remuneration for creators and the objective of the public interest for access to cultural goods and knowledge;
Amendment 375 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. CRecalls for the adoption of an open norm introducing flexibility in the interpretation of exceptions and limitations in certain special cases that dothat the exceptions and limitations should not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author or rightholder, while keeping the interpretation of exceptions and limitations on the level of Member States to permit the adaptation of the copyright system to different national circumstances and social needs;
Amendment 379 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. CRecalls for the adoption of an open norm introducing flexibility in the interpretation of exceptions and limitations in certain special cases that dothat exceptions and limitations must not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and do notor unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author or rightholder; they are created for quite specific reasons and must be strictly applied by Member States;
Amendment 392 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Urges the European legislator to ensure the technological neutrality and future- compatibility of exceptions and limitations by taking due account of the effects of media convergence; considers, in particular, that the exception for quotation should expressly include audio- visual quotations in its swhile serving the public interest by fostering incentives to create, finance and distribute new works and to make those works available to the public in new, innovative and compelling ways;
Amendment 394 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Urges the European legislator to ensure the technological neutrality and future- compatibility of exceptions and limitations by taking due account of the effects of media convergence; considers, in particular, that the exception for quotation should expressly include audio- visual quotations in its scope;
Amendment 401 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses that the ability to freely link from one resource to another isby means of a hyperlink is indeed one of the fundamental building blocks of the internet; calls on the EU legislator to make, but that, itn clear that reference to works by means of a hyperlink is not subject to exclusive rights, as it does not consist inertain cases, the link and the incorporation may be regarded as a communication to a new public12; __________________ 12Order of the Court of Justice of 21 October 2014 in Case C-348/13, BestWater International GmbH v Michael Mebes and Stefan Potsch (request for a preliminary ruling from Germany’s Bundesgerichtshof). and, by virtue of that very fact, constitute a breach of copyright;
Amendment 421 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the EU legislator to ensure that theonsiders that the commercial use of photographs, video footage or other images of works which are permanently located in physical public places is permittedshould always be subject to prior authorisation from the authors or any proxy acting for them;
Amendment 431 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 449 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses the need to enable automated analytical techniques for text and data (e.g. ‘text and data mining’) for all purposes, provided that permission to read the work has been acquired and that the rightholders have been remunerated;
Amendment 469 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls for a broad exception for research and education purposes, which should cover not only educational establishments but any kind oflso educational or research activity, including non-formal educationies linked to an educational establishment or institution recognised by national authorities or legislation or within the purview of an educational programme;
Amendment 475 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls for the adoption of a mandatory exception allowing libraries to lend books to the public in digital formats, irrespective of the place of accesRecognises the importance of libraries for access to knowledge; encourages the parties concerned to work out appropriate solutions to enable libraries to realise their potential in the digital environment, while respecting the interests of rightholders;
Amendment 490 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 510 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls for the adoption of harmonised criteria for defining the harm caused to rightholders in respect of reproductions made by a natural person for private use, and for harmonised transparency measures as regards the private copying levies put in place in some Member States13Believes that the private copying system is a virtuous system that balances the exception for copying for private use with the right to fair remuneration of rightholders, and that it is a system worth preserving; __________________ 13 As stated in António Vitorino’s recommendations of 31 January 2013 resulting from the latest mediation process conducted by the Commission in respect of private copying and reprography levies.
Amendment 514 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. CRecalls for the adoption of harmonised criteria for defining the harm caused to rightholders in respect of reproductions made by a natural person for private use, and for harmonised transparency measures as regards the private copying levies put in place in some Member States13the European Parliament resolution of February 2014 which underlined the importance of the system of remuneration for private copying in seeking to strike a balance between the interests of consumers and those of rightholders; __________________ 13 As stated in António Vitorino’s recommendations of 31 January 2013 resulting from the latest mediation process conducted by the Commission in respect of private copying and reprography levies.
Amendment 519 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. CRecalls for the adoption of harmonised criteria for definingthe importance of fair compensation for the harm caused to rightholders in respect of reproductions made by a natural person for private use, and for harmonised transparency measures as regards the private copying levies put in place in some Member States13; __________________ 13As stated in António Vitorino’s recommendations of 31 January 2013 resulting from the latest mediation process conducted by the Commission in respect of private copying and reprography levies.;
Amendment 533 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. StressNotes that the effective exercise of exceptions or limitations, and access to content that is not subject to copyright or related rights protection, should not be hindered by technological measuresis guaranteed by Article 6(4) 0f Directive 2001/29/EC;
Amendment 547 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 548 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 556 #
2014/2256(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 e (new)
Paragraph 24 e (new)
24e. Calls on the Commission and the legislature to consider solutions for the displacement of value from content to services; stresses the need to adjust the definition of the status of intermediary in the current digital environment;
Amendment 14 #
2014/2241(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Highlights that cultural tourism has an important role in the European economy as it creates millions of jobs and enhances social cohesion; stresses, in this regard, that safeguarding tangible and intangible cultural heritage, in its diverse manifestations, and promoting cultural creativity is essential and should be among our top priorities;
Amendment 18 #
2014/2241(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Emphasizes that cultural tourism can educate local communities and can influence policy-making; points out that cultural tourism is an essential part of many national and regional economies and an important factor for cultural exchange and development; reiterates that tourism should be based on strategies that protect and strengthen both natural and cultural diversities, preserve local cultures, traditions, heritage and environment;
Amendment 67 #
2014/2241(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Underlines the importance to foster close collaboration and cooperation between culture and tourism in order to support responsible, culturally aware, inclusive and sustainable tourism that contribute to the socio-economic development of host communities, promote cross-cultural exchanges and multicultural understanding;
Amendment 73 #
2014/2241(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Points out that host communities and indigenous peoples should be involved in different policies for the identification, promotion, protection, conservation, management, presentation and interpretation of their heritage resources, cultural practices and contemporary cultural expressions, in the context of tourism;
Amendment 76 #
2014/2241(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Stresses the potential of cultural tourism for poverty alleviation; calls, in this regard, for fostering the countries' creative industries and rural tourism in order to promote Europe's extraordinary cultural wealth and fight poverty and unemployment;
Amendment 94 #
2014/2241(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Asks the Commission and the Member States to implement the action to protect endangered monuments and sites in Europe in order to safeguard and promote cultural heritage and therefore encourage cultural tourism;
Amendment 101 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
ia. Calls on the Commission however to ensure that the rules on the cultural exception continue to be excluded from the negotiating mandate for Brussels;
Amendment 105 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point i b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point i b (new)
ib. Calls on the Commission to ensure in particular that all matters benefiting European artists and producers are included in the rules on cultural exception;
Amendment 106 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point i c (new)
Paragraph 1 – point i c (new)
ic. Calls on the Commission to give guarantees regarding inclusion of the publishing sector in the cultural exception;
Amendment 1 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Welcomes the EU Action Plan on the enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and particularly emphasises and supports the application of due diligence throughout the supply chain, the ‘follow the money’ approach, the improvement of IP civil enforcement procedures for SMEs, the targeted communication campaign and the focus on commercial scale IPR infringements;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Notes that according to the Commission, the cultural and creative sectors, often IPR intensive, already account for up to 4.5% of GDP and up to 8.5 million jobs in the European Union and are not only essential for cultural diversity but also significantly contribute to social and economic development;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
- having regard to Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 concerning customs enforcement of intellectual property rights and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1383/2003,
Amendment 3 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that the key objective of the aAction pPlan should be to ensure that future measures taken toe effective enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) are not based solely on data provided by the industry, in particular in the cultural and creative sectors, but on precise, unbiased data documenting IPR infringements; emphasises that the duty of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) to generate reliable data which allow an analysis of the real impact of infringements on the industry should be part of the ten-point action planwhich plays a key role in stimulating innovation, creativity, competitiveness, growth and cultural diversity;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 b (new)
Citation 2 b (new)
- having regard to the report submitted by OHIM and the EPO in September 2013, entitled ‘Intellectual property rights intensive industries: contribution to economic performance and employment in the European Union’,
Amendment 6 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that while data on the number and type of intellectual property rights in existence is relatively easy to collect and analyse, studies on the scope and scale of IP infringements and their relation to criminality have been more difficult; to this end emphasises the important role played by the European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights in providing data, tools and databases to support the fight against IP infringement;
Amendment 7 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that in a time of financial crisis when funding for culture suffers from severe cuts, IPR enforcement is often a primary source of revenue for artists and creators; stresses therefore that attaining and safeguarding a fair remuneration for artists, creators and right holders should be one of the key objectives of the Action Plan;
Amendment 8 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Stresses the importance of ensuring the application of due diligence throughout the supply chain, including the digital supply chain and all the key actors and operators in it, such as creators, artists and right holders, producers, intermediaries, internet service providers, online sales platforms, end users and public authorities;
Amendment 9 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Emphasises the importance of improving IP civil enforcement procedures for SMEs and individual creators, as they play a key role in the creative and cultural sectors and often do not have the capacity to enforce their rights given the complexity, cost and length of such procedures;
Amendment 10 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)
Paragraph 1 e (new)
1e. Supports the launching of targeted communication campaigns to raise awareness on the economic and potential health and safety risks associated with commercial scale IPR infringements, particularly amongst the younger generations growing up in the digital era;
Amendment 11 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 f (new)
Paragraph 1 f (new)
1f. Notes that, in preventing commercial scale IPR infringements, it is also important to enlarge the legal offer of diversified cultural and creative content online and to increase its accessibility; to this end calls on the Commission to take actions to support such efforts and promote investment in new competitive business models that broaden the legal offer of creative and cultural content and restore consumer trust and confidence online;
Amendment 13 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the EU faces a high number of intellectual property rights infringements, and whereas the volume and financial value of these infringements are alarming, as reported by the Commission in its report on the application of the Directive on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (COM(2010)0779); whereas these figures also illustrate the added value which IPR represent for the European economy in global competition;
Amendment 15 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that the system for the notification and removal, one URL at a time, of content that infringes IPR, has practical limitations in view of the speed with which the content in question can be made available again; calls, therefore, on operators in this sector to start thinking about how to make the notification and removal system more effective in the long term;
Amendment 16 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Notes that, in Member States where this is permitted by law, the blocking by a court ruling of internet sites which allow IPR infringements has practical limitations in the long term;
Amendment 22 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that in the interests of innovation, creativity and competitiveness, it is crucial that the IPR infrastructure is transparent and that full information is available to the public and to all other actors concernedo achieve a meaningful enforcement of IPR through a fully transparent, holistic, balanced and flexible system that can react rapidly to the evolving challenges that face the EU knowledge economy in the digital era;
Amendment 33 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises that in order to stimulate innovation and competitiveness in knowledge-based sectors in the Union, IPR enforcement should not prevent opengoes hand in hand with the promotion of research and knowledge sharing, which are also identified as key elements in the ‘Global Europe’ and ‘Europe 2020’ strategies;
Amendment 34 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas law enforcement is essential, and whereas it is of the utmost importance to find effective means ofMember States must adopt measures to enforcinge IPR effectively;
Amendment 35 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Emphasises the need for preventive measures and precise detection systems that lead to the swift interruption of commercial scale IPR infringing activities;
Amendment 38 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Insists that remedies be put in place for platforms adversely affected by any measure taken to combat commercial infringements of IPR by operators in the sector on the basis of exchange of information;
Amendment 40 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4d. Points out that ‘cyberlocker’ platforms are one of the main hubs for IPR infringements, from which they indirectly derive income via advertising and/or subscriptions;
Amendment 41 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that potential health and safety risks of marketed goods are a very serious issue; stresses in this context that the quality of a product is a diffeStresses that IPR infringing products not only cause the direct loss of revenue to legitimate businesses but also lead to direct and indirenct issue from the status of IPR and whether there has been an infringement, and thus should be dealt with separately.job losses, to reputational damage and to increased enforcement costs whilst often having links to organised crime and posing potential health and safety risks;
Amendment 43 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Encourages the Commission when addressing whether there is a need to adapt the IPR enforcement legislation to the digital era to safeguard the fair balance between all key actors in the supply chain whilst fully respecting the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, namely the protection of personal data and respect for private life, the right to property and the right to access to justice;
Amendment 44 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Recalls that several other issues of IPR enforcement not included in the Action Plan were identified in the consultation process on the civil enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights carried out by the Commission from 2012-2013, including the difficulties in identifying infringers and alleged infringers, the role of intermediaries in assisting the fight against IPR infringements and the attribution of damages in IPR disputes; thus recalls that the Action Plan is only a starting point in securing the enforcement of IPR;
Amendment 45 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Calls on the Commission to consider all possible options to address the enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, including the proposal of more concrete legislative actions.
Amendment 49 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to study the feasibility of a European label indicating to the public which internet sites are considered free of commercial IPR infringements.
Amendment 49 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
Subheading 1
Involving all actors in the supply chain, both on line and off line
Amendment 59 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that applying due diligence throughout the supply chain would improve the business environment and contribute to preventing infringing goods from entering the market; stresses, however, that the cost-benefit ratio of qualitative auditing schemes should be well assessed and that providing support to SMEs should be considered , in the context of commercial activity, applying due diligence on the part of the various parties throughout the supply chain is a key element in combating infringements of IPR and protecting consumers to the maximum, and would improve cooperation between undertakings and contribute to preventing infringing goods from entering that respece market;
Amendment 60 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the approach of depriving IPR infringers of their revenues by means of agreements between right-holders and their partners; supports the elaboration of memoranda of overall understanding as soft-law measures to fight against counterfeiting and piracy, and supports the idea of developing such measures further among stakeholders, involving all stakeholders in the value chain;
Amendment 68 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses the need to address, more specifically, the younger generation by means of appropriate campaigns to raise awareness, bearing in mind that, as a recent survey of perceptions of intellectual property has revealed, it is that particular generation that is least respectful of intellectual property rights;
Amendment 69 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Stresses the importance of initiatives to assess and monitor the development of knowledge of young people’s understanding and perception of intellectual property in order to better understand their needs and to define the most appropriate action to take;
Amendment 70 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes at the same time that consumers shouldthe public authorities and European institutions should help consumers to be better able to identify infringing offers so that they can decide not to proceed with a given purchase; deplores the fact that the Commission’s action plan does not include any action designed to improve consumers’ ability to identify infringing goods and contents, and calls on the Commission to reflect further on the development of specific tools, including labelling, based on the experiences gathered by the Commission and the European Observatory on Counterfeiting and Piracy, especially with regard to the sharing of best practiceencourages the Commission and Member States to introduce effective measures requiring each participant in the supply chain to refrain from using means intended to mislead consumers; calls in particular on the Commission to step up measures to combat unfair on-line trading practices, particularly those aimed directly at consumers;
Amendment 74 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes at the same time that consumers should be better able to identify infringing offers so that they can decide not to proceed with a given purchase; deplores the fact that the Commission’s action plan does not include any action designed to improve consumers’ ability to identify infringing goods and contents, and calls on the Commission to reflect further on the development of specific tools, guides, including labelling, based on the experiences gathered by the Commission and the European Observatory on Counterfeiting and PiracyInfringements of Intellectual Property Rights, especially with regard to the sharing of best practices;
Amendment 82 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that the lack of a competitive supply of non-infringing products and content makes it difficult to deter consumers from buying unlawful goods or using unlawful contentinfringements of IPR hamper the development of new economic models whose competitiveness is damaged by illicit offers an abusive practices; takes the view that sufficient progress has not been made in this area, and reiterates its demand that the Commission and Member States put more pressure on thsupport the cultural and creative industry toin developing, in all Member States, licit offers that are both diversified and attractive;
Amendment 83 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 90 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Stresses that intellectual property rights are guarantors of the creativity, innovation and competiveness of the cultural and creative industries in particular, but also of other industrial sectors, as underlined by Commission in its Communication ‘For a European industrial renaissance’; calls on the Commission to continue the work of taking IPR into account as a factor in the competitiveness of the European economy;
Amendment 102 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Stresses the importance of regularly analysing the factors which decisively influence decisions by SMEs to use or not to use IPR, so as to identify where improvements could be made, whether in the case of innovative SMEs or in the case of SMEs which encounter problems, in particular, in exercising their IPR;
Amendment 104 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Expresses its satisfaction about the development of the activities of the European Observatory on Counterfeiting and Piracy as a tool for collecting and exchanging data and information on all forms of IPR infringements, and welcomes in particular the efforts made and the results obtained, notably as regards the Enforcement Database and the Anti- Counterfeiting Intelligence Support ToolInfringements of Intellectual Property Rights as a useful aid to the deliberations of political decision-makers and as a tool for collecting and exchanging data and information on all forms of IPR infringements;
Amendment 105 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Welcomes in particular the efforts made and the results achieved by the Observatory, particularly regarding specialised studies and tools, such as the implementation database and the Anti- Counterfeiting Intelligence Support Tool database, and calls on Member States to take full advantage of them;
Amendment 106 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Commission to make full use of the data collected by the Observatory, and of the results of the Observatory’s activities, to draw conclusions and propose solutions for improving IPR enforcement to be used by policy-makers; calls on the Commission to report back to Parliament on this on a regular basis;
Amendment 109 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the establishment by the Commission of an expert group on IPR enforcement, and calls on the Commission to invite Parliament and, where necessary, the European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights, to send experts to attend its meetings;
Amendment 110 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Stresses the need to work together and for information to be exchanged between all parties;
Amendment 124 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Stresses the importance of close cooperation and exchanges of information, as well as the importance of appropriate training of customs authorities, market surveillance authorities and judicial authorities;
Amendment 14 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
(This amendment does not apply to the English version)
Amendment 15 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas however a growing number of European films with a modest production and promotion budget would benefit from more flexible release strategies and earlier availability in VOD services;
Amendment 16 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas a better organisation of the release windows would maximise the potential audience, while making the unauthorised consumption of films less attractive;
Amendment 17 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas Article 13.1 of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) obliges Member States to ensure that on-demand service providers promote European works;
Amendment 18 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Gc (new)
Recital Gc (new)
Gc. whereas this provision has been implemented in a diverse manner with different levels of legal requirements and has led to providers establishing themselves in those Member States with the lowest requirements;
Amendment 22 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas it is essential to guarantee funding for the digitisation, preservation and online availability of film heritage and related materials and to establish European standards on preservation of digital films;
Amendment 23 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas media literacy, and in particular film literacy can empower citizens to develop critical thinking and understanding;
Amendment 34 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that the effectiveness of the fight against the unauthorised consumption of films requires, inter alia, the establishment of legal VOD services and high-quality online services, which are easy to use, featuring a broad and diverse catalogue of films available in several languages with subtitled versions;
Amendment 42 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes in particular the role played by MEDIA in supporting subtitling and dubbing to increase availability of European films in original versions with subtitles which facilitate their circulation and improve knowledge and understanding of European cultures and languages;
Amendment 44 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Underlines the importance of recently adopted preparatory action on 'Crowdsourcing subtitling to increase the circulation of European works' and the future work by the Commission to implement this action;
Amendment 51 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Suggests that there is a need to promote and support European coproductions and that the increase in such productions may result in the wider distribution of European films all across Europe;
Amendment 52 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Highlights moreover growing success of high quality European TV series and the strategic importance of further encouraging their production, distribution and promotion on the European and the global markets;
Amendment 54 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Suggests strengthening existing measures for better optimisation of the price of cinema tickets, the development of innovative promotions and subscription offers that would help ensure the attractiveness of, and access of all to, cinemas;
Amendment 57 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Recognises that cinemas are still the most important places to present and promote films and furthermore places where people meet and exchange views, and stresses that the disappearance of small and independent cinemas, in particular in small towns and less developed regions, limits access to European cultural resources, heritage and dialogue;
Amendment 58 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses the importance of MEDIA in testing innovative approaches in audience development, in particular through supporting festivals, film literacy initiatives and audience development actions;
Amendment 67 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Calls on Member States in particular to increase public funding to support at an early stage distribution and promotion of national films abroad as well as non- national European films;
Amendment 77 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Welcomes the Commission’'s initiative to establish a European Film Forum, in order to facilitate a structured dialogue on the challenges currently faced by the European film industrywith all stakeholders of the European film industry on the challenges it currently faces in the digital era;
Amendment 81 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls in that respect for a broad participation and cooperation amongst all Institutions concerned, in particular with the European Parliament;
Amendment 96 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Supports innovative projects such as the Commission’'s preparatory action on the circulation of European films in the digital era, designed to test a more flexible release of films across media in several Member States and welcomes the integration of this action in the Creative Europe programme;
Amendment 98 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Urges the Member States to guarantee the appropriate level of funding for digitisation, preservation and online availability of film heritage;
Amendment 99 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21b. Calls on Member States to ensure the digitisation of cinematographic works and to set up compulsory deposit mechanisms for digital formats or adapt their existing mechanisms to such formats by requesting the deposit of a standard digital master for digital films;
Amendment 100 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 c (new)
Paragraph 21 c (new)
21c. Emphasizes the importance of audiovisual archives, especially from film heritage institutions and public service broadcasters, and the need for appropriate funding and rights clearance schemes to facilitate the fulfilling of their public interest missions, including preservation, digitisation and making available to the public;
Amendment 101 #
2014/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 d (new)
Paragraph 21 d (new)
21d. Highlights the important role of the European digital library EUROPEANA as a digital library for the European audiovisual heritage (both film and television);
Amendment 184 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
a) legitimate use of the right to media freedom, freedom of expression and of information;;
Amendment 194 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) for the purpose of revealing an applicant’s misconduct, wrongdoing or illegal activity to the security authorities, provided that the alleged acquisition, use or disclosure of the trade secret was strictly limited and necessary for such revelation and that the respondent acted in the public interest;
Amendment 204 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the trade secret was disclosed by workers to their representatives as part of the legitimate exercise of their representative functions;, in accordance with Union and national law, provided that the disclosure was strictly limited and necessary to the exercise of their functions.
Amendment 226 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a) The practices and exceptions provided for in this Article may be applied only to the extent that they are in accordance with honest commercial practices and do not provide an unfair competitive advantage.
Amendment 244 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7
Article 7
Member States shall ensure that actions for the application of the measures, procedures and remedies provided for in this Directive may be brought within at least one year but not more than twofive years after the date on which the applicant became aware, or had reason to become aware, of the last fact giving rise to the action.
Amendment 262 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
The obligation referred to in the first subparagraph shall remain in force after the end of the legal proceedings. However, it shall cease to exist in any of the following circumstances:
Amendment 276 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) to restrict access to any document containing trade secrets submitted by the parties or third parties, in whole or in part, to their lawyers or legal representatives;
Amendment 295 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the competent judicial authorities have, in respect of the measures referred to in Article 9, the authorityare empowered to require the applicant to provide evidence that may reasonably be considered available in order to satisfy themselves that a trade secret exists, that the applicant is the legitimate trade secret holder and that the trade secret has been acquired unlawfully, that the trade secret is being unlawfully used or disclosed, or that an unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of the trade secret is imminent.
Amendment 299 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that in deciding on the granting or rejecting of the application and assessing its proportionality, the competent judicial authorities shall be required to take into account the valueparticular circumstances of the case. Their assessment should, if appropriate, take into consideration the value and other characteristics of the trade secret, the measures taken to protect the trade secret, and the conduct of the respondent in acquiring, disclosing or using of the trade secret, the impact of the unlawful disclosure or use of the trade secret, the legitimate interests of the parties and the impact which the granting or rejection of the measures could have on the parties, the legitimate interests of third parties, the public interest and the safeguard of fundamental rights, including freedom of expression and information.
Amendment 321 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the person concerned originally acquired knowledge of the trade secret in good faith and fulfils the conditions of Article 3(4)at the time of use or disclosure neither knew nor had reason, under the circumstances, to know that the trade secret was obtained from another person who was using or disclosing the trade secret unlawfully;
Amendment 325 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the competent judicial authorities, on the application of the injured party, order the infringer who knew or ought to have known that he or she was engaging in unlawful acquisition, disclosure or use of a trade secret, to pay the trade secret holder damages commensurappropriate to the actual prejudice suffered as a result of the infringement.
Amendment 327 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
In accordance with their national laws and practices, Member States may limit the liability for damages of employees towards their employers for the unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of a trade secret of the employer when they act without intent.
Amendment 150 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 2 – point 1
Article 2 – point 1
(lj) ‘'Director’' means any member of the administrative, management or supervisory bodies of a company; , except with regard to the application of Articles 9a and 9b, for which ‘director’ means any member of the management body of a company or any person appointed by the administrative body of a company to perform a management role, or the chair of the board or of the supervisory board;
Amendment 157 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 3 a – paragraph 1
Article 3 a – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that intermediaries offer toguarantee that companies thare possibilityermitted to have their shareholders identified and that this right is effectively upheld.
Amendment 164 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 3 a – paragraph 2
Article 3 a – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that, on the request of the company,This right includes the right to receive from the intermediary communicates without undue delay to the company the name and contact details of the shareholders and, where the shareholders are legal persons,he names of shareholders and, where available, address and number of shares and voting rights they hold and their unique identifier where available.of legal persons Where there is more than one intermediary in a holding chain, the request of the company and the identity and contact details of the shareholders shall be transmitted between intermediaries without undue delay.
Amendment 172 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 3 a – paragraph 3
Article 3 a – paragraph 3
3. Shareholders shall be duly informed by their intermediary that their name and contact details may be transmitted for the purpose of identification in accordance with this article. This information may only be used for the purpose of facilitation of the exercise of the rights of the shareholder and dialogue between the company and its shareholders and to give third parties an overview of the shareholding structure of the company by disclosing the names of the main shareholders and the different shareholder categories. The company and the intermediary shall ensure that natural and legal persons are able to rectify or erase any incomplete or inaccurate data and shall not conserve the information relating to the shareholder for longer than 246 months after receiving it. the individual concerned has ceased to be a shareholder.
Amendment 176 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 3 a – paragraph 4
Article 3 a – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that an intermediary that repoimparts the name and contact details of a shareholdero the company information regarding shareholders referred to in paragraph 2 is not considered in breach of any restriction on disclosure of information imposed by contract or by any legislative, regulatory or administrative provision.
Amendment 196 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
2. Member States shall ensure that companies confirm the votes cast in general meetings by ordisclose the results of votes in general meetings. Member States shall, within a period of five years after the date of entry into force of this Directive, take all the necessary measures to ensure that companies confirm the votes cast on behalf of the shareholders. In case the intermediary casts the vote in a general meeting at the request of the Council or of the intermediary who has cast the vote on his behalf, whether electronically or by any other means. They may provide that a reasonable charge be made for confirmation. When the vote has been cast by an intermediary, it shall transmit the voting confirmation to the shareholder. Where there is more than one intermediary in the holding chain the confirmation shall be transmitted between intermediaries without undue delay.
Amendment 215 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 3 f – paragraph 1 – subparagraphs 1 and 1a (new)
Article 3 f – paragraph 1 – subparagraphs 1 and 1a (new)
1. Member States shall ensure that institutional investors and asset managers develop a policy on shareholder engagement (“engagement policy”) This engagement policy shall determine how institutional investors and asset managers conduct all of the following actionseither comply with the provisions of the following subparagraph or make public their reasons for non-compliance. Institutional investors and asset managers shall formulate a shareholder engagement policy ('engagement policy') to determine how they:
Amendment 254 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 3 g – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 3 g – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Amendment 260 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 3 g – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 3 g – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Amendment 263 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 3 g – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Article 3 g – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Amendment 298 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that shareholders have the right to vote on thecompanies draw up a remuneration policy as regards directors. Companies shall only pay remuneration to their directors in accordance with athat remuneration policy. Member States shall ensure that shas been apreholders have the right to approve either the remuneration policy as regards directors or the remuneration report for the previous year as provided by shareholders. The policy shallfor in Article 9b. If shareholders have the right to vote on the remuneration policy, that policy must be submitted to them for approval by the shareholders at least every three years. at least every three years or every time it is changed. Member States may stipulate that the vote by shareholders on the remuneration policy is advisory, provided that, if the shareholders reject the remuneration policy, the board then reviews that policy and notifies its conclusions to the shareholders at the latest at the next general meeting. If shareholders have the right to vote only on the remuneration report for the previous year, and if they rejected that report, the board shall review the remuneration policy and notify its conclusions to the shareholders at the latest at the next general meeting.
Amendment 323 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The policy shall explain how it contributes to the company’s strategy and to its long- term interests and sustainability of the company. It shall set clear criteria for the award of. It shall outline the components of the fixed and variable remuneration, including all benefits in whatever form, paid to directors.
Amendment 338 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 9 a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The policy shall indicate the maximum amounts of total remuneration that can be awarded, and the corresponding relative proportion of the different components of fixed and variable remuneration. It shall explain how the pay and employment conditions of employees of the company were taken into account when setting the policy or directors' remuneration by explaining the ratio between the average remuneration of directors and the average remuneration of full time employees of the company other than directors and why this ratio is considered appropriate. The policy may exceptionally be without a ratio in case of exceptional circumstances. In that case, it shall explain why there is no ratio and which measures with the same effect have been takenremuneration policy for directors.
Amendment 350 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
Article 9 a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
The policy shall indicate the main terms of the contractsconditions of employment of directors, including itsthe duration of their appointment and the applicable notice periods and payments linked to termination of contracttheir duties.
Amendment 360 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 a – paragraph 4
Article 9 a – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that after approval by the shareholders the policy is made public without delay and available, free of charge, on the company's website at least as long as it is applicable.
Amendment 365 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 b – paragraph 1 – introductory words
Article 9 b – paragraph 1 – introductory words
1. Member States shall ensure that the company draws up a clear and understandable remuneration report, providing a comprehensive overview of the remuneration, including all benefits in whatever form, granted, in accordance with the remuneration policy referred to in Article 9a, to individual directors, including to newly recruited and former directors, in the last financial year. It shall, where applicable, contain all of the following elements:
Amendment 371 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 b – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 9 b – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the total remuneration awardepaid or paidyable split out by component, the relative proportion of fixed and variable remuneration, an explanation how the total remuneration is linked to long-term performance and information on how the performance criteria where applied;
Amendment 380 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 200/36/EC
Article 9 b – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 9 b – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the relative change of the remuneration of directors over the last three financial years, its relation to the development of the valuperformance of the company and to change in the average remuneration of full time employees of the company other than directors over the same period;
Amendment 384 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 b – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 9 b – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) where appropriate, information on the use of the possibility to reclaim variable remuneration;
Amendment 385 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 b – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 9 b – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) information on how the remuneration of directors was established, including, where appropriate, on the role of the remuneration committee.
Amendment 395 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 b – paragraph 3 c (new)
Article 9 b – paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. The requirements in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall not apply to transactions entered into in the ordinary course of business or concluded on market terms or on market-equivalent terms.
Amendment 404 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 c – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 c – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that companies, in case of significant transactions with related parties that represent more than 1% of their assets, publicly announce such transactions at the time of the conclusion of the transaction, and accompany the announcement by a report from an independent third party assessing whether or not it is on market terms and confirming that the transaction is fair and reasonable from the perspective of the shareholders, including minority shareholders. Member States may stipulate that this announcement is accompanied by a report from an independent third party which provides the information needed to assess the significance of the transaction for the company. The announcement shall contain information on the nature of the related party relationship, the name of the related party, the amount of the transaction and any other information necessary to assess the transaction.
Amendment 433 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 9 c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 444 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 c – paragraph 3
Article 9 c – paragraph 3
3. TMember States shall ensure that significant transactions with the same related party that have been concluded during the previous 12 months period and have not been approved by shareholders shall be aggregated for the purposes of application of paragraph 2. If the value of these aggregated transactions exceeds 5% of the assets, the transaction by which this threshold is exceeded and any subsequenties are put to a vote of shareholders at the general meeting or by the administrative or supervisory body. If the transactions with the samea related party shall be submitted to a shareholder vote and may only be unconditionally concluded after shareholder approvalinvolves a shareholder or a director, that shareholder or director shall not be allowed to vote.
Amendment 454 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 c – paragraph 4
Article 9 c – paragraph 4
4. Member States may exclude transactions entered into between the company and one or more members of its group from the requirements in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, provided that those members of the group are wholly owned by the company. Member States may also exclude certain types of clearly defined transactions in respect of which minority shareholders enjoy adequate protection under national law.
Amendment 467 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9 c – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 9 c – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. For the purposes of this Article, Member States shall take account of the following when defining significant transactions: (a) the nature of the transaction and the position of the related party; or (b) the impact of the transaction on the company’s results, assets, capitalisation or turnover; or (c) the risks which the transaction creates for the company and its shareholders.
Amendment 14 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
Amendment 28 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas a great many EU Member States have, at some point in their history, lived through the painful experience of a totalitarian regime;
Amendment 31 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the European Union undertook in 2007 to foster a European historical memory with the intention of forging a common identity;
Amendment 36 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the European Union was constructed against the backdrop of the trauma brought about by two all-powerful totalitarianism systems: National Socialism and Communism, which, although they differed in ideology and form,, which were both characterised by brutality and claimed the lives of millions; whereas it is inappropriate to argue that one was better or worse than the other; and whereas united Europe is founded on the basis of Judaeo-Christian ethics, Greek aesthetics and Roman law;
Amendment 51 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the European Union was born from the impetus provided by several European leaders, and could not have become the area of peace and freedom that we know today without their energy and motivation;
Amendment 53 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas the creation of European symbols such as the European flag, passport and anthem as early as the 1980s sought to give concrete expression to the common collective identity towards which we strive;
Amendment 54 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas, while not repudiating the past, one should not confuse history, which draws on experiences, with historical memory, which calls for objectivity;
Amendment 55 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 65 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas even after the Second World War the building of a united Europe met with very mixed success, and a democratic harmonisation of the governments of its Member States would only come about after 1989;
Amendment 69 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the trauma of 1939-45 must not be allowed to be repeated, and in that regard remembering and accurately portraying the past is of vital importance; whereas, also, the acceptance of historical lies or the denial of difficult episodes in history can lead to xenophobia and hatred; whereas the claim made for many years that the Katyń massacre was a German crime is a classic example of a historical liethe Member States must learn the lessons it taught and work together to overcome difficult episodes in their pasts in order to forge among the European public a genuine collective memory that transcends the horrors of the past;
Amendment 93 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas education plays a key role in understanding history and promoting historical truth, especially among young people, whose knowledge of history often comes solely from electronic media, especially among younger generations of Europeans;
Amendment 110 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas culture is a universal and easily accessible carrier ofor harnessing the historical memory and content influencing Europeans’ awarenessof the European Union and facilitating an understandthe overcoming of dark episodes in the past; whereas, also, history is a huge source of inspiration for artists and culture-makers;
Amendment 117 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
Amendment 126 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
Amendment 140 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
Amendment 150 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas it is clear that some Member States which until very recently were suffering under dictatorships should be able to access their archives to help come to terms with their past;
Amendment 153 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the creation of a Platform ofthe House of European History, which will embody European Mmemory and Cconscience, is an essential step on the road to genuine reconciliation among European nations, and whereas EU financial support is essential for this projecit to achieve its mission;
Amendment 174 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 184 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that the duty of memory must not be a tool used for political ends and that it must serve as a means of transcending tragic events in European history and ensuring a ‘renaissance’ of unified European culture;
Amendment 186 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Notes that as early as 1973, in the Declaration on European Identity, European governments were voicing the need to rediscover common European values;
Amendment 191 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Pays tribute to all the heroes, known and unknown, who, acting out of a profound sense of humanismcommitment and faithfulness to their values, opposed the totalitarian regimes and demonstrated their humanity, often paying with their own livesdemocratic values, showed resistance and worked towards the unification of Europe;
Amendment 203 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Welcomes the discussions held between the countries of the Union on Europe’s past and how to commemorate it, and views these as necessary awareness-raising steps in terms of the existence of a European community;
Amendment 206 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 220 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 234 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 247 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Emphasises that the countries of Europe see life in the same way, that this is based on the desire to build a society designed to serve man, and that they mean to protect democratic principles;
Amendment 248 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Stresses that talk of a European historical memory presupposes an acceptance to view history in an alternative and objective manner, or in other words one that enables one to develop one’s viewpoint;
Amendment 249 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Points out that forgetting the past does not mean denying the past, and that this is a necessary foundation from which historical memory can emerge;
Amendment 252 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that historical truth and memory, nurtured among other things by educational activities and cultural events, will reinforce genuine reconciliation between nations and authentic European integration based on truth;
Amendment 263 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses that Europe has a specific, finely-developed vision of democracy, and it is this unique approach, amalgamated with its past errors, which will serve as the foundation of the identity of Europe;
Amendment 264 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Stresses the fact that European states must reflect on one important aspect of European historical memory: they need both justice and to confront their pasts, and far from being opposites, reconciliation and the development of a shared memory in fact make justice possible;
Amendment 274 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Supports the proposal for a Platform of European Memory and Conscience, the aim of which is to establish an international judicial body to deal with the most serious crimes of the Communist dictatorsthe creation of House of European History, which will serve as the memory and conscience of Europe;
Amendment 283 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on Member States to support ambitious European history teaching programmes which do not gloss over the most difficult episodes; recognises that Member States have complete autonomy as regards the content of their teaching syllabuses;
Amendment 301 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 311 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the importance of EU funds in promoting historical memory; notes that such funds should be used for projects linked to history education, promotion, research, archiving and digitisationmaintaining and digitising the archive records of Member States in order to allow their citizens, and those of other Member States, access to the European historical memory;
Amendment 323 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Deplores the planned reduction in funds for the ‘Europe for Citizens’ programme, and calls on the Commission to guarantee better funding for national and transnational educational and cultural projects which raise awareness of the darker episodes in Europe’s history;
Amendment 332 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 339 #
2013/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 3 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
– having regard to the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union, particularly in cases C-467/08, Padawan v SGAE, of 21 October 2010, C-457/11 – C-460/11, VG Wort v Kyocera Mita and others, of 27 June 2013, and C-521/11, Austro Mechana v Amazon, of 11 July 2013, and C-462/09, Stichting de Thuiskopie v Opus Supplies Deutschland GmbH and others, of 16 June 2011,
Amendment 9 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas cultural content plays a pivotal role in the digital economy, whereas Europe’s digital growth will depend in future on having a varied supply of high- quality cultural content, and whereas it has emerged from consultations and several independent surveys that the cultural and creative sectors are facing common challenges from digitisation and globalisation, along with funding problems, and that EU-level action is needed to resolve these problems;
Amendment 29 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas thesre levies only constitute a small proportion of the turnover ofare now virtually no European manufacturers andor importers of traditional and digital recording media and material; whereas the non-European companies operating on the market today usually transfer their operations to sites enabling them to produce ever more cheaply; and whereas these levies only constitute a small proportion of their turnover;
Amendment 32 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas when the prices at which material sells in a country that charges the levy are compared with those in one that does not, it becomes clear that the private copying levy has no appreciable impact on the prices of products;
Amendment 42 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas the exemption and reimbursepayment arrangements for professional uses which have been introduced in the Member States are far from satisfactonecessary and the judicial decisions adopted in some Member States have not always been applied;
Amendment 62 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that the private copying system is a virtuous system that balances the option of, and the right to, copying for private use with fair remuneration to rightholders, and that it is a system worth preserving;
Amendment 77 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the private copying levy should apply to all material, media and services and media whose value resides in their private recording and storage capacity and their use by consumers to copy protected works;
Amendment 89 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 98 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls for confirmation at EU level that the country of destination rule applies where cross-border transactions are concerned; notes that the harm to be made good is brought about not by the movement of recording media, but by the reproduction carried out on those media by a natural person for a private use; considers that the distance seller must therefore be liable for payment of the levy chargeable under the law of the country where the media are purchased by the end users;
Amendment 99 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 104 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls for the principle of precluding any double payment of private copying levies where sales involve several Member States to be recognised at Community level; recommends, in this regard, that systems be established that provide for, on the one hand, the reimbursement or exemption of manufacturers and distributors where the levies paid concern exported products which had not been made available on the national market and, on the other hand, the possibility for rightholders to carry out checks and audits to determine the quantity of products imported, exported or made available on national markets.
Amendment 109 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses the need to make clear to consumers the role of the private copying system with regard to remuneration of artists and cultural dissemination; urges Member States and rightholders to replacconduct, alongside their anti-piracy campaigns with, ‘positive’ campaigns highlighting the benefits of private copying levies;
Amendment 114 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Takes the view that consumers must be informed of the amount of the levy paid by them; urges the Commission and Member States accordingly, in consultation with manufacturers, importers, retailers and, consumer associations and rightholders, to ensure that this information is indicated on packaging and, as far as possible, on invoices and receipts issued to consumers;
Amendment 138 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 142 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Stresses that technical protection measures should not prevent consumers from making copies or rightholders from being fairly remunerated for private copying.
Amendment 161 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Stresses that, as for online services, contractual authorisations concerning private copies cannot be allowed to prevail to the detriment of private copyingthe exception arrangements for this private copying;
Amendment 165 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. The enforcement of exclusive rights, which is the primary means of exercising copyright and related rights, particularly in the digital environment, does not allow effective and proper control over the private use of protected works and items;
Amendment 171 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Takes the view that private copies of protected works made using cloud computing technology may in some cases have the same purpose as those made using traditional and/or digital recording media and materials; considers that these copies shcould be taken into account by the private copying compensation mechanisms;
Amendment 174 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 179 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Calls on the Commission to assess the impact on private copying systems of the use of cloud computing services for private recording and storage of protected works, so as to determine how these private copies of protected works should be taken into account by private copying compensation mechanisms; stresses the need to look into the legal arrangements for cloud computing services as regards the principles of intellectual property.
Amendment 183 #
2013/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
Amendment 39 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) This Directive should facilitate the practical application of the right to be presumed innocent and all its different aspects and also of the right to be present at one's trial, with a view to safeguarding the right to a fair trial, with due regard for the adversarial principle and balance between the rights of the parties.
Amendment 42 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) However, if the infringement explicitly defined in law is based on the fact that it has been committed by a natural person who occupies a representative, management or directorial post in a company and if it is demonstrated by the company that the culprit acted fraudulently, criminal proceedings may be brought against the latter.
Amendment 51 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 59 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23 a (new)
Recital 23 a (new)
(23a) However, any person who is named as the subject of a complaint, denunciation or accusation by a victim during an investigation, whom there are grounds for suspecting of possibly having committed an offence and who has not been placed under judicial investigation, must be heard if the suspect so requests.
Amendment 85 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. However, any person who is named as the subject of a complaint, denunciation or accusation by a victim during an investigation, whom there are grounds for suspecting of possibly having committed an offence and who has not been placed under judicial investigation, must be heard if the suspect so requests.
Amendment 92 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. In order to maintain the right balance between the principle of the presumption of innocence and freedom of the press, Member States shall ensure that journalists are at all times protected as regards their right to protect the confidentiality of their sources.
Amendment 51 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) It is appropriate to provide for rules at Union level to approximate the national legislative systems so as to ensure a sufficient and consistent level of redress across the internal market in case of unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of a trade secret. For this purpose, it is important to establish a homogenous definition of a trade secret without restricting the subject matter to be protected against misappropriation. Such definition should therefore be constructed as to cover business information, technological information and know-how where there is both a legitimate interest in keeping confidential and a legitimate expectation in the preservation of such confidentiality, including in the context of public and private contracts. The information or know-how should also have actual or potential commercial value. The information or know-how has commercial value, in particular, to the extent that its unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure is likely to cause harm to the person who legitimately controls it, by undermining their scientific and technological potential, economic or financial interests or their ability to withstand competition. By nature, such definition should exclude trivial information and should not extend to the knowledge and skills gained by employees in the normal course of their employment and which are known among or accessible to persons within the circles that normally deal with the kind of information in question.
Amendment 60 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
10) In the interest of innovation and to foster competition, the provisions of this Directive should not create any exclusive right on the know-how or information protected as trade secrets. Its provisions cannot be used for the sole purpose of restricting competition. Thus, independent discovery of the same know- how and information remains possible and competitors of the trade secret holder are also free to reverse engineer any lawfully acquired product.
Amendment 62 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10 a) The lawful acquisition of confidential commercial information or know-how cannot subsequently be used to justify disclosure constituting an act of unfair competition, defined in Article 10a of the Paris Convention on the protection of intellectual property as any act of competition contrary to honest practices in industrial or commercial matters. While healthy competition brought about by the lawful use of data, including data generated by reverse engineering, should be encouraged, it is essential to punish any use which is contrary to honest commercial practices
Amendment 63 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In line with the principle of proportionality the measures and remedies intended to protect trade secrets should be tailored to meet the objective of a smooth functioning internal market for research and innovation without jeopardising other objectives and principles of public interest. In this respect, the measures and remedies ensure that competent judicial authorities account for the value of a trade secret, the seriousness of the conduct resulting in the unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of the trade secret as well as the impact of such conduct. It should also be ensured that the competent judicial authorities are provided with the discretion to weigh up the interests of the parties to the litigation, as well as the interests of third parties including, where appropriate, consumers. Any measure that may directly or indirectly restrict sharing and use of knowledge and the hiring and mobility of labour, including the introduction of a uniform definition of trade secrets and the introduction and implementation of uniform rules for the protection of trade secrets within the internal market, should respect the principle of proportionality in the interest of innovation and free competition.
Amendment 70 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) For the same reason, it is also important to provide for measures to prevent further unlawful use or disclosure of a trade secret, including when trade secrets are used for the purposes of delivering services. For prohibitory measures to be effective, their duration, when circumstances require a limitation in time, should be sufficient to eliminate any commercial advantage which the third party could have derived from the unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of the trade secret. In any event, no measure of this type should be enforceable if the information originally covered by the trade secret is in the public domain for reasons that cannot be attributed to the respondent.
Amendment 73 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, notably the right to respect private and family life, the right to the protection of personal data, the freedom of the press and the media, the freedom of expression and information, the freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work, the freedom to conduct a business, the right to property, the right to good administration, access to file and preservation of secrecy of business, the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial and right of defence.
Amendment 77 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23 a (new)
Recital 23 a (new)
(23 a) In particular, it is important that the freedom of the press and the media should be respected, in accordance with Article 11 paragraph 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in order that this Directive does not hinder the work of journalists, especially in relation to investigations, the protection of sources and the public’s right to information.
Amendment 82 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
Amendment 105 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 1 – point c
Article 2 – point 1 – point c
(c) has been subject to reasonable steps under the circumstances, by the person lawfully in control ofwho holds the information, to keep it secret;
Amendment 116 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 4
Article 2 – point 4
4) ‘infringing goods’ means goods whose design, qualityunlawful goods or services’ means goods placed on the market whose form quality, characteristics, manufacturing process or marketing significantlyhave benefitsted from trade secrets unlawfully acquired, used or disclosed.
Amendment 147 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
c a) has acquired the trade secret lawfully but uses or discloses it in a manner contrary to honest commercial practices and likely to harm the commercial interests of the trade secret holder and/or the smooth functioning of the internal market.
Amendment 148 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
3a. The obligations laid down in this paragraph may not arbitrarily limit the use of experience acquired honestly through employment or some other contractual relationship. The rules on collective agreements and national labour law systems shall not be affected.
Amendment 157 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) observation, study, disassembly or test of a product or object that has been made available to the public or that it is lawfully in the possession of the acquirer of the information who is free from any legally valid duty to limit the acquisition of the trade secret, provided that the information acquired is not used in a manner contrary to honest commercial practice;
Amendment 169 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1a (new)
1a. The acquisition, use and disclosure of trade secrets shall be deemed lawful in so far as it is required by national or Union law, without prejudice to the rights of the holder.
Amendment 69 #
2013/0309(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. SuchAny price discrimination against content, applications or services or any discriminatory conditions regarding data flow and volumes should be prohibited. Reasonable traffic management measures should be transparent, proportionate and non- discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.
Amendment 93 #
2013/0309(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point 15
Article 2 – point 15
(15) "specialised service" means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widelyit is provided within a closed electronic communications network using the internet protocol, relying on strict admission control. A specialised service must not be marketed or used as a substitute for internet access service;
Amendment 117 #
2013/0309(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 120 #
2013/0309(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 126 #
2013/0309(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service. provided within closed electronic networks.
Amendment 134 #
2013/0309(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the generalthe quality of internet access services.
Amendment 138 #
2013/0309(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Providers of vertically integrated public electronic communications shall should not discriminate in any way against traffic generated by providers of content, services or applications competing with their own services or those provided by them under exclusive agreements.
Amendment 51 #
2013/0162(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Since the tasks ofIt is essential, therefore, that the cCommitteession set up by Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 116/2009 are rendered obsolete by the deletion of the Annex to Directive 93/7/EEC, references to that committee should be deleteda group of experts representing the national authorities responsible for implementing this Directive in each Member State, in order to provide a platform for exchange of information and good practice.
Amendment 11 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10
Citation 10
Amendment 12 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A – point 1 (new)
Paragraph A – point 1 (new)
(1) whereas, on the basis of Article 341 TFEU, the Protocol on the location of the seats of the institutions and of certain bodies, offices, agencies and departments of the European Union forms an integral part of the Treaties and thus of EU primary law, having been ratified, as part of the Treaty of Amsterdam, by all the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional rules;
Amendment 14 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A a (new)
Paragraph A a (new)
Aa. whereas the European Parliament has had its seat in Strasbourg since 1952, a situation confirmed by the Edinburgh European Council in 1992 and by the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997, and not altered by the Lisbon Treaty;
Amendment 16 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A b (new)
Paragraph A b (new)
Ab. whereas the real annual cost of retaining the Strasbourg seat in 2010 was EUR 51.5 million, i.e. 0.04 % of the annual budget of the European Union or 10 cents per citizen per year;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A c (new)
Paragraph A c (new)
Ac. whereas the gross cost of holding plenary sessions in Strasbourg is EUR 7 445 000 per part-session, and whereas 80 % of these costs are fixed and would be incurred irrespective of where a given part-session is held (equipment, publications, translation, etc.);
Amendment 19 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A c (new)
Paragraph A c (new)
Ac. whereas the seats of some European institutions were chosen on account of their symbolic significance, one such example being Strasbourg, the city which symbolises the process of Franco-German reconciliation which is at the root of the European peace project;
Amendment 20 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A d (new)
Paragraph A d (new)
Ad. whereas mobility is an intrinsic aspect of the work of an MEP, requiring at least a large number of journeys between the European Parliament, the MEP’s Member State of origin and the constituency in which the MEP was elected;
Amendment 21 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A d (new)
Paragraph A d (new)
Ad. whereas, in accordance with the sole article of Protocol No 6 annexed to the TFEU, the European Parliament has its seat in Strasbourg, the Council has its seat in Brussels, the Commission has its seat in Brussels, the Court of Justice of the European Union has its seat in Luxembourg, the Court of Auditors has its seat in Luxembourg, the Economic and Social Committee has its seat in Brussels, the Committee of the Regions has its seat in Brussels, the European Investment Bank has its seat in Luxembourg, the European Central Bank has its seat in Frankfurt and the European Police Office (Europol) has its seat in The Hague;
Amendment 26 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph B
Paragraph B
B. whereas one of these petitions (0630/2006) does not bears the signatures of more than one million citizens of the EU; one million signatures required for compliance with Rule 201(2) (Rule 191(2) when the petition was deposited) of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, and whereas, moreover, its originators are MEPs seeking to circumvent the Treaties;
Amendment 29 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph B a (new)
Paragraph B a (new)
Ba. whereas, pursuant to the former Rule 191(2) and the current Rule 201(2) of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, petitions to Parliament ‘shall show the name, nationality and permanent address of each petitioner’, which ‘petition’ 0630/2006 clearly does not do;
Amendment 32 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph B c (new)
Paragraph B c (new)
Bc. whereas the city of Strasbourg is associated in people’s minds with the European Parliament, and whereas the seating capacity for visitors is much greater in the Strasbourg than in the Brussels Chamber, which represents an asset for the seat of European democracy;
Amendment 36 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas on two occasions, in 1997 and 2012, the Court of Justice of the European Union pointed out that the fact that Parliament’s seat is in Strasbourg is determined by the TFEU; whereas it has also confirmed Protocol No 6 in clarifying the conditions for the application thereof; whereas it has fully acknowledged the power of Parliament to determine its own internal organisational arrangements, since Parliament may adopt appropriate measures to ensure its proper functioning and proper conduct of its proceedings, but the question of determining its seat does not come within that remit;
Amendment 38 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas Strasbourg has been the meeting place of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe since 1949 and then, from 1952, played host to the Parliamentary Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community;
Amendment 39 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas the seat of the European Parliament in Strasbourg was confirmed by the Edinburgh European Council in 1992 and the Amsterdam Treaty in 1997 and then incorporated in the Lisbon Treaty in 2009;
Amendment 42 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph C
Paragraph C
C. whereas since 2006 attempts by the Petitions Committee to consider this issue on a parliamentary level have repeatedly been obstructnot yet succeeded despite the widespread interest in the issue amongst MEPs;
Amendment 43 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the structure of Parliament’s calendar (fixed during the Edinburgh Summit in 1992) predates all changes to its rolehas not been called into question, since it was confirmed in Protocol No 6 annexed to the Treaty of Lisbon, and the increase in Parliament’s powers arising from the adoption of the Treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon has therefore been taken into account;
Amendment 49 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas the fact of geographical distance between the official seats of the co- legislative bodies – 435 km – isolates Parliament not only fromreflects the multi- centre principle with regard to the seats of the European institutions and, during part-sessions, the attention of the Council and the Commission, but also ofrom other stakeholders, such as NGOs, civil society organisations and Member State representations, and ofrom one of the world’s largest international journalistic communities, is fully focused on the work of Parliament;
Amendment 49 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph C a (new)
Paragraph C a (new)
Ca. whereas petitions are not an instrument for evading the Treaties but an instrument for use by European citizens to improve EU legislation which creates obstacles in their everyday life or to provide them with assistance so as to support them if their rights as citizens are disregarded;
Amendment 51 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
Amendment 53 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph C b (new)
Paragraph C b (new)
Cb. whereas the concept of mobility is inherent in the work of Members of the European Parliament to enable them to come closer to European citizens, whereas the Committee on Petitions regularly invites petitioners to comment on their petitions by inviting them to the European Parliament in Brussels and whereas this work of contact with citizens should not be confined to one direction;
Amendment 64 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
Amendment 70 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that only the Member States have the power to amend the Treaties, the substance of which is binding on the Institutions and their members, and that a vote on this subject can only be carried unanimously;
Amendment 71 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Considers, however, that it is time to stop the polemics concerning the cost of the Strasbourg seat; calls therefore for the figures provided by official sources within the European Parliament to be quoted clearly in the annexes to the own- initiative report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, including pages 68-70 of the Environmental Declaration of the European Parliament of May 2011 concerning the ‘environmental impact of the Strasbourg seat’ and page 40 of the document of the European Parliament’s Secretariat entitled ‘REPLIES AND FOLLOW-UP TO THE DISCHARGE FOR 2010’ on the annual cost of the Strasbourg seat;
Amendment 72 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Recalls that, on this basis, twelve monthly plenary part-sessions, including the budgetary part-session, must be held at the Strasbourg seat, while additional part-sessions are held in Brussels;
Amendment 74 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Amendment 74 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Stresses that the additional part- sessions entail a substantial additional cost, which could be reduced by extending ordinary part-sessions in Strasbourg;
Amendment 76 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Recalls that European Citizens’ Initiatives (ECIs) have the purpose of securing the adoption of a legal act of the Union which does not amend primary law, whereas any call for amendment of the ‘Protocol on the location of the seats of the institutions and of certain bodies and departments of the European Union’ would entail amendment of a primary legal act, which is not compatible with the regulation;
Amendment 79 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 86 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 89 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Agrees with the principle that the European Parliament would be more effective, cost-efficient andConsiders efficiency, cost-effectiveness and the principle of respectful of for the environment if it were located in a single place; and notes that the continuation of the monthly migration between Brussels andnot to be connected with the place in which Parliament sits, but with its needs; points out that according to figures from the European Parliament’s services, the annual cost of Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg hwas become a symbolic negative issue amongst most EU citizens which is detrimental to Parliament’s reputationEUR 51.5 million in 2010, or 0.04% of the annual EU budget, which represents a cost of 10 cents per EU citizen per year, and hence considers the arguments on Parliament’s cost to be exaggerated;
Amendment 90 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
emphasises that the gross cost of holding part-sessions in Strasbourg is EUR 7 445 000 per part-session, and that 80% of these costs are fixed and would be incurred irrespective of where the part-session is held, be they for equipment, publications or translation, etc.;
Amendment 92 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Emphasises the environmental example set by the European Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg, which reduced its CO2 emissions by 57% between 2006 and 2010 by taking special measures, meaning that these now represent 3.6% of all Parliament’s CO2 emissions;
Amendment 94 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Respects the historical reasons for the location of its plenary sessions in Strasbourg and the Treaty requirements that necessitate the system of a single seat and three places of work;
Amendment 95 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Emphasises that European integration necessarily entails mobility and that this applies to all national and European political representatives and officials, and that mobility is an intrinsic aspect of the work of MEPs, as representatives of the citizens of the European Union;
Amendment 96 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Points to the economic and social importance of the European Parliament for the Strasbourg region;
Amendment 97 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Points to the tradition of geographical diversity in the siting of EU institutions;
Amendment 99 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Stresses that concentrating EU powers in the city of Brussels would adversely effect the way the European public views the EU;
Amendment 100 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Points to the environmental example set by the European Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg, which reduced its own CO2 emissions by 57% between 2006 and 2010, meaning that these now represent 3.6% of all Parliament’s CO2 emissions;
Amendment 101 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 101 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Emphasises that Strasbourg has come to be viewed by the public as the European capital of democracy and human rights owing to the institutions that are based there, among them the European Parliament;
Amendment 102 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Adds that the carbon footprint for travel for committee, political group and delegation meetings, which increased by 23.8% between 2006 and 2010, is significantly larger (6 350 tonnes of CO2 in 2010) than that for Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg (4 199 tonnes of CO2 en 2010);
Amendment 103 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)
Paragraph 2 f (new)
2f. Emphasises that the public associates the city of Brussels with the European Commission, while the city of Strasbourg continues to be associated with the European Parliament;
Amendment 104 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)
Paragraph 2 f (new)
2f. Considers that the success of the open days held every year at the European Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg, the 100 000 visitors each year outside part-sessions and the 10 000 students from the Euroscola Programme indicate that the European public have in no way rejected the seat of the European Parliament in Strasbourg;
Amendment 105 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 g (new)
Paragraph 2 g (new)
2g. Expresses concern at the steady increase (+23.8% between 2006 and 2010) in the number of committee, political group and delegation meetings held outside the European Parliament’s places of work;
Amendment 106 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Emphasises that the Committee’s report was prepared under the ordinary own-initiative procedure and there is thus no obligation to implement the proposals, and further that the matter of the EU institutions’ seats is governed directly by the Treaties and is therefore subject to the political will of the Member States acting unanimously;
Amendment 107 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 h (new)
Paragraph 2 h (new)
2h. Notes that the carbon footprint for travel in connection with these meetings was 6 350 tonnes of CO2 en 2010, while for the seat in Strasbourg it was 4 199 tonnes that year;
Amendment 108 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 i (new)
Paragraph 2 i (new)
2i. Notes that economic and environmental costs could be rationalised by limiting the number of meetings held outside the European Parliament’s official places of work;
Amendment 118 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that this own-initiative report must not be used as a means of disregarding the EU Treaties, which provide that the seat of the European Parliament shall be in Strasbourg and that 12 part-sessions per year shall be held there;
Amendment 120 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Observes that, if a debate were initiated concerning the seat of the European Parliament, it would inevitably lead to discussion of the distribution of all the seats of the European Institutions, which is laid down in the Treaty;
Amendment 120 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Respects the historic reasons for the location of its plenary sessions in Strasbourg and the Treaty requirements that necessitate the two-seat system; nevertheless insists that such an arrangement cannot continue in perpetuity and that Parliament itself must be able to state a preference for its future;
Amendment 130 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underscores the symbolic and historical importance of the European Parliament’s location in Strasbourg as part of the process of European reconciliation;
Amendment 132 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Points out that Parliament’s initiatives on determining for itself the matter of its seat – which is in Strasbourg – were set aside by the Court of Justice in its ruling of 13 December 2012 and that, therefore, any action on Parliament’s part to establish the seats of the EU institutions is in breach of the very Treaties which it sees itself as defending in its capacity as the democratic voice of Europe’s citizens;
Amendment 134 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Recognises the educational and civic value of Parliament’s Strasbourg seat, which attracts 100 000 visitors a year outside part-session periods, as well as 10 000 students on the Euroscola programme;
Amendment 138 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Recognises that efforts are needed to improve working conditions during ordinary part-sessions in Strasbourg;
Amendment 145 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 160 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Finds it regrettable that this debate should focus on a matter which concerns 0.04% of the EU budget at a time when people want to see an overall Union budget capable of responding adequately to the financial difficulties that Member States are experiencing;
Amendment 14 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the advent of connected TV has shaken up the traditional value chain and necessitates drawing up a new strategy;
Amendment 15 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the advancement of technological developments leads inevitably to increase of user autonomy, there is a growing necessity to ensure protection of exclusive rights and the integrity of the content;
Amendment 17 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas consumers’ interest in hybrid receiving systems is constantly growing, so that the opportunities for dissemination of (interactive) on-line services, which take their starting point as traditional TV services as regards their content or conception or are related to them in terms of scope,ranges of services are constantly and significantly increasing;
Amendment 22 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the attention of each user is finite and, as theit the increasing number of services on offer rismakes, it becomesever more difficult to reach users, which means that access to and findability of services will be decisive for their succesviewers;
Amendment 27 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the number of services on offer is rising, and their success depends on the ease with which the public can access and locate them rapidly;
Amendment 28 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the current provisions of Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) do not yet take into account these newreflect this technological developments and whereas in particular graduaconvergence and instead regulation, which differentiates between television programmes (including webcasting and live streaming) and aucontinue to focus on the diovisual media services on demand, will become less important in its existing form, although differently regulated information and communications services are available on one and the same device, including services which do not fall within the scope of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, which may result in unequal competitive conditions and unacceptable discrepancies in the protection of usersding lines between content and network and the multiple competent regulatory and supervisory authorities at European, national and regional level;
Amendment 29 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the current provisions of Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) do not yet take into account these neware based on the principle of technological developmentsneutrality, and whereas in particular graduated regulation, which differentiates between television programmes (including webcasting and live streaming) and audiovisual media services on demand, willmay become less important in its existing form, although differently regulated information and communications services are available on one and the same device, including services which do not fall within the scope of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, which may result in unequal competitive conditions and unacceptable discrepancies in the protection of users;
Amendment 31 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas these new service providers will compete head-on against the traditional players in the sector, both by acquiring exclusive content, including on the European market, and by offering new services;
Amendment 33 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the regulatory objectives of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive – particularly ensuring and promoting diversity of opinion and of the media, protecting human dignity and competition and protecting children, as well as quality- and content-based regulation of advertising – retain their importance to society and their regulatory justification as a matter of principle, but at the same time the limits of the effectiveness and enforceability of these protective provisions are becoming increasingly apparent because of the methods of use which have been made possible by hybrid receiving systems;
Amendment 35 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the regulatory objectives of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive – particularly ensuring and promoting diversity of opinion and of the media, protecting human dignity and protecting children, and encouraging media service providers to guarantee accessibility to visually and hearing impaired as well as regulation of advertising – retain their importance to society and their regulatory justification as a matter of principle, but at the same time the limits of the effectiveness and enforceability of these protective provisions are becoming increasingly apparent because of the methods of use which have been made possible by hybrid receiving systems;
Amendment 37 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas high-quality connected TV services can only be provided if telecommunications operators offer sufficiently high speed links between the broadcasting servers and subscribers;
Amendment 38 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas guaranteeing fair competition in the context of linear and non-linear services on hybrid platforms is of utmost importance, there is a need to ensure that European works do not find themselves underprivileged to obtain access to this new environment;
Amendment 45 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas any means of adapting the market to favour creation and innovation in Europe should be encouraged;
Amendment 46 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas new market players providing audiovisual content on the same media in competition with long- established European broadcasters should abide by the same rules as they do;
Amendment 47 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G c (new)
Recital G c (new)
Gc. whereas the development of hybrid systems combining TV and the Internet will allow users to browse indiscriminately between TV channels and the Internet, including websites illegally offering audiovisual content;
Amendment 54 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission, in the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and, insofar as necessary, in a supplementary manner in additional EU legal acts, to lay down provisions regulating services which will control the availability of, and access to, audiovisual media services and other communications services or their representation on hybrid receiving devices, so as to prevent producers of such receiving devices or suppliers of the services in question from exploiting their gatekeeper position in a way which discriminates against to evaluate to what extent it is necessary to revise the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and other current requirements laid down in network and media regulations (e.g. the telecommunications package) with respect to the rules on findability and non- discriminatory access to platforms, expanding the concept of platforms and developing legislation on media concentration in order to adapt the existing instruments to new constent providerllations;
Amendment 57 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission, in the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and, insofar as necessary, in a supplementary manner in additional EU legal acts, to lay down provisions regulating services which will control the availability of, and access to, audiovisual media services and other communications services or their representation on hybrid receiving devices, so as to prevent producers of such receiving devices or suppliers of the services in question from exploiting their gatekeeper position in a way which discriminates against content providers; and cuts them off from their viewers;
Amendment 61 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that the impact of the advent of connected TV on the value of goods traded and the remuneration of creators must be studied in depth, in terms of trends in the price of content as well as the proportion of remuneration collected by search engines and the nature of the programmes broadcast;
Amendment 62 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 67 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission, in the context of a possible revision of Directive 2010/13/EU, or in any future legislation, to continue its efforts to safeguard press freedom by expressly excluding electronic versions of newspapers and magazines from the scope of such legal provisions, as is currently the case under this directive;
Amendment 68 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission, by means of the prompt further development of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and other EU legis to consider which regulatory mechanisms are still necessary and useful against the background of convergence and which should perhaps be newly implemented, whereby the objective of convergent regulation should be to remove existing overregulation, to and create a level playing field for all content and service providers, taking account of the following minimum requirements, so as to ensure fair competition among content providers and guarantee users the chance to choose among a wide range of high-quality services on a footing of equal opportunity and without discrimination;
Amendment 73 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission, in the event of a review of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, to ensure fair competition between all content providers;
Amendment 74 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that the development strategy of these new market players will lead to an increased range of content by combining long-established TV channels with the plethora of content available on the Internet;
Amendment 75 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Amendment 79 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to review the provisions of the Audiovisual Media Services Directivehave an eye to future challenges of Connected TV, in ter alia with reference toms of the competitiveness in the industry, and particularly to fully exploit the opportunities afforded by liberalisation orby accessing greater flexibility of quantitative rules on advertising;
Amendment 88 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that the Audiovisual Media Services Directive has already considerably relaxed some of the rules relating to broadcast advertising;
Amendment 89 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Emphasises that it is vital for the public sector to remain exempt from restrictions on advertising funding in order for it to retain its independence, and calls on the Member States to support efforts to provide funding for that sector;
Amendment 90 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Emphasises that new advertising strategies that use new technologies to increase their effectiveness (screenshots, consumer profiling, multi-screen strategies) raise the issue of protecting consumers, their private lives and their personal data; with this in mind, emphasises that there is a need to come up with a set of consistent rules to apply to these strategies;
Amendment 91 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Encourages Europe’s audiovisual industry to continue to develop consistent, attractive services, especially on-line, so as to enrich the range of European audiovisual content on offer;
Amendment 96 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to ensure in the Audiovisual Media Services Directive that Member States are given the opportunity to grantxamine whether and how those content providers can be granted an appropriately privileged status with regard to findability on hybrid platforms (including portals, home pages and EPGs) to which the Member States assign a public broadcasting remit or which help to promote objectives in the public interest, particularly tosuch as ensureing media pluralism and cultural diversity, or which lastingly and demonstrably undertake to carry out duties in the public interest which maintain the quality and independence of reporting and promote diversity of opinion, in which connection service providers with the highest aspirations to comply with such obligations should also be assigned the most prominent position on platforms;.
Amendment 98 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Emphasises that, in this environment in which many services are on offer, it is important that the best possible referencing is provided for European services, which, furthermore, are the most capable of promoting the objective of cultural diversity;
Amendment 101 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission and Member States, in addition to such ‘must be found’ rules, to consider to what extent a reform of media regulation so as to move towards incentive and certification schemes and strengthen self- regulatory approaches can enable the aforesaid regulatory objectives of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, in particular as regards the protection of young people and human dignity, to be attained in a lasting fashion;
Amendment 105 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Is concerned, in this context, by the increased level of competition resulting from the presence of international players that are not subject to European rules and obligations;
Amendment 106 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. To avoid any distortion of competition, recommends that the same rules should apply to the same services, irrespective of the medium of transmission;
Amendment 108 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to ensure that these platforms are operated on the basis of an open, non-proprietary standard, in a way which accords with market conditions entailing fair competition and accords with consumer demand;
Amendment 109 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to ensure that these platforms are operated on the basis of an open, non-proprietaryinteroperable standard, in a way which accords with market conditions entailing fair competition and accords with consumer demand;
Amendment 113 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. In this context, emphasises the need for consideration to be given to the development of the regulatory framework, to the ways of regulating connected TV and to the content referencing systems;
Amendment 114 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Calls for connected TV platform regulation which guarantees access to and integrity of broadcasters’ content, transparency for consumers and the application of a basic code of ethics (e.g. protection of minors and of private life);
Amendment 115 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to advance media literacy of all EU citizens, in particular, through initiatives and coordinated actions aimed at increasing understanding of linear and non-linear media services;
Amendment 116 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that measures are taken, in particular, by device manufacturers and service providers to improve accessibility to linear and non-linear media services for elderly people and people with a disability such as the hard of hearing and the visually impaired;
Amendment 117 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to ensureTakes the view that platform services and portal services arshould be interoperable, so that, if possible, content need only be prepared once, irrespective of the particular device manufacturer or service provider,in order to givinge third parties equalthe opportunitiesy, without discrimination, to produce and market their own applications, irrespective of the medium of transmission;
Amendment 118 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Recommends that all the European audiovisual services provided by these new players in the shape of distributors, aggregators or publishers should be more visible and better referenced on their platforms;
Amendment 123 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Draws attention to the effects of the disparities between VAT systems at European level, which will be further accentuated with the arrival of connected TV, and stresses the need to adopt a competitive joint VAT system across all the Member States;
Amendment 124 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission to ensure, in a legally binding manner, compliance with the principles of internet neutrality, which is vital where media convergence is concerned;
Amendment 128 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to safeguard by law the integrity of linear and non-linear services on hybrid platforms and in particular to prohibit the overlay or scaling of these services with third-party content, unless the latter have been authorised by the content provider and explicitly initiatexplicitly initiated by the user, and, in the case of commercial communications, authorised by the usbroadcaster; points out that unauthorised use or dissemination by third parties of the content or broadcast signals of a provider must likewise be prevented;
Amendment 129 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the Commission to consider measures to take account of the risk of unauthorised sites being referenced on portals and search engines;
Amendment 136 #
2012/2300(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the anonymous use of TV and on-line services by means of hybrid receiving devices is guaranteed and that monitoring and exploitation of the user’s behaviour by manufacturers of devices or by third parties is not normally allowed, being permitted only with the witting and unambiguous consent of the userconsistent with the data protection rules in force;
Amendment 37 #
2012/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes the Commission's intention to publish shortly a policy document on convergence related to Connected TV and connected devices which will launch a public consultation on all issues arising from these new developments;
Amendment 53 #
2012/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on Member States to strengthen efforts to encourage audiovisual media services providers and manufacturers of supporting devices, to pay full recognition to the needs of people with a disability and of the elderly;
Amendment 60 #
2012/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Regrets that the data provided are insufficient to draw any conclusions on the promotion of European works by on- demand services providers and urges the Member States to provide relevant data in that regard;
Amendment 64 #
2012/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Therefore calls on the European Commission and Member States to act urgently to ensure the effective implementation of Article 13 of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive;
Amendment 71 #
2012/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Recognises the efforts made by the advertising industry and members of the EU Pledge, made notably in the context of the EU Platform on Diet, Physical Activity and Health, to respond to the AVMS Directive's call for codes of conduct for commercial communications, accompanying or included in children's programmes, of foods and beverages high in fat, sugar and salt;
Amendment 82 #
2012/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Urges Member States to continue encouraging audiovisual media service providers to develop codes of conduct as regards to inappropriate audiovisual commercial communications in children's programmes;
Amendment 86 #
2012/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Acknowledges Member States' achievements in protecting against content inciting hatred on the grounds of race, sex, nationality and religion;
Amendment 107 #
2012/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Takes note of the findings by the Commission with regard to the level of media literacy in the Member States;
Amendment 120 #
2012/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Calls on the Commission to consider whether some basic requirements of the AVMSD should be extended to other online content and services which are currently out of its scope, and to report to the Parliament by 2014;
Amendment 25 #
2012/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C bis (new)
Recital C bis (new)
Ca. Considering that minors generally demonstrate great ease in using the Internet but that it is necessary to help them to use it wisely, responsibly and safely;
Amendment 33 #
2012/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the levelvectors of diffusion of media that converge in a single digital system and this implies risks in terms of easy access to content that is illegal, unsuitable, and harmful for the development of minors;
Amendment 40 #
2012/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas, in the free circulation of the audiovisual services of the single market, where digital service providers have differing responsibilities, the protection of minors and human dignity is pre-eminent; whereas, however,must remain an absolute priority, including for WebTV and hybrid TV, which are outside the scope of any controls;
Amendment 51 #
2012/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the fact that personal information and data with regard to minors remain online can imply the illegal processing thereof, as well as harm to their personal dignity, thus compromising their identitparticularly because these details may aend social inclusionup in the wrong hands;
Amendment 85 #
2012/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Identifies in ‘Media Education’ the essential tool for access to and trainllowing of minors to engage in the critical use of media and opportunities of the digital world and invites all the Member States to enhance Media Educationinclude it in the school curriculum and to make use of the good practice of ‘European Schoolnet’;
Amendment 103 #
2012/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 bis (new)
Paragraph 6 bis (new)
6a. Calls on Member States, public authorities and access providers to intensify their communication campaigns in order to make minors, adolescents, parents and educators aware of uncontrolled digital dangers;
Amendment 111 #
2012/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 132 #
2012/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 bis (new)
Paragraph 12 bis (new)
12a. Underlines the importance of disseminating reliable instruments such as warning pages or acoustic and optical signals to limit direct access of minors to content that is harmful to them;
Amendment 159 #
2012/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Invites the Commission to continue the ‘European Framework for Safer Mobile Use’ by exploiting the options that facilitate parental control;
Amendment 171 #
2012/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 bis (new)
Paragraph 20 bis (new)
20a. Underlines the importance of informing children and adolescents at a very early stage of their rights to privacy on the Internet and teaching them to recognise the sometimes subtle methods used to obtain information from them;
Amendment 182 #
2012/2068(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 bis (new)
Paragraph 24 bis (new)
24a. Recalls that information and citizenship are closely linked on the Internet and that what threatens the civic engagement of young people today is the lack of interest they show in information;
Amendment 32 #
2012/2045(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights that the economic costs of educational underperformance are significantly higher than the costs of the financial crisis, and Member States are already paying the price year after yearweigh heavily on Member States;
Amendment 42 #
2012/2045(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Recalls the importance to give to research in the framework of an ambitious strategy for education and training, therefore asks the Commission and Member States to reinforce their actions aiming to increase the part of young people moving towards this field;
Amendment 66 #
2012/2045(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Highlights the need for the many to acquirement of language skills since ithey enables people to be more mobile;
Amendment 76 #
2012/2045(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Believes it is vital to promote mobility, notably thanks to ambitious community programs for education and culture, in particular through exchanges of teachers, students and pupils in the language field;
Amendment 79 #
2012/2045(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Encourages the Commission to support the development of innovative solutions in the field of learning and formation, which could be easily adapted with regard to languages and also in technical terms, and would create mobility in sectors the less affected by this phenomenon;
Amendment 5 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission to propose the application of a reduced rate of VAT to online cultural goods and services in order to encourage the development of legal offers;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that micropayments are increasingly used to pay for media and cultural content online; emphasises however that problems associated with online payment systems, such as lack of interoperability and high costs of micro- payment for consumers, should be tackled with a view to developing simple, innovative and cost-effective solutions of benefit to consumers and digital platforms;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Awaits with anticipation the proposal for a legal framework for the collective administration of copyrights with a view to ensuring better accountability, transparency and governance of collective rights management societies, establishing efficient dispute resolution mechanisms, and clarifying and simplifying licensing systems in the music sector; calls on the Commission not to defer the submission yet again;
Amendment 14 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Requests clarification that internet service providers are obliged to adhere to EU data protection law and EU competition law and to comply with intellectual property rights protection when gathering data within the EU, irrespective of where this data is stored and/or processed; considers that a higher level of transparency regarding the identification of internet service providers should play a key role in fostering consumer confidence, promote best practice in this area, and be a key criterion for the creation of a European trustmark;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Underlines that the Digital Single Market will allow citizens to have access, throughout the EU, to all digital contents and services, whether they are musical, audiovisual, or a video game;
Amendment 19 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 22 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Underlines that digital technologies provide new and innovative ways to customise and enrich the offer and meet consumers' demand, including for tailored cross-border services; calls for better exploitation of digital technologies which should constitute a springboard for both differentiation and multiplication of legitimate offers;
Amendment 23 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 32 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Stresses the need to subject cultural works sold online and offline to the same VAT rate; considers, in this context, that the application of reduced VAT rates for online cultural content would boost the attractiveness of digital platforms;
Amendment 36 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the proposals for increasing availability and developing legal online content services, but highlights that this is inhibited by the EU's fragmented copyright system;
Amendment 38 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the proposals for increasing availability and developing legal online content services, but highlights that this is inhibited by the EU's fragmented copyright systeme need for copyright law which provides the appropriate incentives, ensures balance and keeps apace with modern technology; considers that the encouragement, promotion and sustainability of multi- territorial licensing in the digital single market should, above all, be facilitated by market-driven initiatives in response to consumer demand;
Amendment 43 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. RegretWelcomes the announcement by the Commission of a new notice and action scheme before the EP has been able to discuss the IP Enforcement Directive, under which such a scheme should be dealt withand recalls in this context that the E-Commerce Directive provides that information society service providers have a duty to act, under certain circumstances, with a view to preventing or stopping illegal activities occurring online;
Amendment 45 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 54 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Recalls that Member States also have a role to play by veiling to a rapid and non-bureaucratic implementation of the EU rules, in order to make consumers' rights concrete;
Amendment 55 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. RegretWelcomes the Commission's proposals for cooperative measures with payment services to combat unauthorised or illegal content; acknowledges that analysing the use of payment services can help identify individuals providing such content; reiterates that the universal and fundamental right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal established by law must be unequivocally ensured for infringers of IPRstresses that this cooperation should be firmly grounded in a legal framework characterised by respect for data privacy, consumer protection, right of redress and access to justice;
Amendment 62 #
2012/2030(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Underlines that all operators, including payment providers and advertisers, have a role to play in the fight against unauthorized or illegal content;
Amendment 83 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The dissemination of content which is protected by copyright and related rights and the linked services, including books, audiovisual productions and recorded music require the licensing of rights by different holders of copyright and related rights, such as authors, performers, producers and publishers. It is normally for the rightholders to choose between the individual or collective management of their rights. Management of copyright and related rights includes the granting of licences to users, the auditing of licensees and monitoring of the use of rights, the enforcement of copyright and related rights, the collection of rights revenue derived from the exploitation of rights and the distribution of the amounts due to rightholders. Collecting societies enable rightholders to be remunerated for uses which they would not be in a position to control or enforce themselves, including in non-domestic markets. Moreover, they have an important social and cultural role as promoters of the diversity of cultural expressions by enabling the smallest and less popular repertoires to access the market. Article 167 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union requires the Union to take cultural aspects into account in its action, in particular in order to respect and to promote the diversity of its cultures, except where national or EU law has made collective management compulsory.
Amendment 88 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) It is imperative, however, that account is taken of the specific nature of collective management organisations serving the audiovisual and live entertainment sectors, which function very differently from the music sector.
Amendment 90 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
Amendment 95 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) A suitable legal framework for collective management organisations should be established and, in particular, those Member States that do not yet have a supervisory body should establish one so as to facilitate the proper transposition of the EU legislation.
Amendment 96 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Collective management organisations are not commercial companies as they do not merely collect and redistribute rights revenue but also promote creativity and cultural diversity. They may therefore be required to comply with Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006, on services in the internal market, only in respect of a certain number of their activities.
Amendment 99 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) There are significant differences in the national rules governing the functioning of collecting societies, in particular as regards their transparency and accountability towards their members and rightholders. Beyond the difficulties non-domestic rightholders face when exercising their rights and the too often poor financial management of the revenues collectedFurthermore, problems with the functioning of collecting societies lead to inefficiencies in the exploitation of copyright and related rights across the internal market to the detriment of the members of collecting societies, rightholders and users alike. These difficulties do not arise in the functioning of independent rights management service providers who act as agents for rightholders for the management of their rights on a commercial basis and in which rightholders do not exercise membership rights, provided that they do not compete directly with management organisations in the areas of collecting and distributing monies due to rightholders. In such cases the criteria of membership and control by the membership are not relevant.
Amendment 101 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The protection of the interests of the members of collecting societies, rightholders and third parties requires that the laws of the Member States related to copyright management and multi-territorial licensing for online rights in musical works be coordinated with a view to having equivalent safeguards throughout the Union. Accordingly, the Directive is based on Article 50(2)(g) of the Treaty.
Amendment 103 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Having the freedom to provide and to receive collective management services across national borders entails that rightholders are able to freely choose the collecting society for the management of their rights, such as public performance or broadcasting rights, or categories of rights, such as interactive communication to the public1, provided the collecting society already manages such rights or categories of rights. This implies that rightholders can easily withdraw their rights or categories of rights from a collecting society and entrust or transfer all or part of them to another collecting society or another entity irrespective of the Member State of residence or the nationality of either the collecting society or the rightholder. Collecting societies managing different types of works and other subject matter, such as literary, musical or photographic works, should also allow this flexibility to rightholders as regards the management of different types of works and other subject matter. Collecting societieve management organisations should inform rightholders of this choice and allow them to exercise it as easily as possible. Finally, given that direct licensing between users and rightholders plays a major role in some creative sectors and facilitates the development of innovative services, this Directive should not prejudice the possibilities of rightholders to manage their rights individually, including for non- commercial uses. __________________ 1 The reference to ‘categories of rights’ is to be deleted throughout the text.
Amendment 105 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Having the freedom to provide and to receivereceive services for collective management serviceof copyright and related rights across national borders entails that rightholders are able to freely choose the collecting societyve management organisation for the management of their rights, such as public performance or broadcasting rights, or categories of rights, such as interactive communication to the public, provided the collecting society ve management organisation already manages such rights or categories of rights. This implies that rightholders can easily withdraw their rights or categories of rights from a collecting societyve management organisation and entrust or transfer all or part of them to another collecting societyve management organisation or another entity irrespective of the Member State of residence or the nationality of either the collecting societyve management organisation or the rightholder. Collecting societieve management organisations managing different types of works and other subject matter, such as literary, musical or photographic works, should also allow this flexibility to rightholders as regards the management of different types of works and other subject matter. Collecting societieve management organisations should inform rightholders of this choice and allow them to exercise it as easily as possible. Finally, this Directive should not prejudice the possibilities of rightholders to manage their rights individually, including for non- commercial uses.
Amendment 112 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) In implementing the provisions of the Directive, account should be taken of the specificity of each sector. In this context, collecting societies are the preferred way to ensure fair remuneration for authors. Collecting societies must be able to perform their task of pooling management costs for the benefit of their members and in the interests of legal certainty for users and of defending and promoting cultural diversity.
Amendment 119 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) At general meetings, the use of a proxy system should be encouraged so as to enable more members to be represented at such meetings; to prevent abuses and guarantee democratic representation for all it is essential to limit the concentration of proxies in the hands of a small number of people (a maximum of three proxies per person).
Amendment 123 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Members should be allowed to take part in monitoring the management of collecting societies. To this end, collecting societieve management organisations. To this end, collective management organisations should establish a supervisory function appropriate to their organisational structure and allow members to be representedthe different categories of members to be represented in fair and balanced manner in the body that exercises this function. To avoid imposing excessive burden on smaller collecting societies and to make the obligations arising from this Directive proportionate, Member States should be able to, if they consider this to be necessary, exclude the smallest collecting societies from having to organise such a supervisory function.
Amendment 123 #
2012/0180(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
Having regard to Directive 2011/77/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2011 amending Directive 2006/116/EC,
Amendment 126 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Collecting societies collect, manage and distribute revenue from the exploitation of the rights entrusted to them by rightholders. This revenue is ultimately due to rightholders who may be members of that society, or another society. It is therefore important that collecting societies exercise the utmost diligence in collecting, managing and distributing that revenue. Accurate distribution is only possible where collecting societies maintain proper records of membership, licences and use of works and other subject matter. Where appropriate, data should also be provided by rightholders and users and verified by the collecting societies. Amounts collected and due to rightholders should be managed separately from any own assets of the collecting society and, if they are invested, pending their distribution to rightholders, this should be carried out in accordance with the investment policy decided by the collecting societies’ general meeting. In order to maintain a high level of protection for the rights of rightholders and to ensure that any income which may be derived from exploitation of their rights accrues for the benefit of rightholders, the investments made and held by the collecting society should be managed in accordance with criteria which would oblige the collecting society to act prudently, while allowing the collecting society to decide on the most secure and efficient investment policy. As the collective management of rights by collecting societies is not a profit-making activity, these organisations should opt for an asset allocation that is suitable in terms of its precise nature and duration, and avoids any exposure to risk of rights revenue. This should allow the colleting society to opt for an asset allocation that suits the precise nature and duration of any exposure to risk of any rights revenue invested and which does not unduly prejudice any rights revenue owed to rightholders. Moreover, in order to ensure that the amounts due to rightholders are appropriately and effectively distributed, it is necessary to require collecting societies to undertake diligent and good faith reasonable measures to identify and locate the relevant rightholders. It is also appropriate to provide for the approval by members of collecting societies of the rules governing any situation where, due to the lack of identified or located rightholders, amounts collected cannot be distributed.
Amendment 128 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Since rightholders are entitled to be remunerated for the exploitation of their rights, it is important for any deduction, other than management fees or deductions required by national law, to be decided by the members of collecting societies and for the societies to be transparent towards rightholders regarding the rules governing those deductions. Any such rightholder should have access in a non-discriminatory manner to any social, cultural or educational service funded through such deductions. However, this Directive should not affect national law on any aspects that are not regulated by this Directive, with the exception of non-voluntary collective management models.
Amendment 129 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) This Directive is without prejudice to arrangements in the Member States concerning extended or compulsory collective licensing, legal presumptions of representation or transfer, or a combination of these elements.
Amendment 158 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35 a (new)
Recital 35 a (new)
(35a) Broadcasting organisations generally rely on a global licence from a local collective management organisation for rights to the world repertoire of musical works, in order to communicate and make available to the public their own radio or television programmes and corresponding online services, such as content complementing or enhancing broadcasters’ programmes or broadening the choice of programmes they offer. This directive should therefore uphold this well-established practice in order to avoid a situation where different rules apply to licences issued for broadcasters’ online and offline services. It is therefore necessary to exempt collection societies from the provisions of Title III where they issue licences for broadcasters’ online services linked to their offline services; such licences should be issued in accordance with national and European Union law, in particular Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 159 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) Given the disparity in the term of protection of rights between sound and audiovisual recordings, and with a view to improving the functioning of the European single market, the term of protection of rights related to audiovisual recordings should be extended to 70 years.
Amendment 160 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42 a (new)
Recital 42 a (new)
(42a) While it is legitimate to recognise the rightholder’s freedom to enter into, withdraw from or terminate a rights management arrangement, it is essential that this should go hand in hand with respect for economic imperatives, and for the nature and quality of the service provided by the collecting society.
Amendment 163 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) At general meetings, the use of a proxy system should be encouraged so as to enable more members to be represented at such meetings; to prevent abuse and ensure democratic representation for all it is essential to limit the concentration of proxies in the hands of a small number of people (a maximum of three proxies per person).
Amendment 169 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Titles I, II and IV with the exception of Articles 36 and 40 shall apply to all collecting societies established in the Union and also outside the Union but providing services in the Union.
Amendment 173 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Collecting societies collect, manage and distribute revenue from the exploitation of the rights entrusted to them by rightholders. This revenue is ultimately due to rightholders who may be members of that society, or another society. It is therefore important that collecting societies exercise the utmost diligence in collecting, managing and distributing that revenue. Accurate distribution is only possible where collecting societies maintain proper records of membership, licences and use of works and other subject matter. Where appropriate, data should also be provided by rightholders and users and verified by the collecting societies. It is therefore important that collecting societies exercise the utmost diligence in collecting, managing and distributing that revenue. Amounts collected and due to rightholders should be managed separately from any own assets of the collecting society and, if they are invested, pending their distribution to rightholders, this should be carried out in accordance with the investment policy decided by the collecting societies'’ general meeting. In order to maintain a high level of protection for the rights of rightholders and to ensure that any income which may be derived from exploitation of their rights accrues for the benefit of rightholders, the investments made and held by the collecting society should be managed in accordance with criteria which would oblige the collecting society to act prudently, while allowing the collecting society to decide on the most secure and efficient investment policy. As the collective management of rights by collecting societies is not a profit-making activity, these organisations should opt for an asset allocation that is suitable in terms of its precise nature and duration, and avoids any exposure to risk of rights revenue. This should allow the collecting society to opt for an asset allocation that suits the precise nature and duration of any exposure to risk of any rights revenue invested and which does not unduly prejudice any rights revenue owed to rightholders. Moreover, in order to ensure that the amounts due to rightholders are appropriately and effectively distributed, it is necessary to require collecting societies to undertake diligent and good faith reasonable measures to identify and locate the relevant rightholders. It is also appropriate to provide for the approval by members of collecting societies of the rules governing any situation where, due to the lack of identified or located rightholders, amounts collected cannot be distributed.
Amendment 175 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Title III and Articles 36 and 40 of Title IV shall only apply to those collecting societies managing authors' rights in musical works for online use on a multi- territorial and multi-repertoire basis.
Amendment 178 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) This Directive is without prejudice to arrangements in the Member States concerning extended or compulsory collective licensing, legal presumptions of representation or transfer, or a combination of these elements.
Amendment 184 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
However, Title III shall not apply where collecting societies, in accordance with national and Community law, grant licences for this type of work to broadcasters for their online services that are linked to their offline broadcasting services.
Amendment 185 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 b (new)
The provisions of the Directive shall apply to any entity that performs the same function as a collecting society in terms of collective rights management, as well as to entities owned, controlled or managed, in whole or in part, by a collecting society. Criteria of transparency and reporting rights should also be imposed on them.
Amendment 186 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
This Directive shall not affect Member States' arrangements on extended collective licences or the mandatory collective management of exclusive rights or rights to remuneration.
Amendment 188 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
a) 'collecting society' means any non- profit-making organisation which is authorised by law or by way of assignment, licence or any other contractual arrangement, by more than one rightholder, collectively to manage copyright or rights related to copyright as its sole or main purpose and which is owned or controlled by its membdirectly or indirectly by the rightholders;
Amendment 192 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
a a) ‘Independent provider, operator or commercial agent’ means any entity that engages in business activities relating to the collective management of rights on behalf of rightholders.
Amendment 195 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) 'rightholder' means any natural person or legal entity other than a collecting society that holds a copyright or related right or who under an agreement for the exploitation of rights is entitled to a share of the rights revenue from any of the rights managed by the collecting society;
Amendment 196 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
c) 'member of a collecting society' means a rightholder or an entity directly representing rightholders, including other collecting societies and associations of rightholders, fulfilling the membership requirements of the collecting societywhich has been accepted as a member;
Amendment 198 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
e) 'director' means any individual managing director, any member of the administrative board, the management or the supervisory boardor person with management responsibilities within the society that actually manages the activities of a collecting society;
Amendment 199 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
e a) ‘Administrator’ means any member of the board, the executive board or the supervisory board of a collecting society;
Amendment 200 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
e b) ‘Supervisory board’ means a permanent body of the collecting society composed of persons appointed by the members of the collecting society whose function is to control the actions of that society. It shall report annually to the general meeting of members on the controls it has carried out and any action it has taken;
Amendment 200 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35 a (new)
Recital 35 a (new)
(35a) Broadcasting organisations generally rely on a global licence from a local collective management organisation for rights to the world repertoire of musical works, in order to communicate and make available to the public their own radio or television programmes and corresponding online services, such as content complementing or enhancing broadcasters’ programmes or broadening the choice of programmes they offer. This directive should therefore uphold this well-established practice in order to avoid a situation where different rules apply to licences issued for broadcasters’ online and offline services. It is therefore necessary to exempt collection societies from the provisions of Title III where they issue licences for broadcasters’ online services linked to their offline services, which should be issued in accordance with national and European Union law, in particular Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 204 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point k
k) 'multi-territorial licence' means a licence for an online music service which covers the territory of more than one Member State;
Amendment 209 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Titles I, II and IV with the exception of Articles 36 and 40 shall apply to all collecting societies established in the Union and also outside the Union but providing services in the Union.
Amendment 213 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
This Directive shall not affect Member States’ provisions on extended collective licensing, the mandatory collective management of exclusive rights or rights to remuneration, the legal presumption of representation by a collecting society or the transfer of rights to a society, with due respect for Community law.
Amendment 218 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
The provisions of the Directive shall apply to any entity that performs the same function as a collecting society in terms of collective rights management, as well as to entities owned, controlled or managed, in whole or in part, by a collecting society. Criteria relating to transparency and the provision of information about rights should also be imposed on them.
Amendment 219 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Rightholders shall have the right to authorise a collecting societyve management organisation of their choice to manage the rights, categories of rights or types of works and other subject matter of their choice, for the Member States of their choice, irrespective of the Member State of residence or of establishment or the nationality of either the collecting societyve management organisation or the rightholder.
Amendment 222 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Rightholders shall have the right to grant licences free of charge for the non- commercial use of their works and rights. In this case they shall inform in due time the relevant collective management organisations that such a license has been granted.
Amendment 225 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Rightholders shall have the right to terminate the authorisation to manage rights, categories of rights or types of works and other subject matter granted to a collecting societyve management organisations or to withdraw from a collecting societyve management organisations any of the rights or categories of rights or types of works and other subject matter of their choice, at any time during the term of the authorisation, for the Member States of their choice, upon serving reasonable notice not exceeding six months. The collecting societyve management organisation may decide that such termination or withdrawal will take effect only at the middle and at the end of the financial year, whichever is sooner after the expiry of the notice period.
Amendment 226 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Collecting societies shall retain the ability to lay down rules in their membership contracts on how to prevent unconscionable withdrawals.
Amendment 227 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 5
Article 5 – paragraph 5
5. Collecting societieve management organisations shall not restrict the exercise of rights provided under paragraphs 3 and 4 by requiring that the management of rights or categories of rights or type of works and other subject matter which are subject to the termination or the withdrawal are entrusted to another collecting societyve management organisation.
Amendment 228 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 5
Article 5 – paragraph 5
5. Collecting societies shall not restrict the exercise of rights provided under paragraphs 3 and 4 by requiring that the management of rights or categories of rights or type of works and other subject matter which are subject to the termination or the withdrawal are entrusted to another collecting society. These provisions shall not apply to collecting societies which administer the rights of authors in the audiovisual field in respect of which Member States may possibly envisage provisions on suitable conditions for withdrawal.
Amendment 229 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 6
Article 5 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall ensure that the rightholder gives express consent specifically for each right or category of rights or type of works and other subject matter which that rightholder authorises the collecting societyve management organisation to manage and that any such consent is evidenced in documentary form.
Amendment 230 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 6
Article 5 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall ensure that the rightholder gives express consent specifically for each right or category of rights or type of works and other subject matter which that rightholder authorises the collecting society to manage and that any such consent is evidenced in documentary form with the exception of models of non- voluntary collective management.
Amendment 233 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
a) 'collecting society' means any organisation owned by its members which is authorised by law or by way of assignment, licence or any other contractual arrangement, by more than onea significant number of rightholders, to manage copyright or rights related to copy, to carry out social, cultural and artistic activities in their favour, and to defend and promote their rights, as its sole or main purpose and which is owned or controlled by its members;
Amendment 234 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) ) 'rightholder' means any natural person or legal entity other than a collecting society that holds a copyright or related right or who under an agreement for the exploitation of rights is entitled to a share of the rights revenue from any of the righ, i.e. a writer, performer, their heirs, an editor or a producer, as defined by Community texts managed by the collecting societyd Member State law;
Amendment 242 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The general meeting shall have the power to decide on the appointment or dismissal of the administrators and directors and approve their remuneration and other benefits such as non-monetary benefits, pension awards, right to other awards and rights to severance pay.
Amendment 244 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
The general meeting shall not decide on the appointment or dismissal of members of the management board or the individual managing director where the body responsible for exercising the supervisory boardfunction has the power to appoint or dismiss them.
Amendment 245 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point a
a) the policy on the distribution of the amounts due to rightholders, except where the general meeting decides to delegate this decision to the management board or to the body exercising the supervisory function;
Amendment 247 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point b
b) the use of the amounts due to rightholders which cannot be distributed as set out in Article 12(2) except where the general meeting decides to delegate this decision to the management board or to the body exercising the supervisory function;
Amendment 250 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 257 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – point b
b) amounts received or due to a member sin relation to the specified financial periodce joining the collecting society.
Amendment 263 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8
Article 7 – paragraph 8
8. Every member of a collecting societyve management organisation shall have the right to appoint any other natural or legal person as a proxy holder to attend and vote at the general meeting in his nameof members in his name, provided that such appointment does not result in a conflict of interest.
Amendment 264 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8
Article 7 – paragraph 8
8. Every member of a collecting society shall have the right to appoint any other natural or legal person as a proxy holder to attend and vote at the general meeting in his name if national legislation so allows.
Amendment 266 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Where a member appoints another member of the collective management organisation as a proxy holder, Member States may allow the collective management organisation to restrict the appointment of proxy holders to members who belong to the same category as the appointing member.
Amendment 267 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Member States may also allow a collective management organisation to impose reasonable restrictions related to the maximum number of votes a proxy holder may exercise at the general meeting of members.
Amendment 268 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 b (new)
The proxy holder shall enjoy the same rights in the general meeting of the members as those to which the appointing member would be entitled.
Amendment 269 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 c (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 c (new)
The proxy holder shall cast votes in accordance with the instructions issued by the appointing member.
Amendment 272 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Member States shall ensure that collecting societies encourage their members to take part in the general meeting by offering them arrangements such as distance voting or voting by proxy if they cannot attend.
Amendment 273 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. If a collecting society allows its members to designate an agent to represent them at the general meeting and vote on their behalf, it may insist that they choose that agent from among the other members in the same category.
Amendment 275 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that, if it does not already have one, the collecting society establishes a supervisory function, in accordance with the criteria laid down in Article 3, responsible for continuously monitoring the activities and the performance of the duties of the persons entrusted with managerial responsibilities in the collecting society. There shall be fair and balanced representation of the members of the collecting society in the body exercising this function in order to ensure their effective participation.
Amendment 277 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Amendment 281 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. The collecting society shall manage and keep separate in accounting terms the rights revenue and any income derived from its investment from its own assets, the income derived from its management services or the income derived from any other activities.
Amendment 287 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall ensure that deductions made for management fees shall not exceed justified and documented costs incurred for the purpose of managing copyright and related rights.
Amendment 289 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States shall ensure that, where a collecting society provides social, cultural or educational services funded through deductions from rights revenue, rightholdmembers are entitled to the following:
Amendment 296 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b
b) rightholders who have terminated the authorisation to manage rights or categories of rights or types of works and other subject matter or who have withdrawn their rights or categories of rights or types of works and other subject matter from the collecting society, continue to have access to thosewithdrawal services. The criteria in relation to the access to and the extent of those services may take into consideration the rights revenue generated by those rightholders and the duration of the authorisation to manage rights, provided that such criteria are also applicable to rightholders who have not terminated such authorisation or have not withdrawn their rights or categories of rights or types of works and other subject matter from the collecting society.
Amendment 303 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. Where the amounts due to rightholders cannot be distributed, after fivthree years from the end of the financial year in which the collection of the rights revenue occurred, and provided that the collecting society has taken all necessary measures to identify and locate the rightholders, the collecting societygeneral meeting of members shall decide on the use of the amounts concerned in accordance with Article 7(5)(b), without prejudice to the right of the rightholder to claim such amounts from the collecting society.
Amendment 305 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Sums which have not been claimed by rightholders upon the expiry of a period which may not exceed three years and which have not therefore been distributed must be reinvested in economic or social measures in the cultural and creative sector. It shall be for the general meeting, acting in accordance with Article 7(5)(b), to determine how these sums shall be spent. Furthermore, the general meeting may also decide to earmark some of the sums collected by the collecting society each year for measures to support the creation and dissemination of works, training, the safeguarding and promotion of the interests of rightholders and, more generally, measures to foster cultural and artistic diversity.
Amendment 313 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Tariffs for exclusive rights shall reflect the economic value of the rights in trade and of the service provided by the collecting societyand rights to fair remuneration must take account of the need for rightholders to receive reasonable remuneration, the overall value of the repertoire of the collecting society and of the economic benefit which users obtain from the collective management of their rights.
Amendment 316 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
In the absence of any national law which establishes the amounts due to rightholders in respect of a right to remuneration and a right to compensation, the collecting society shall base its own determination of those amounts due, on the economic value of those rights in trade.
Amendment 317 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
An author or performer may decide to opt for collective management of a category of rights even though he or she had previously agreed to assign those rights.
Amendment 318 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 b (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 b (new)
In order to deter any attempt to defer payment to collecting societies on the grounds that the tariffs are being challenged and to discourage delaying tactics of any kind, a mechanism shall be introduced whereby the sums in question are frozen.
Amendment 319 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 c (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 c (new)
Member States shall ensure that users forward to collecting societies declarations concerning the use of the works and other subject matter, in an agreed format and by a set deadline, in such a way as to enable collecting societies to determine what fees are applicable and distribute the amounts due to rightholders in an appropriate manner consistent with the provisions of this Directive.
Amendment 320 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 d (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 d (new)
If a general tariff applies, or if such a tariff has been set by a court, Member States shall ensure that users pay the fees due to collecting societies by a set deadline.
Amendment 323 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a (new)
Amendment 330 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. If a collecting society allows its members to designate a proxy holder to represent them at the general meeting and vote on their behalf, it may insist that they choose that proxy holder from among the other members in the same category.
Amendment 353 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. The annual transparency report shall contain at least the information set out in Annex I. The Commission shall carry out a feasibility study before the annex enters into force.
Amendment 354 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 5
Article 20 – paragraph 5
Amendment 375 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 33
Article 33
Amendment 380 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that disputes between collecting societies and users concerning existing andor proposed licensing conditions, tariffs, and or any refusal to grant a licence for example can be submitted to a court, and if appropriate, to an independent and impartial dispute resolution body. However, if the law of the Member State concerned so permits, priority shall be given to mediation.
Amendment 380 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. In the interests of facilitating the management of authorisations to exploit and distribute protected content and of improving the distribution of remunerations due to rightholders, consideration should be given to extending Directive 2011/77/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2011 amending Directive 206/116/EC, and to extending the term of protection of rights related to audiovisual recordings to 70 years.
Amendment 383 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 35 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 35 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States shall ensure that if users challenge the tariffs charged by a collecting society before a court or an independent and impartial dispute resolution body the sums in question are frozen until such time as the dispute has been settled.
Amendment 388 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 1
Article 38 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall providensure that their respective competent authorities may take appropriate administrative sanctions andhave the power to impose appropriate sanctions and to take appropriate measures where the provisions of the national provisionslaw adopted in the implementation of this Directive have not been complied with, and shall ensure that they are applied. These sanctions and measures shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
Amendment 389 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Sums which have not been claimed by rightholders upon the expiry of a period which may not exceed three years and which have not therefore been distributed must be reinvested in economic or social measures in the cultural and creative sector. It shall be for the general meeting, acting in accordance with Article 7(5)(b), to determine how these sums shall be spent. Furthermore, the general meeting may also decide to earmark some of the sums collected by the collecting society each year for measures to support the creation and dissemination of works, training, the safeguarding and promotion of the interests of rightholders and, more generally, measures to foster cultural and artistic diversity.
Amendment 416 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
If a general tariff applies, or if such a tariff has been set by a court, Member States shall ensure that users pay the fees due to collecting societies by a set deadline.
Amendment 516 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that disputes between collecting societies and users concerning existing and proposed licensing conditions, tariffs, and any refusal to grant a licence can be submitted to a court, and if appropriate, to an independent and impartial dispute resolution body. However, if the law of the Member State concerned so permits, priority shall be given to mediation.
Amendment 527 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 35 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 35 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States shall ensure that if users challenge the tariffs charged by a collecting society before a court or an independent and impartial dispute resolution body, the sums in question are frozen until such time as the dispute has been settled.
Amendment 537 #
2012/0180(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 1
By [5 years after the end of the transposition period (date)], the Commission shall assess the application of this Directive and report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the application of this Directive, including its impact on the development of cross-border services and on cultural diversity, and, if necessary, on the need to review it. The report shall also be used to assess the financial impact of implementing the provisions of this Directive and the possibility of introducing related funding for collecting societies, if necessary. The Commission shall submit its report accompanied, if appropriate, by a legislative proposal.
Amendment 1 #
2011/2313(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Stresses that online use can represent a real opportunity for better diffusion and distribution of European works, particularly audiovisual works, in conditions where legal supply can develop in an environment of healthy competition which effectively tackles the illegal supply of protected works;
Amendment 7 #
2011/2313(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Invites the Commission to enable the industry to test innovative means of distribution seeking to exploit the possible benefits across and between territories and exploitation windows notably through the implementation of the preparatory action on circulation of audiovisual works adopted by Parliament in November 2011;
Amendment 17 #
2011/2313(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to present a legislative initiative for the collective management of copyright, aimed at ensuring better accountability, transparency and governance on the part of collective rights management societies, as well as efficient dispute resolution mechanisms, and at clarifying and simplifying licensing systems in the music sector; stresses, in this regard, the need to operate a clear distinction between licensing practices for different types of content, notably between audiovisual/cinematographic and musical works; recalls that the licensing of audiovisual works is mainly conducted on the basis of contractual agreements, and that collective management is rare;
Amendment 19 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas cinema exhibition continues to account for a large proportion of film revenue and has a considerable impact on the success of films on video-on-demand platforms;
Amendment 26 #
2011/2313(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses that it is essential, in the online distribution of audiovisual works, to guarantee equitable remuneration for all authors, artists and performers involved, for example by setting up collective agreements through contractual clauses or, in the absence of an agreement between the parties, through voluntary collective administration;
Amendment 28 #
2011/2313(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Calls for the Commission to urgently carry out a study on the different remuneration options for authors, artists and performers in the audiovisual sector, so that best practice in Member States can be used to set up an EU model;
Amendment 33 #
2011/2313(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Calls on the Commission to find mechanisms to encourage access to archived audiovisual material held in Europe's film heritage institutions; for reasons often linked to diminishing consumer appeal and limited shelf life, a substantial share of European audiovisual material is unavailable commercially;
Amendment 34 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas the rapid development of social networking platforms is a driver of freedom of artistic and creative expression for Internet users, the consequences for uploading works protected by copyright should not, however, be forgotten;
Amendment 35 #
2011/2313(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Calls on Member States and the Commission to promote solutions to support the digitization, preservation and educational availability of these works, including across borders;
Amendment 36 #
2011/2313(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7 c. Calls on the Commission, with regard to the impact of standardized practices on the free movement and free provision of audiovisual works, to implement measures facilitating wider use of the ISAN system;
Amendment 64 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q a (new)
Recital Q a (new)
Qa. whereas media chronology is governed by interprofessional agreements and, in some cases, is at the discretion of the Member States;
Amendment 66 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R a (new)
Recital R a (new)
Ra. whereas the current regulatory framework is not enough to guarantee an effective collective licensing system for non-linear media services as regards the broadcasting of music;
Amendment 71 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital S a (new)
Recital S a (new)
Sa. whereas there is a crucial need to step up research and development for developing techniques for the automated management of services for people with disabilities, especially thanks to hybrid broadcasting;
Amendment 82 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Promotes the development of a rich and diverse legal offering, especially by making release windows more flexible;
Amendment 87 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Welcomes the Commission’s decision to implement the preparatory action adopted by Parliament for testing new modes of distribution based on the complementarity between platforms on the flexibility of release windows;
Amendment 92 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Observes that the development of cross-border service providers is entirely possible so long as business platforms are prepared to contractually acquire the rights to exploit one or more territories, because it is important to remember that territorial systems are the normal markets in broadcasting;
Amendment 108 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the Commission to afford Internet users legal certainty when using streamed services and to consider, in particular, ways to prevent the use of payment systems and funding through advertising on pay platforms offering unauthorised downloading and streaming services;
Amendment 109 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Draws attention to the upsurge of social networking platforms offering Internet users the chance to financially support the production of a film or documentary, which makes them feel like an integral part of its making, but stresses, nonetheless, that this type of funding in the short term is unlikely to replace traditional sources of funding;
Amendment 128 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Maintains that it is essential to guarantee authors and performers remuneration that is fair and proportional to the revenue generated by the online exploitation of their works;
Amendment 142 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Observes that it would be useful for culture workers and Member States to negotiate the implementation of measures enabling public records to fully benefit from digital technology for works that form part of heritage, especially as regards access to remote digital works on non-commercial scales;
Amendment 143 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Stresses that if voluntary collective management were to no longer permit the broadcasting of the world music repertoire and if equivalent measures for obtaining rights could no longer be voluntarily introduced with legal certainty, mandatory collective management for authorising the use of music and musical compositions should expressly be considered as a part of programmes distributed by EU media services;
Amendment 147 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Commission to consider ways to encourage network operators to standardise their technical tools and reverse the current trend of removing responsibility from these operators regarding consumer protection, implementation of intellectual property and ensuring Internet privacy;
Amendment 151 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Calls on the Commission to implement a legal framework for online non-EU audiovisual services if they are aimed directly or indirectly at the EU public so that they are subject to the same obligations as EU services;
Amendment 152 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Notes that in order to ensure fair competition among the different operators or the different platforms, the provisions on cable in the ‘cable and satellite’ directive should be extended to the integrated, simultaneous and unabridged retransmission of pre-existing broadcasts via closed retransmission platforms such as IPTV services;
Amendment 155 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Calls on the Commission, with the cooperation of Parliament, to call for an annual assembly dedicated to developing online audiovisual and cinematographic content in which new models for the creation and promotion of online audiovisual content will be examined;
Amendment 156 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15c. Stresses that the development of smart terminals has further facilitated direct access to audiovisual content via search engines, and that it would therefore be appropriate to ensure that the links given the highest ranking by referral sites will direct consumers to domestic and European sites or services, in order to ensure the economic value of content;
Amendment 157 #
2011/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 d (new)
Paragraph 15 d (new)
15d. Encourages Member States to implement Directive 2010/13/EU on audiovisual media services and recommends that they monitor how European works, particularly films and documentaries, are actually presented and promoted throughout the different audiovisual media services accessible to the public, and stresses the need for closer cooperation between regulatory authorities and film funding organisations;
Amendment 17 #
2011/2246(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that freedom of expression and the independence and pluralism of the media are prerequisites for democracy and cultural diversity, as set out in Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and that it is essential for the European institutions to ensure that Member States comply therewith, especially since they are bound in this respect by a positive obligation arising from the interpretation, by the European Court of Human Rights, of Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights;
Amendment 18 #
2011/2246(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Points out that, in Europe, media pluralism guarantees plurality of opinion and a diverse supply of information;
Amendment 19 #
2011/2246(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Stresses that the Commission should ensure that Member States guarantee proper implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in their country, manifested through media pluralism, equal access to information and respect for the independence of the press through neutrality;
Amendment 20 #
2011/2246(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Emphasises the vital role of public service media for a balanced media offering and for safeguarding and promoting freedom of expression and media pluralism;
Amendment 26 #
2011/2246(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Strongly emphasises the educational and culturalspecific nature of the social, cultural and democratic role of the public media; suggesttresses that the commercial activities of the public media should solely complement the promotion of culture and their educational missionat specific nature stems from the remit given to them by Member States; and points out that they should have sufficient funding to enable them to carry out that remit to the full;
Amendment 35 #
2011/2246(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Points out that, in order to meet the challenges of the technological environment and for the future of the public service media in Europe, meticulous thought must now be given to the development of tangible strategies encouraging the media to adapt to digital changes in order to carry out their information society remit;
Amendment 36 #
2011/2246(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Stresses the need to encourage Member States to equip the public service media in Europe with the necessary resources to expand interactive online services, with a view to increasing the public’s democratic participation, which is one of the objectives of their public service remit;
Amendment 62 #
2011/2246(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that the protection of journalists’ sources must be absolutely and effectively guaranteed in the legal system of all Member States;
Amendment 63 #
2011/2246(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls on the Commission to urgently consider proposing arrangements that safeguard confidentiality of sources for media outlets and journalists;
Amendment 17 #
2011/2178(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission and Member States to actively involve citizens, businesses and educational institutions in developing user-driven eGovernment platforms, using open source software and interoperable standards;
Amendment 22 #
2011/2178(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on Member States and the Commission to publish publicly funded data in machine-readable form (and in real time) under open licences, to enable innovative re-use of public sector information by academia and for research, business development and the general public;
Amendment 29 #
2011/2178(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 5 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the European Schools enable pupils to affirm their cultural identity and to attain a high level of knowledge of foreign languages, which they are encouraged to learn from an extremely early age,
Amendment 10 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the European Schools cannot be put in the same category as international schools because, rather than existing to offer parents the option of a particular type of schooling for their children, they meet a need to educate children in their mother tongue,
Amendment 15 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the European Schools operate in a way that is no longer suited to the present circumstances’ way of operating, based from the outset on an intergovernmental convention, is no longer suited to the present circumstances, and the system will have to be given a legal basis that will allow it to be simplified and to become more transparent and effective,
Amendment 18 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas in the Schools in Brussels and Luxembourg the problem of excessive numbers of students is detrimental to the quality of education and prevents the enrolment ofSchools’ being opened up to children other than the children of EU institutions’ staff,
Amendment 27 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas it is difficult to bring together within the same educational system – geared solely towards the European baccalaureate examination – students from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds, who may have very different talents and capacities, and whereas it is thus necessary to provide appropriate support for students with special educational needs (SEN),
Amendment 28 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. recognising the need to consider the introduction of a school-leaving certificate other than the European baccalaureate for students wishing to specialise in vocational courses,
Amendment 29 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas, in its resolution of 8 September 2005, one of the things that Parliament called for was a pilot project for an SEN resource centre; whereas the sum of EUR 200 000 was earmarked for that purpose in the 2008 EU budget and whereas the money was eventually used to fund a study of policy and practice with regard to SEN provision in the European Schools,
Amendment 30 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas in order to help bring studentArticle 4 of the Convention defining the Statute of the European Schools stipulates that, in order to help bring students from the various language sections together and to foster mutual understanding between them, certain lessons arwill be taught in the same languageany Community language, where circumstances justify its use, to joint classes of the same level,
Amendment 33 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the European Schools are funded by contributions from the Member States and a balancing contribution from the EU, in accordance with Article 25 of the Convention defining the Statute of the European Schools, the Schools are funded essentially by contributions from the Member States in the form of the secondment of teachers, which in 2010 made up 21% of the European Schools’ budget, and a balancing contribution from the EU, to cover the difference between the Schools’ overall expenditure and their total income from other sources, which in 2010 made up 58% of the budget; whereas the European Schools are also dependent, via their Board of Governors, on an intergovernmental executive,
Amendment 34 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas Article 25 also provides that the European Schools’ budget may include a financial contribution decided on by the Board of Governors acting unanimously,
Amendment 35 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the economic crisis has repercussions for the financing of the European Schools and the Commission has therefore called for reforms to rationalise costs in the Schools,
Amendment 40 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas, following the two most recent EU enlargements, the number of students without a language section (SWALS) is continuing to grow,
Amendment 44 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas a special levy on the salaries of officials, intended to be used inter alia for the European Schools, was introduced in 2004, for the declared purpose of reflecting the costs of social policy, improved working conditions and the European Schools,
Amendment 56 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that the European Schools constitute an excellent educational laboratory based on a well proven teaching approach, that they should serve as an example and that exporting this model to the national education systems would assist professional mobility and help to foster multilingualism and European integration;
Amendment 62 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that the budget restrictions that the Schools will have to accept must be accompanied by a real increase in their management autonomy and in the resources for exercising that autonomy, in accordance with the aims set out at the time of the reform in 2009;
Amendment 66 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses the need to give the European Schools the foundation of an adequate legal base, within the EU’s area of competence, and wishes to be involved in any discussions on the subjecthopes that Parliament’s Committee on Culture and Education – responsible under Annex VII of its Rules of Procedure for the promotion of the system of European schools – can be involved in any discussions on the subject and in any consideration of the future of the Schools;
Amendment 76 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Encourages the Member States to promote the concept of European Schools on their territory by creating pilot establishments, as provided for in the 2009 reform, under the aim of opening up the system, with a view to promoting access to European studies and the European baccalaureate throughout the Member States;
Amendment 81 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Invites the Member States to develop syllabuses for use in all EU countriesraw on the educational experience of the European Schools to develop syllabuses for use in all EU countries and to pursue collective consideration of how best to realise the aim of opening of the system;
Amendment 92 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Points out that students who hold the European baccalaureate can, under Article 5 of the Convention defining the Statute of the European Schools, students who hold the European baccalaureate can, with the same rights as nationals of the country in question who hold equivalent qualifications, apply to any university in the EU, and urges the Member States to ensure that the relevant provisions are complied with;
Amendment 98 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Encourages twinning between the European Schools and national schools, as a means of promoting student and teacher exchanges and raising awareness of the European Schools system in the Member States, along the lines of the Comenius programme;
Amendment 101 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes the need to rationalise the Schools’ management costs, but points out that attempts to curb expenditure must not bring into question fundamental principles that form the basis of the European Schools concept, such as mother-tongue teaching by native speakers, and must not be at the expense of educational quality;
Amendment 111 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Asks the Commission to consider introducing a system of reserve lists for filling those posts that cannot be filled by teachers on secondment and those which need to be filled by locally recruited staff, in order to ensure that needs are met with regard to teacher numbers and that educational quality and continuity are guaranteed;
Amendment 124 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls forWishes – in accordance with Article 4 of the Convention defining the Statute of the European Schools, which aims to bring pupils of the different language sections together by offering joint classes of the same level in certain subjects – to see general use of the working languages for teaching all non-fundamental subjects;
Amendment 127 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 135 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Hopes that the recruitment of local staff meets the excellence criteria and that they are check Board of Governors will ensure that the professional abilities of such staff are evaluated by inspectors;
Amendment 141 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Calls on the Board of Governors of the European Schools to implement the recommendations on students with special educational needs made following the 2009 study by a team of Swedish experts, and to draw up an SEN action plan;
Amendment 145 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls, once again, on the Board of Governors to work on providing alternatives for those students who drop out of preparation for the European baccalaureate, and to consider the creation of a school-leaving certificate other than the baccalaureate for students who wish to specialise in vocational courses;
Amendment 147 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Notes that the official 2.7% failure rate reported by the Board of Governors does not reflect the great disparity in results across the European Schools, where there has for many years been an abnormally high failure rate in the French language section; calls on the Board of Governors to examine the educational and financial causes and consequences of this malfunction in the European Schools system;
Amendment 148 #
2011/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23b. Reaffirms that provision for students with special educational needs must continue to be a priority, particularly as the European Schools still offer only one type of school-leaving certificate and therefore need to ensure that maximum support is provided with a view to preventing academic failure insofar as possible, so that students do not then risk finding themselves without other options if, for language or other reasons, they cannot take alternative courses in their host country’s national education system;
Amendment 58 #
2011/0901B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In September 2016, first instance jurisdiction in Union civil service cases, and the seven posts of the Judges sitting at the European Union Civil Service Tribunal, should be transferred to the General Court, on the basis of a future legislative request by the Court of JustiAs the Court of Justice has already announced, a second legislative proposal will be presented to determine all the modalities of the transfer of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal, including its seven posts of Judge and its staff and resources.
Amendment 60 #
2011/0901B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) The Statute should also provide a permanent solution to the issue of the appointment of Judges according to their country of origin, since the current system, under which one Judge is appointed by Member State, is no longer applicable where the total number of Judges exceeds the number of Member States.
Amendment 67 #
2011/0901B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In September 2019,Article 19 (2) of the Tremaining nine additional Judges should take office. In order to ensure cost effectiveness, this should not entail the recruitment of additional legal secretariaty on European Union provides that the Court of Justice shall include at least one Judge per Member State. Since this system already ensures a definite geographical balance, additional Judges should be appointed primarily on the basis of their professional and personal skills, and in the light of their knowledge of the legal systems of the European Union and its Member States; or only thern support staffhould account be taken of their nationality. Internal re-organisation measures within the institution should ensure that efficient use be made of existing human resources.
Amendment 82 #
2011/0901B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Protocol No 3
Article 48
Article 48
(2) Article 48 is replaced by the following : "Article 48 The General Court shallcurrently consists of: (a) 40 Judges as from …*; (b) 47 Judges as from 1 September 2016; (c) two Judges per Member State as from 1 September 2019.". __________________ * OJ: insert "1 September 2015", or the date of entry into force of this Regulation if that date is after 1 September 2015 one Judge per Member State. In order to cope with the steady increase in litigation, twelve additional Judges shall be allocated to that Court at the end of 2015. Taking into account the integration of the seven Judges of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal at the end of 2016, the number of Judges of the General Court will be increased to 47. In 2019, prior to the replacement of the General Court confirming the decision to allocate it nine additional Judges, it is essential that an impact study be carried out on whether it is necessary to allocate these nine Judges to that Court, in the light of the workload.
Amendment 96 #
2011/0901B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 – point c
Article 1 – point 2 – point c
Protocol No 3
Article 48
Article 48
Amendment 107 #
2011/0901B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – point 2 a (new)
Protocol No 3
Article 48 a (new)
Article 48 a (new)
2a) The following Article is inserted: "Article 48a Where Judges are to be appointed per Member State, the right of appointment shall lie with the government of the Member State in question. "
Amendment 109 #
2011/0901B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 b (new)
Article 1 – point 2 b (new)
Protocol No 3
Article 48b (new)
Article 48b (new)
(2b) The following article is inserted: "Article 48b 1. The additional Judges shall be appointed regardless of nominees' Member States of origin. 2. Where one or more of the twelve additional Judges’ posts are to be filled, all Member States’ governments may propose a nominee. These nominees may only be accepted if they involve a candidate of the opposite sex to the sitting judge from that Member State, as nominated by that Member State pursuant to Article 48a. 3. Furthermore, outgoing General Court Judges may nominate themselves in a written submission to the Chair of the panel referred to in Article 255 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. 4. When one or more of the 12 additional Judges’ posts are to be filled, the panel referred to in Article 255 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union shall deliver an opinion on the suitability of the nominees to perform the duties of Court Judge. To accompany its opinion on the nominees’ suitability, the panel shall draw up a list of nominees best qualified in the light of their high-level experience, ranking them in order of merit. The list must take into account parity between men and women."
Amendment 200 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The Treaty aims at an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe and confers on the Union the task, inter alia, of contributing to the flowering of cultures of Member States, while respecting their national and regional diversity and at the same time ensuring that the conditions necessary for the competitiveness of the Union's industry exist. In this respect, the Union, where necessary, supports and supplements Member States' actions to respect cultural and linguistic diversity, strengthen the competitiveness of the European cultural and creative sectors and facilitate adaptation to industri, improve knowledge and dissemination of the cultural history of the peoples of Europe and conserve and protect Europe's cultural heritage, as well as Member States’ actions in the fields of non-commercial cultural exchanges, in particular through vocational training and artistic and literary creation, including in the audiovisual and cinema industries.
Amendment 250 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Participation in the framework programme will be open to Member States, acceding countries, candidate countries and potential candidates benefiting from a pre- accession strategy, in accordance with the general principles and general terms and conditions for the participation of those countries in Union programmes established in the respective Framework Agreements, Association Council Decisions or similar agreements; to EFTA countries which are parties to the EEA Agreement and to countries of the European neighbourhood area in accordance with the procedures defined with those countries following the framework agreements providing for their participation in European Union programmes. The participation of the Swiss Confederation is subject to specific arrangements with that country.
Amendment 260 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) It is necessary to ensure the European added value of all actions carried out within in the framework of the Programme, complementarity to Member State activities and compliance with Article 167 (4) of the Treaty, in particular paragraph 4 of that article, and other Union activities, in particular in the field of education, research and innovation, industrial and cohesion policy, tourism and external relations.
Amendment 268 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Given the transnational and international character of proposed actions, the objectives of this Regulation, namely to foster the protection, promotion and development of Europe’s cultural and linguistic diversity and audiovisual and cinema heritage, to promote intercultural dialogue and enhance the cultural area shared by Europeans in order to strengthen their feeling of being European citizens and to build capacity in Europe’s cultural and creative sectors so as to help them to develop and Europe's audiovisual industry to be competitive in the period from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020, cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States alone. For reasons of scale and the expected effects of those actions, transnational results can be better achieved by action at Union level. The Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to support the achieving ofachieve those objectives to safeguard and promote European cultural and linguistic diversity and strengthen the competitiveness of the cultural and creative sectors in the period from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020.
Amendment 271 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation establishes the Creative Europe Framework Programme for support to the European cultural and creative sectors, in particular the audiovisual sector, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Framework Programme’) for the period from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020.
Amendment 273 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point 1
Article 2 – point 1
1. '‘cultural and creative sectors'’ means all sectors, including the audiovisual sector, whose activities are based on cultural values and/or artistic and, creative and audiovisual expressions, whether these activities are market or non-market oriented and whatever the type of structure that carries them out. These activities include the creation, the production, the dissemination and the preservation of goods and services which embody cultural, artistic or creative expressions, as well as related functions such as education, management or regulation. The cultural and creative sectors include in particular architecture, archives and libraries, artistic crafts, audiovisual (including film, television, video games and multimedia), cultural heritage, design, festivals, music, performing arts, publishing, radio and visual arts;.
Amendment 282 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point 2
Article 2 – point 2
2. 'cultural and creative operator' means a professional, an organisation, a business, including an SME, or an institution active in the cultural and creative sectors, in particular the audiovisual sector;
Amendment 285 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point 3
Article 2 – point 3
3. 'participating financial intermediaries', as selected by the cultural and creative sectors guarantee fund, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XX/2012 [the Financial Regulation], means financial institutions providing or planning to provide loan facilities or additional expertise regarding the cultural and creative sectors.
Amendment 288 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. The Framework Programme shall only support thosebe based on actions and activities presenting a potential European added value and contributing to the achievement of the objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy and its flagship initiativepromotion of cultural diversity, the conservation of Europe’s cultural heritage and the enhancement and development of the cultural and creative area shared by Europeans.
Amendment 295 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the transnational character of its activitiescultural and creative activities, in particular in the audiovisual sector, and their impact, which will complement national, international and other Union programmes;
Amendment 300 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 303 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) transnational cooperation stimulating more comprehensive, rapid and effective responses to global challenges and creating long-term systemic effects on thebetween cultural and creative operators, including artists, from more than one Member State, fostering the emergence of a cultural and creative space shared by Europeans and helping to make for better structured sectors;
Amendment 307 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) ensuring a more level playing field in the European cultural and creative sectors by taking account of low production capacity countries and/or countries orthat proper account is taken of the conditions obtaining in the European cultural and creative sectors, in particular the situation in low production capacity Member States and/or EU regions with a restricted geographical and linguistic area.
Amendment 317 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – point a
Article 4 – point a
(a) to foster the safeguarding and, promotion and development of European’s cultural and linguistic diversity; and audiovisual and cinema heritage and to promote intercultural dialogue and enhance the cultural area shared by Europeans in order to strengthen their feeling of being European citizens;
Amendment 318 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – point b
Article 4 – point b
(b) to strengthen the competitiveness of the cultural and creative sectors with a view to promoting smart, sustainable and inclusive growthbuild up the capacity of Europe’s cultural and creative sectors so as to help them to develop and support the competitiveness of the European audiovisual industry.
Amendment 324 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point a
Article 5 – point a
(a) to support the capacity of the European cultural and creative sectors, in particular the audiovisual sector, to operate transnationally;
Amendment 329 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point b
Article 5 – point b
(b) to promote the transnational circulation of cultural and creative works and operators and, in particular audiovisual works, and the mobility of cultural and creative operators, including audiovisual professionals, in order to reach new audiences in Europethe Union and beyond;:
Amendment 335 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point c
Article 5 – point c
(c) to strengthen the financial capacity of the cultural and creative sectors, and in particular small and medium-sized enterprises and organisationoperators and audiovisual professionals, and in particular SMEs and organisations in the cultural and creative sectors;
Amendment 347 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point d
Article 5 – point d
(d) to support transnational polartisticy cooperation in the cultural and creative sectors, in particular the audiovisual sector, in order to foster policy development, innovation, and audience building and new business models.
Amendment 353 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – introductory wording
Article 6 – introductory wording
The Programme shall consist of the following strands:
Amendment 355 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – point a
Article 6 – point a
(a) an Cross-sectoral Strand addressed to all cultural and creative sectors;
Amendment 356 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – point b
Article 6 – point b
(b) a Culture Strand addressed to the cultural and creative sectorsprogramme;
Amendment 360 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – point c
Article 6 – point c
(c) a MEDIA Strand addressed to the audiovisual sectorprogramme.
Amendment 362 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – title
Article 7 – title
The Cultural and Creative Sectors Guarantee Facility
Amendment 364 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory wording
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory wording
1. The Commission shall establish a Facility targeting the cultural and creative sectors and operated within the context of a Union debt instrument for small and medium-sized enterprises. This facility shall have the following priorities, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No xx/2012 [the Financial Regulation] and the rules laid down in Annex I, a Guarantee Facility targeting the cultural and creative sectors which shall be open to cultural and creative SMEs and organisations established in a Member State and shall:
Amendment 366 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory wording
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory wording
1. The Commission shall establish a, in accordance with the rules laid down in Annex I, a Guarantee Facility targeting the Union's cultural and creative sectors and operated. The Guarantee Facility may operate as a self-standing instrument or within the context of another Union debt instrument for. The Guarantee Facility smhall and medium-sized enterprises. This facility shall have the following priorities: be set up and managed in accordance with Title VIII of the Financial Regulation. It shall be opened to cultural and creative SMEs and organisations established in a Member State and shall:
Amendment 378 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) facilitate access to finance for small- and medium-sized enterprises and organisations in the European cultural and creative sectorcultural and creative SMEs and organisations;
Amendment 379 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) facilitate access to finance for small- and medium-sized enterpriseSMEs and organisations in the Europeanacross the Union's cultural and creative sectors;
Amendment 389 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) to this end, improveing the capacity of participating financial institutiontermediaries to assess the risks associated with SMEs and organisations in the cultural and creative sectors and their projects, including through technical assistance, knowledge-building and networking measures.
Amendment 390 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) to this end, improve the capacity of participating financial institutiontermediaries to assess cultural and creative projects, including technical assistance and networking measures.
Amendment 394 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. In accordance with Article 130(3) of the Financial Regulation, the Commission shall implement the Guarantee Facility in an indirect management mode by entrusting tasks to the European Investment Fund (EIF) referred to in point (iv) of Article 55(1) of the Financial Regulation, subject to the terms of an agreement to be concluded between the Commission and the EIF.
Amendment 415 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – point f – introductory wording
Article 8 – point f – introductory wording
Amendment 420 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – point f – indent 1
Article 8 – point f – indent 1
Amendment 423 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – point f – indent 2
Article 8 – point f – indent 2
Amendment 427 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – point f – indent 3
Article 8 – point f – indent 3
Amendment 429 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – point f – indent 4
Article 8 – point f – indent 4
Amendment 434 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – point f – indent 5
Article 8 – point f – indent 5
Amendment 439 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new) – title
Article 8 a (new) – title
Article 8 bis Network of Creative Europe Desks
Amendment 441 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 (new)
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 (new)
1. The countries participating in the framework programme shall, each in accordance with its own regulations and provisions, establish Creative Europe desks, consisting of MEDIA Desks and Europe culture points, in order to guarantee that existing expertise is utilised and that the specific features of each sector are taken into account.
Amendment 443 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 451 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b (new) – introductory wording
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b (new) – introductory wording
1b. The Creative Europe Desks organised around the MEDIA Desks and the Europe culture points shall carry out the following tasks:
Amendment 452 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 (new)
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 (new)
– promote the programmes at national level in the participating countries and to engage in advertising and publicity for them;
Amendment 453 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 a (new)
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 a (new)
– assist the cultural and creative sectors with regard to the programmes and to provide information on other opportunities for assistance provided by EU policies;
Amendment 454 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 b (new)
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 b (new)
– stimulate cross-border cooperation between professionals in the cultural and creative sectors, and the creation of institutional platforms and networks in the cultural and creative sectors;
Amendment 455 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 c (new)
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 c (new)
– support the Commission by assisting it in matters relating to the cultural and creative sectors, in particular the audiovisual sector, in the countries participating in the programmes, for example by supplying it with available data for these sectors, which should also be made available to stakeholders;
Amendment 456 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 d (new)
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 d (new)
– support the Commission in ensuring proper communication and dissemination of the results and impacts of the programmes;
Amendment 457 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 e (new)
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 e (new)
– encourage the greatest possible level of programme participation by operators in the cultural and creative sectors as a result of efficient dissemination of information to them and appropriate initiatives for networking between them;
Amendment 458 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 f (new)
Article 8 a (new) – paragraph 1 b – indent 1 f (new)
– assist cultural and creative operators in presenting their projects in response to calls for proposals.
Amendment 459 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter III – Article -9 (new)
Chapter III – Article -9 (new)
Article -9 Scope of the Culture Programme The Culture Programme shall seek to emphasise the cultural space shared by Europeans and based on a common cultural heritage, by developing cultural cooperation between the various European operators in the cultural and creative sectors, with a view to strengthening people's sense of sharing a common European citizenship. The Culture Programme shall be open to cultural and creative operators, in particular SMEs and cultural and creative operators carrying out non-profit cultural and creative activities.
Amendment 460 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article -9 a (new) (after Chapter III "The Culture Strand")
Article -9 a (new) (after Chapter III "The Culture Strand")
Article -9a Specific objectives of the Culture Programme 1. The specific objectives of the Programme shall be: (a) to promote transnational mobility of cultural and creative operators; (b) to promote the transnational circulation of cultural and creative, and, in particular, artistic, works, projects and products; (c) to encourage intercultural dialogue.
Amendment 475 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b
b) supporting actions enabling cultural and creative operators to internationalise their careers in Europe and beyond;
Amendment 494 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – introductory wording
Article 10 – introductory wording
The Culture Strandprogramme shall provide support for the following measures:
Amendment 497 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – point a
Article 10 – point a
a) annual and multiannual cooperation measureprojects bringing together cultural and creative operators from different countries to undertake sectoral or cross-sectoral cultural and creative activities;
Amendment 502 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – point b
Article 10 – point b
b) activities by European bodies comprising networks of operators from different countriesnetworks of cultural and creative operators from different countries and at cultural events of a European character;
Amendment 505 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – point c
Article 10 – point c
c) activities by organisations providing a promotional European platform for the development ofprojects for the promotion and the circulation beyond their own borders of artists, works and professionals, particularly emerging talent, and stimulating the circulation of artists and works, with a systemic and large scale effectultural and creative sectors;
Amendment 511 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – point d
Article 10 – point d
d) support for literary translation (such as pieces of fiction, novels, stories, novellas, plays, poetry, comic strips) from one European language to another;
Amendment 518 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – point e
Article 10 – point e
e) special actions aiming to achieve greater visibility for the richness and diversity of European cultures, and stimulate intercultural dialogue and mutual understanding, including festivals, art festivals, European cultural prizes, the European Heritage Label, and the European Capitals of Culture.
Amendment 524 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter IV – Article -11 (new)
Chapter IV – Article -11 (new)
Article -11 Scope of the MEDIA Programme The audiovisual sector is an essential vector for conveying and developing European cultural values and for creating highly skilled jobs for the digital age. Its creativity is a positive factor for competitiveness and appeal with the public. The MEDIA Programme is intended to strengthen the audiovisual sector economically to enable it to play its cultural and creative role more effectively by developing an industry with powerful and diversified content and a valuable and accessible heritage and to add value to national support.
Amendment 525 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title
Article 11 – title
Amendment 526 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 11 – paragraph -1 (new)
The MEDIA Programme shall have the following specific objectives: (a) preserve and enhance European cultural and linguistic diversity and its cinematographic and audiovisual heritage, guarantee its accessibility to the public and promote intercultural dialogue; (b) increase the circulation and viewership of European audiovisual works inside and outside the European Union, including through greater cooperation between players; (c) strengthen the competitiveness of the European audiovisual sector in the framework of an open and competitive European market favourable to employment, including by promoting links between audiovisual professionals; (d) increase the competitiveness of the European audiovisual industry, permit Europe to play its cultural and political role more effectively in the world, and broaden consumer choice and enhance cultural diversity, in particular through support for international collaborative projects in the audiovisual sector and improved access to third country markets, and build trust and confidence and long- term working relationships.
Amendment 527 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory wording
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory wording
1. The priorio achieve these objectives in the field of reinforcing the sector's capacity shall be the followingand with a view to reinforcing the European audiovisual sector's capacity, the MEDIA Programme shall support:
Amendment 528 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
a) facilitating the acquisition of skillsand improvement of skills in the audiovisual field and the development of networks and in particular encouraging the use of digital technologies to ensure the adaptation to market developments;
Amendment 533 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b
b) increasing the capacity of European audiovisual operators to developsign and develop European audiovisual works with a potential to circulate in Europe and beyond and to facilitate European and international co-production including with TV broadcasters;
Amendment 537 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c
c) encouraging business to business exchanges by facilitating access to markets and businesseconomic tools for audiovisual operators to increase the visibility of their projects on European and international markets.
Amendment 540 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point c
c) supporting audience building as means of stimulatingtimulation of audience interest for European audiovisual works in particular through promotion, events, film literacy and festivals;
Amendment 542 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) helping European and international co-production partners to collaborate and to provide support for co-produced audiovisual works;
Amendment 544 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – introductory wording
Article 12 – introductory wording
Amendment 545 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – point a
Article 12 – point a
(a) continuing training measures to support the development of a comprehensive offer of new skills acquisition, particularly through the establishment of pan-European training provision enabling those who work in the audiovisual industry to enhance their skills, especially in IT, in the international market, as well as well as knowledge sharing and networking initiatives;
Amendment 549 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – point a a (new)
Article 12 – point a a (new)
(aa) subtitling, surtitling, dubbing and audio description of audiovisual works;
Amendment 552 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – point b
Article 12 – point b
(b) supportmeasures to support European audiovisual operators to develop European audiovisual works with enhanced cross- border circulation potential, and especially to promote the development of projects for the production of European television programmes and films (fiction, animation and documentaries) as well as interactive works, notably video games for the European and international markets;
Amendment 554 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – point c
Article 12 – point c
(c) measures to support the activities aiming atof independent European audiovisual production companies with a view to facilitating European and international co- productions, including television and especially the production of works for television such as series and pilot programmes, as well as supporting international co-production funds;
Amendment 559 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – point d
Article 12 – point d
(d) measures to facilitate access to professional audiovisual trade events and markets and the use of online business tools inside and outside Europeeconomic resources inside and outside Europe, particularly through co-production forums, and to promote European audiovisual projects and works on the European and international film markets;
Amendment 562 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – point e
Article 12 – point e
(e) measures to establish systems of support for the distribution of non-national European films on all platformdistribution platforms of all types and for international saleseconomic activities;
Amendment 569 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – point f
Article 12 – point f
(f) measures to facilitate circulation of European films worldwide and of international films in Europe on all platforms via projects for cooperation among various interests in the audiovisual sector (festivals, sales agents, distributors and distribution platforms generally);
Amendment 571 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – point g
Article 12 – point g
(g) supportmeasures to support the creation of a European cinema owners'’ network screening mostly European films including a significant proportion of non- national European films, includingand to support the integration of digital technologies, particularly by encouraging the digitisation of these operators’ cinemas;
Amendment 577 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – point h
Article 12 – point h
(h) measures to support initiatives, including festivals, presenting and promoting a diversity of European audiovisual works;
Amendment 580 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – point i
Article 12 – point i
(i) measures to support activities aiming at increasing audiences’ knowledge of and interest ofin European cinema and the European cinematographic heritage, particularly activities to educate film audiences, and especially young audiences;
Amendment 584 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – point j
Article 12 – point j
(j) measures to support innovative actions testing new business models and tools in areas likely to be influenced by the introduction and the use of digital technologies.
Amendment 587 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) relevant EU policies, in particular those in the fields of education, employment, healthcohesion, training, youth provision, research and innovation, enterprise, tourism, justice and development;
Amendment 596 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. This Regulation shall apply and be implemented respecting international commitments of the Union, notably the 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions.
Amendment 636 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point a a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point a a (new)
(aa) Without prejudice to the requirements set out in point (a), the Member States shall submit to the Commission no later than 30 September 2017 a report on the implementation and impact of the Framework Programme within their territory.
Amendment 637 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point a b (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point a b (new)
(ab) A final evaluation of the Framework Programme shall be submitted by the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions no later than 30 June 2022.
Amendment 642 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. The Creative Europe Desks network referred to in Article 8 (f)a shall ensure communication and dissemination of information concerning the Union funding awarded and results obtained for their country.
Amendment 645 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – introductory wording
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – introductory wording
2. The Strands shall be open to the participation of the following countries provided that the conditions are met, including thoseset out below are met: – commitment to the values of diversity of cultural expression, evinced by signature and ratification of the 2005 UNESCO Convention; – in respect of the MEDIA strand, the conditions contained within Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services for the MEDIA strand, and additional appropriations are paid: ; – payment of additional appropriations, the amounts of which shall be commensurate with the countries’ participation, on the basis of the payments made during previous programmes.
Amendment 655 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17a Annual work programmes 1. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 17b laying down annual work programmes. 2. The annual work programmes shall specify, in particular, the objectives pursued, the expected results, the method of implementation and the total amount of the financing plan. 3. The annual work programmes shall also contain a description of the actions to be financed, an indication of the amount allocated to each section and an indicative implementation timetable. For grants, they shall include the priorities, the essential evaluation criteria and the maximum rate of co-financing. 4. For the Guarantee Facility, the annual work programme shall include the eligibility and selection criteria for financial intermediaries, the exclusion criteria related to the content of projects submitted to the participating financial intermediaries, the annual allocation to the EIF and the eligibility, selection and award criteria for capacity-building providers.
Amendment 674 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex I – point 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The resources allocated to capacity- building shall be limited to [10%]1 of the budget for the Guarantee Facility. The EIF shall select the capacity-building providers on behalf of the Guarantee Facility and under the supervision of the Commission through a public and open procurement procedure, on the basis of criteria such as experience in financing the cultural and creative sectors, expertise, geographical reach, delivery capacity and market knowledge. ________________ 1 Depending on the final budget for the Creative Europe Programme, as agreed in the context of the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020.
Amendment 675 #
2011/0370(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Annex I – point 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Types of loans covered by the Guarantee Facility shall include in particular: – investment in tangible or intangible assets; – business transfers; – working capital (such as interim finance, gap finance, tax incentives, cash flow, credit lines, etc.)
Amendment 44 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Creating a legal framework to facilitate the digitisation and dissemination of works for which no author isrightholder or rightholders are identified or, even if identified, isare not located, so called orphan works, is a key action of the Digital Agenda for Europe, as set out in the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions – A Digital Agenda for Europe.
Amendment 52 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The exclusive rights for authorightholders of reproduction and of making available to the public of their works, as harmonised under Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, require the consent of the authorrightholder or rightholders prior to the digitisation and making available of a work.
Amendment 53 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The exclusive rights for authorightholders of reproduction and of making availablecommunication to the public of their works, including making them available, as harmonised under Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, require the consent of the authorrightholders prior to the digitisation and makingcommunication of works to the public, including making them available of a workn demand.
Amendment 58 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) For the purposes of this Directive, cinematographic, audio and audiovisual works in the archives of public service broadcasting organisations should be understood as including works commissioned by such organisations for their exclusive exploitation.
Amendment 70 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Cinematographic, audio and audiovisual works in the archives of public service broadcasting organisations and produced by them may include orphan works. Taking into account the special position of broadcasters as producers of audio and audiovisual material and the need to adopt, measures to limit the phenomena of orphan works in the future, it is appropriate to set a cut off date relating to the application of this Directive as far as the works in the archives of broadcasting organisations are concern should be adopted.
Amendment 73 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) For the purposes of this Directive, cinematographic, audio and audiovisual works in the archives of public service broadcasting organisations should be understood as including workproductions commissioned by such organisations for their exclusive exploitationand funded by broadcasting organisations and over which they had editorial control.
Amendment 84 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Before a work can be considered an orphan work, a good faith and reasonable diligent search for the authorrightholder or rightholders should be carried out. Member States should be permitted to provide that such a diligent search may be carried out by the organisations referred to in this Directive or by other organisations.
Amendment 89 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. This Directive applies to works subject to copyright and related rights in the collections of organisations referred to in Article 1(1) and first published or broadcast in the territory of a Member State and, which are:
Amendment 97 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point 3
(3) Cinematographic,Works which are an integral or incorporated part of an audio or audiovisual works produced and disseminated initially in a Member State by a public service broadcasting organisations before the 31 December 2002 and contained in theirits archives.
Amendment 111 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) This Directive should be without prejudice to existing arrangements inby the Member States concerning the management of rights such as extended collective licences, legal presumptions of representation or transfer, mandatory collective licensing, or any combination thereof.
Amendment 119 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. A diligent search is required to be carried out only in the Member State of first publication or broadcastin whose territory the work was first published or broadcast. It shall be carried out in good faith and in reasonable terms for each work used.
Amendment 125 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive concerns certain uses of orphan works undertaken by publicly accessible libraries, educational establishments or museums as well as by archives, film heritage institutions and public service broadcasting organizsations.
Amendment 126 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
This Directive shall be without prejudice to the current or future arrangements laid down by the Member States concerning the management of rights such as extended collective licences.
Amendment 131 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – introductory wording
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – introductory wording
2. This Directive applies to orphan works first published or broadcast or fixed in a Member State and which are:
Amendment 136 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) by makcommunicating the orphan work available, within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2001/29/ECto the public, including making it available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access it from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
Amendment 141 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point 3
3) Cinematographic, audio or audiovisual works produced by public service broadcasting organisations before the 31 December 2002 and contained in their archives.
Amendment 146 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States shall ensure that rightholders which put an end to the orphan status of the work, within the meaning of Article 5, are remunerated for the use that has been made of the work by the organisations referred to in Article 1(1);
Amendment 147 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. A work shall be considered an orphan work if the rightone or more of the holder ins of the work iscopyright or related rights are not identified or, even if identified, isare not located after a good faith and diligent search for the rightholder has been carried out and recorded in accordance with Article 3.
Amendment 151 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. Where a work has more than one rightholder, and or includes other works or protected subject-matter and at least one of the rightholders has neither been identified andnor located, that work shall notcontinue to be considered an orphan work for the purposes of this Directive. The rights of known or identified rightholders, in particular with regard to their rights to payment, shall not be affected. Member States shall ensure that the organisations referred to in Article 1(1) or, more particularly, duly entitled collecting societies, pursue a diligent search to identify and locate the other holders of rights to the work.
Amendment 155 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. For the purposes of establishing whether a work is an orphan work, the organisations referred to in Article 1(1) shall ensure that a good faith and diligent search is carried out for each workindividual work or any other protected subject- matter, by consulting the appropriate sources for the category of works in question.
Amendment 159 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) rightholders may claim their remuneration under point (4) within a period fixed by Member States and which shall not be less than five years from the date of the act givingof exploitation of a work which gives rise to the claim.
Amendment 160 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The sources that are appropriate for each category of works or any other protected subject-matter shall be determined by each Member State, in consultation with rightholders and users, and may include, the sources listed in the Annex.
Amendment 160 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may choose the means for authorising use within the meaning of paragraph 1 and. They shall remain free to decide on the use of any revenues which are unclaimed after the expiry of the period fixed in accordance with paragraph 1(5). However, preference shall be given to earmarking those revenues for the restoration and digitisation of works and for measures assisting the creative process.
Amendment 163 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. A diligent search is required to be carried out only in the Member State of first publication or broadcast or fixation.
Amendment 169 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. If a cinematographic or audiovisual work for which a diligent search is being carried out is presumed to be the fruit of a co-production, then the diligent search shall be carried out in the country with the majority participation in the co- production, identifying said country by taking account of material factors such as the language used in the film or the film’s original title. In the event that the search in said country proves unsuccessful, continuing the search in the countries where there is a strong presumption that minority co-producers may be found shall be mandatory.
Amendment 182 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The loss of a work’s orphan status shall not affect existing contracts for the use, in accordance with this Directive, of the work in question.
Amendment 184 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) by makproviding the orphan work available, within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2001/29/ECpublic with the orphan work, including its availability to the public at any time and in any place;
Amendment 189 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. However, unless otherwise provided in Article 7, the organisations referred to in Article 1(1) may not use orphan works in order to achieve aims other than their public interest missions, notably preservation, restoration and the provision of cultural and educational access to works contained in their collections for educational and research purposes.
Amendment 195 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. For this Directive to be fully effective, broadcasting organisations need to be able to use recognised orphan works, under the conditions established by this directive, in the course of their normal activities.
Amendment 222 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. This Directive shall apply without prejudice to provisions on the management of rights over works and other protected subject matter, notably provisions on collective licensing, legal presumptions of representation or transfer, mandatory collective licensing, or any combinations thereof, whether said works or protected subject matter are orphan works or not within the meaning of Article 2, in accordance with EU laws and international treaties on copyright and related rights. Where such provisions exist or are introduced, each of the other Member States shall ensure that the beneficiaries referred to in Article 1(1) are legally protected in regard to their use of works or other protected subject matter that is the subject of a licence or authorisation in accordance with these provisions.
Amendment 229 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – point 5 – introductory wording
Annex – point 5 – introductory wording
5) For audiovisual works contained in the collections of film heritage institutions and public service broadcasting organisations:
Amendment 25 #
2011/0135(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) The Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market is needed in order to provide more effective protection of intellectual property rights in Europe.
Amendment 79 #
2011/0135(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) drawing up and promoting the best strategies on national practices and techniques for enforcing intellectual property law, whether originating from the public or from the private sector.
Amendment 98 #
2011/0135(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point k a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point k a (new)
(ka) strengthening administrative cooperation at every level as regards the authorities called upon to combat piracy and counterfeiting in Member States;
Amendment 18 #
2010/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the Internet’s neutrality is compromised when content protected by intellectual property rights is pirated;
Amendment 21 #
2010/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas in this regard as soon as they become suppliers of protected content, the various Internet operators need to abide by the rules in force by purchasing the IPR and paying suitable sums along the chain of title;
Amendment 61 #
2010/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that although the Internet is a marvellous tool for accessing content, it can also be regarded as destroying value in creation and the cultural industries;
Amendment 67 #
2010/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Acknowledges that creation and innovation are matters of general interest and urges that investing in programmes should be prioritised and supported in order to stimulate the supply of good quality content available on the networks;
Amendment 99 #
2010/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses that Internet neutrality should not be synonymous with ‘neutralising the Internet’ and that it is therefore clear that the interests of the contents’ creators should be protected through their intellectual property rights;
Amendment 118 #
2010/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Emphasises that the search for a paying economic model, such as the premium services for film works between the OSP and the IAP, seems to be the route that should be taken to allow the fixed and mobile networks to continue to develop and so there are no long-term expectations that works protected by IPR can be accessed free of charge;
Amendment 1 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A (new)
Recital A (new)
A. whereas the exclusion of Roma children from the education system has an adverse impact on the other rights of the members of the Roma community, in particular the right to work, and whereas this exacerbates their marginalisation,
Amendment 2 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B (new)
Recital B (new)
B. whereas the communities that wish to maintain their traditional nomadic lifestyle within Europe are those most affected by illiteracy, and whereas there are therefore cultural barriers to the schooling of their children,
Amendment 3 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C (new)
Recital C (new)
C. whereas the material conditions required for the schooling of Roma children must be provided, and whereas this must include the appointment of school mediators,
Amendment 17 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that Roma children must, like other children, enjoy their fundamental right to an education, guaranteeing them a future as adults in the world of work;
Amendment 29 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to combat every form of social and educational exclusion of the Roma and to encourage all programmes that invest in education for Roma people;
Amendment 32 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to set themselves genuine, concrete objectives in terms of finding solutions to the problem of begging by Roma children, and to support all initiatives that vigorously combat trafficking in human beings;
Amendment 52 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses that it must be made possible for different approaches to be adopted to the children of Roma families who wish to settle in one place and those who wish to continue their nomadic way of life: - in the case of the first, a consistent approach should be taken to structures monitoring children’s regular school attendance, as well as systematic steps to remove the cultural and linguistic obstacles which may be the root causes of ‘dropping out’ from school; - in the case of the second, encouragement should be given, in collaboration with education ministries and educational associations in the Member States, to ‘school buses’, which would go to camps so that Roma children could be given special lessons on the rights and obligations associated with the European Union, which would at the same time be tailored to their needs and history and enable language barriers to be removed, thus strengthening the links between school and family;
Amendment 63 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Amendment 86 #
2010/2161(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls for IPR reform and the completion of the European Digital Market and emphasises the need for effective IPR protection to strengthen the EU's cultural industries' competitive position in a global economy;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
– having regard to the Commission staff working document on media pluralism in the Member States of the European Union (SEC(2007)0032),
Amendment 54 #
2010/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N a (new)
Recital N a (new)
Na. whereas in certain Member States public service broadcasting is not yet sufficiently socially embedded and does not have adequate resources at its disposal,
Amendment 66 #
2010/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that the coexistence of public and private media has broadly contributed to innovation and diversification of content and has had a positive impact on quality;
Amendment 67 #
2010/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Reiterates the need to maintain strong and vibrant independent public service broadcasting, whilst adapting it to the requirements of the digital age, and calls for specific measures to be taken to attain this objective;
Amendment 77 #
2010/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls, in this regard, on public broadcasters to be structured in such a way as to offer attractive, quality online content in order to reach young people who access the media almost exclusively via the internet;
Amendment 84 #
2010/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges Member States to define the remits of public service broadcasters so that they can retain their distinctiveness through a commitment to original audiovisual production and high-quality programming and journalism regardless of commercial considerations, which is precisely what marks them out as distinctive;
Amendment 87 #
2010/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Emphasises the lack of legal provisions in most Member States relating to public service broadcasting activities on the internet and that this could influence the sector’s ability to expand into new platforms;
Amendment 137 #
2010/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Amendment 142 #
2010/2028(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Welcomes the conclusions of the independent study conducted at the Commission’s initiative on defining indicators to measure the pluralism of Europe’s media;
Amendment 25 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
Amendment 26 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K b (new)
Recital K b (new)
Kb. whereas, in its search for public legitimacy in the Member States, the European Union should foster the establishment of trans-national media that can give Europe a new democratic and independent dimension, while tightening up the rules intended to safeguard pluralism and combat concentration of media ownership,
Amendment 27 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K c (new)
Recital K c (new)
Kc. whereas the emergence of new communication tools has transformed all branches of journalism and the media industry, prompting a rethink of the methods traditionally employed in the sector,
Amendment 28 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K d (new)
Recital K d (new)
Kd. whereas information technologies enable anyone to create and share content on blogs, and whereas social networks have changed habits and brought a new dimension to news provision; whereas these phenomena have transformed journalism,
Amendment 29 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K e (new)
Recital K e (new)
Ke. whereas over the past few years social networks have become a central Web 2.0 feature, and whereas an increasing number of journalists are using such networks as a source of, or means of disseminating, information,
Amendment 30 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K f (new)
Recital K f (new)
Kf. whereas social media are used to some extent in researching and producing various types of articles and are used by journalists to publish, share and promote their articles,
Amendment 31 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K g (new)
Recital K g (new)
Kg. whereas journalism is an important gauge of democracy and should guarantee free access to a wide range of views,
Amendment 35 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that the lack of online news and information on the EU and its institutions is not the problem; notes that all the institutions have launched their own news platforms, which fail, however,should be made more accessible to EU citizens since, at the moment, they fail to captivate the public;
Amendment 53 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 65 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 78 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights thehow importance of hiring media professionals from outside the EU institutions as press officers att it is for the Commission’s representations and Parliament’s information offices in the Member States, who would have the task of to playing an active and visible role in national debates on European issues and to disseminate information;
Amendment 96 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 117 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 124 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Stresses the need to set up a group of correspondents from among the specialised, accredited journalists in Brussels, whose role would be to cover European news in a more instructive manner while guaranteeing editorial independence, with the purpose of this ‘taskforce’ being to provide information in a manner that is fully transparent and accessible to the EU public;
Amendment 128 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Suggests developing EuroparlTV, further integrating it into Parliament’s internet strategy and stepping up the distribution of its content to TV channels and online mediatresses the importance of EuroparlTV, which enables Parliament’s plenary and committee proceedings to be broadcast live and suggests integrating it into Parliament’s internet strategy; emphasises, however, that EuroparlTV is a very useful tool, although appropriate adjustments must be made to its status to ensure its editorial independence;
Amendment 134 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Finds the recent decrease in the number of accredited journalists in Brussels extremely worrying; and considers this new state of affairs to be in the interests of neither the European institutions nor the accredited press in Brussels; calls therefore on the European institutions to cooperate more closely with the representatives of the press in Brussels and to display greater openness towards them;
Amendment 175 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Calls on the Commission to be open to all means of communication, to have greater contact with journalists and the media and to support all projects and initiatives aiming to better inform the public on European affairs;
Amendment 177 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Urges journalists and other media professionals to come together to discuss and consider the European journalism of tomorrow;
Amendment 178 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 c (new)
Paragraph 26 c (new)
26c. Stresses that the Member States must come up with viable concepts for the European media that go beyond merely passing on information and enable them to contribute fully to the EU’s cultural and linguistic diversity;
Amendment 179 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 d (new)
Paragraph 26 d (new)
26d. Stresses, however, that, although social networks are a relatively good way of disseminating information rapidly, their reliability as sources cannot always be sufficiently guaranteed and they cannot be considered to be professional media;
Amendment 180 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 e (new)
Paragraph 26 e (new)
26e. Underlines that the way in which data is handled on social network platforms can in many cases be dangerous and give rise to serious breaches of journalistic ethics and that caution is therefore required when taking up these new tools;
Amendment 181 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 f (new)
Paragraph 26 f (new)
Amendment 182 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 g (new)
Paragraph 26 g (new)
26g. Highlights the crucial role of journalists in a modern society faced with a barrage of information, since they alone can bring significant added value to information by using their professionalism, ethics, skill and credibility to make sense of the news;
Amendment 183 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 h (new)
Paragraph 26 h (new)
26h. Stresses the need for journalists and media professionals to remain alert to developments in their ever-changing professions and to take advantage of the possibilities offered by social networks, which are likely to enable them to expand their knowledge networks and facilitate what could be called ‘web monitoring’;
Amendment 184 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 i (new)
Paragraph 26 i (new)
26i. Observes with interest that, despite the irreversible emergence of social networks, journalism has kept its key role in news broadcasting since journalists use these highly diverse networks to carry out in-depth research and check facts, thus giving rise to a new model of participatory journalism and furthering the dissemination of information;
Amendment 185 #
2010/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 j (new)
Paragraph 26 j (new)
26j. Points out that the quality and independence of the media can be guaranteed only by means of rigorous professional and social standards;
Amendment 60 #
2010/0252(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – title
Article 5 – title
Amendment 61 #
2010/0252(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Amendment 62 #
2010/0252(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. In order to implement fully the obligations of paragraph 1, and in particular to ensure that competition is not distorted by any accumulation, transfer or modification of rights of use for radio frequenciespreserve and promote effective competition in the internal market, and pursuant to Article 9(7) of Directive 2009/140/EC, Member States may adopt inter alia the following measures, which are without prejudice to the application of competition rules:
Amendment 63 #
2010/0252(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that authorisation and selection procedures avoid delays and promote effective competition and avoid unjustified delays.
Amendment 73 #
2010/0252(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. In order to support the future development of innovative audiovisual media services, and in particular those stemming from the switch to digital television, the Member States shall, in cooperation with the Commission, and in consideration of the economic and social benefits of the internal digital market, ensure spectrum availability for the provision of audiovisual media services and protect the radio frequencies these require.
Amendment 69 #
2010/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. In order to be eligible to support a proposed citizens' initiative, signatories shall be citizens of the Union and shall be of the age to be entitled to vote in the European electionsve attained the age of majority applicable in their own Member State.
Amendment 97 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – subpoint iii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – subpoint iii
(iii) any material that visually depicts any person appearing to beshowing a child or a virtual image of a child engaged in real or simulated sexually explicit conduct or any depiction ofshowing the sexual organs of any person appearing to be a child child, or a virtual image thereof, for primarily sexual purposes; or
Amendment 98 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) This Directive does not govern Member States’ policies with regard to consensual sexual activities in which childrenadolescents and minors who are close in age may be involved and which can be regarded as the normal discovery of sexuality in the course of human development, taking account of the different cultural and legal traditions and of new forms of establishing and maintaining relations among childrenminors who are close in age and adolescents, including through information and communication technologies.
Amendment 99 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – subpoint iv
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – subpoint iv
(iv) realistic images of a child engaged in sexually explicit conduct or realistic images of the sexual organs of a child, regardless of the actual existence of such child, or of a virtual image thereof for primarily sexual purposes.;
Amendment 102 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Investigating offences and bringing charges in criminal proceedings should be facilitated, to take into account the difficulty for child victims of denouncing abuse and the anonymity of offenders in cyberspace. To ensure successful investigations and prosecutions of the offences referred to in this Directive, effective investigation tools, including the activation of early warning systems, should be made available to those responsible for the investigation and prosecutions of such offences. These tools may include covert operations, interception of communications, covert surveillance including electronic surveillance, monitoring of bank accounts or other financial investigations. These investigations should be subject to prior authorisation by the relevant judicial authority in the Member State concerned and should be carried out under the supervision of that authority.
Amendment 107 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Where the danger posed by the offenders and the possible risks of repetition of the offences make it appropriate, convicted offenders should be temporarily or permanently prevented from exercising activities involving regular contacts with children, where appropriate. Implementation of such prohibitions throughout the EU should be facilitated. Procedures should be implemented in line with the legislation in force in the Member States.
Amendment 112 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) Preventing the exploitation, abuse or sexual assault of children on the internet is an ethical and educational priority, with the upholding of children’s rights forming a basis for any preventive action.
Amendment 117 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point b – point iii
Article 2 – point b – point iii
(iii) any material that visually depicts any person appearing to beshowing a child or a virtual image of a child engaged in real or simulated sexually explicit conduct or any depiction ofshowing the sexual organs of any person appearing to be a child, for primarily sexual purposes; or
Amendment 120 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point b – point iv
Article 2 – point b – point iv
(iv) realistic images of a child engaged in sexually explicit conduct or realistic images of the sexual organs of a child, regardless or of the acvirtual existencimage of sucha child, for primarily sexual purposes.;
Amendment 149 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8
Article 8
The provisions of Article 3 (2), with regard to witnessing sexual activities, and (3); Article 4 (2) and (4) and Article 5 do not govern consensual sexual activities between childrenadolescents or involving personminors who are close in age and degree of psychological and physical development or maturity, insofar as the acts did not involve any abuse.
Amendment 155 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that legal persons may be held liable for any of the offences referred to in Articles 3 to 7 committed for their benefit by anyby any natural person, acting either individually or as part of an organ of the legal person, and having a leading position within the legal person, based on one of the following:
Amendment 160 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that effective investigative tools are available to persons, units or services responsible for investigating or prosecuting offences referred to in Articles 3 to 7, allowing the possibility of covert operations at least in those cases where the use of information and communication technology is involved. These provisions must be subject to prior authorisation by the relevant judicial authority in the Member State concerned and must be carried out under the supervision of that authority.
Amendment 170 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that prevention campaigns are mounted in primary and secondary schools with a view to enabling children to enhance their understanding of the rights of every individual, of self-respect and respect for others, and helping them recognise awkward, intrusive or abusive situations.
Amendment 172 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Member States shall take the necessary measures to mount information campaigns and campaigns aimed at preventing the risks of child pornography, focusing in particular on the ways of detecting and preventing offences.
Amendment 173 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. The Member States shall take the necessary measures to help and encourage teachers, social workers, youth leaders and all those working with children to develop, within their syllabuses or activities, media and internet education in order to teach children to react in ways that might save them from harm. It is vital that children be taught how to surf the internet safely.
Amendment 174 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 4 c (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. The Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that educational measures are included in the aims and values that underpin all levels of primary and secondary schooling. It is vital to develop attitudes that are shaped by respect and justice, enabling children to develop self-respect and respect for others, as well as respect for institutions and for their environment. Only if someone is ready to listen to them will children be able to become aware of any abuse they may have been subjected to or recognise an awkward or intrusive situation they may have experienced.
Amendment 185 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Member States shall take the necessary measures to increase the accountability of internet service providers in accordance with Directives 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society1 and 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights2, and with the Order of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 19 February 2009 in case C-557/07, LSG- Gesellschaft zur Wahrnehmung von Leistungsschutzrechten GmbH v Tele2 Telecommunication GmbH3, with a view to persuading these providers to deny access to child pornography websites of which they are aware. 1 OJ L 167, 22.6.2001, p. 10. 2 OJ L 157, 30.4.2004, p. 45. 3 OJ C 113, 16.5.2009, p. 14.
Amendment 2 #
2009/2229(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers in this respect that any restriction imposed on the exercise of these fundamental rightscultural rights, particularly those relating to protection of copyright, make it necessary to rethink the law in the light of these new concepts and recalls that all restrictions on fundamental rights (censorship, violations of privacy or freedom of expression, incitement to racism, discrimination or xenophobia, intolerance, etc.) should be in accordance with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
Amendment 2 #
2009/2229(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses, however, the important role and responsibilities of governments in creating and pursuing effective policies of general interest and in defending the public interest of society;
Amendment 4 #
2009/2229(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses that the appearance and multiplication of digital distribution media should not harm copyrights and that certain fundamental rights, such as freedom of expression and protection of data, of privacy, against incitement to racism, against discrimination and against xenophobia, should be protected; stresses the need for Community law to strike the right balance between copyright protection and the protection of human rights and basic freedoms;
Amendment 5 #
2009/2229(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Regrets that increasing use of Internet networks does not yet go hand in hand with rules allowing users to manage the personal data they put on those networks;
Amendment 6 #
2009/2229(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Stresses that the success of social networks, together with the Internet’s technical capacities in terms of memory and data processing, gives rise to the problems of data retention and the use of archived data; regrets, in this respect, that there is currently no ‘right to forget’ on the Internet;
Amendment 8 #
2009/2225(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recognises the urgent need for a clear definition of the Digital Agenda, as an important aspect of the European cultural dimension and content; calls in this respect on the Commission to implement the Unesco Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions in all policy initiatives relating to the Digital Agenda;
Amendment 26 #
2009/2225(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses the importance of implementing policies and measures promoting ‘Digital literacy’ in order to reduce barriers to social integration and personal development in a lifelong- learning perspective;
Amendment 44 #
2009/2225(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Emphasises that Europeana is the right instrument to enable citizens to access and improve their knowledge of the European cultural heritage;
Amendment 61 #
2009/2225(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 1 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas, although RFID (radio- frequency identification) chips will be used in a still wider range of applications in the future, this technology raises new data-protection issues, the most significant among them being the fact that the chips are totally or well-nigh invisible,
Amendment 2 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas all everyday objects (such as transport cards, clothes, mobile telephones and cars) will ultimately be fitted with RFID chips, which will quickly take on major economic importance owing to the wide range of applications in which they may be used,
Amendment 3 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas the Internet of Things should, through the use of electronic identification systems and wireless mobile devices, enable digital entities and physical objects to be identified directly and conclusively so as to allow the data they contain to be retrieved, stored, transferred and continuously processed,
Amendment 7 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that, given that the chips attached to retail products are not intended for use outside retail outlets, it should be possible for them to be factory- fitted with devices that will deactivate them and thus limit data retention;
Amendment 8 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that any data that can be tied to a specific consumer, through data mining or by other means, constitutes personal data that must be handlede need to combat the fraudulent collection and handling of personal data on the Internet and to protect these data in compliance with privacy and data protection principles;
Amendment 9 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Draws attention to the need to promote security standards ensuring that any personal data contained on the chips cannot be read remotely by third parties without the knowledge of the persons concerned;
Amendment 10 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Points out that due account must be taken of the key data-protection principles of purpose, proportionality, transparency and security in the development of these technologies;
Amendment 12 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses that, while the use of RFID chips can be effective in combating counterfeiting or the abduction of babies from maternity wards, in identifying animals and in a range of other areas, it can also be dangerous and create ethical problems for individuals and for society against which appropriate safeguards will need to be found;
Amendment 14 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls for the utmost vigilance to be shown in ensuring respect for fundamental rights wherever RFID chips are used, given than anyone who has a dedicated reader can read the contents of such chips, which may contain personal data enabling the individuals concerned to be remotely identified;
Amendment 17 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Stresses that data protection, which has become essential in Europe's modern and democratic society, in which ever- increasing volumes of personal data are collected, generated and analysed, should be accorded the status of a constitutional principle;
Amendment 23 #
2009/2178(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas the growth in legal online supply constitutes an essential anti-piracy tool in the digital world, given that users expect content to be made available to them on all media platforms in a way that allows them to choose the time when they will use it,
Amendment 25 #
2009/2178(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas, in order to maintain and increase the attractiveness of what they can offer their public, producers of audiovisual media must be in a position to use all the new means of distribution; whereas the current system of granting licences must be improved in such a way that the Member States have a flexible system available to them which can be adapted to the new technologies,
Amendment 129 #
2009/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 i (new)
Paragraph 15 i (new)
Amendment 1 #
2009/2170(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas consideration of an appropriate rule has been coloured by controversy about "libel tourism", a type of forum shopping in which a claimant elects to bring an action for defamation in the jurisdiction which is considered most likely to produce a favourable result – generally that of England and Wales, which is "regarded as the most claimant-friendly in the world"; whereas, however, this is an issue that goes beyond the United Kingdom and is also of concern for other jurisdictions;
Amendment 2 #
2009/2170(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas libel tourism is facilitated by Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 ("the Brussels I Regulation"), which, in effect, allows a claimant to bring an action in the jurisdiction of his or her choice;
Amendment 3 #
2009/2170(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas a balance of interests needs to be struck, in particular when dealing with issues that have an impact on the preservation of the freedom of the press and the journalistic profession; whereas the choice of court lies with the claimant, which greatly facilitates the pursuit of claims against publishers and/or the media; whereas the provisions on applicable law must thus ensure a high level of legal certainty for journalists and the media in cases of cross-border litigation;
Amendment 4 #
2009/2170(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas legal remedies must be available when that freedom is abused, particularly to the detriment of peoples' private lives and reputation12; whereas, where powerful media organisations are guilty of such abuse, the victims, who are not always affluent business tycoons or media celebrities and may be simply ordinary citizens, may have in practice no access to justice on account of the expense 1 Reputation is nowadays considered to be protected by the ECHR as part of private life (see N. v. Sweden, No. 11366/85). 2 Reputation is nowadays considered to be protected by the ECHR as part of private life (see N. v. Sweden, No. 11366/85). of legal proceedings each Member State should ensure that such remedies exist and are effective in cases of infringements of such rights; whereas Member States should strive to ensure that prohibitively high legal costs do not result in any claimant being denied access to justice in practice; whereas the cost of legal proceedings can also be ruinous for publishersthe media;
Amendment 5 #
2009/2170(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas it is considered that a provision of the type set out in the annex coupling the basic principle that the law of the place where the damage occurs is paramount with a foreseeability clause to take the legitimate interests of publishers into account ought to be put forward by the Commission in order to fill the gap in the Rome II Regulation; whereas the criterion of the closest connection should be used for the right of reply, since such relief should be granted swiftly and is interim in nature; whereas the provision of the type set out in the Annex should also cater for party autonomy and the option of electing to apply the lex fori where the claimant elects to sue in the publishermedia's courts for damage sustained in more than one Member State;
Amendment 10 #
2009/2170(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex - Article 5 a – paragraph 1
Annex - Article 5 a – paragraph 1
(1) Without prejudice to Article 4(2) and (3),here the claimant sues for all the damages before the courts of the plaw applicable to a non-contractual obligation arising out ofce in which he or she has the centre of his/her interests, with regard to a violations of privacy andor rights relating to personality, including defamation, shall be the law of the country in which the rights of the person seeking compensation for damageon condition that those rights are, or are likely to be, directly and substantially affected. However, the law applicable shall be the law of the country in which the person claimed to be liable is habitually resident if he or she could not reasonably have foreseen substantial consequences of his or her act occurring in the country designated by the first sentenceto a non- contractual obligation arising out of violations of privacy and rights relating to personality, including defamation, shall be the law of the country in which the person claimed to be liable is habitually resident. This shall also be the applicable law if the claimant sues for all damages before the courts of the Member State in which the defendant is domiciled.
Amendment 14 #
2009/2170(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – Article 5 a – paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex – Article 5 a – paragraph 1 a (new)
(1a) When the rights of the person seeking compensation for damage are, or are likely to be, affected in one or more than one Member State, and that person sues in the courts of one of the Member States in the territory of which content is or may be accessible, the defendant may not be made subject to stricter requirements and/or more unreasonable litigation costs than those provided for by the substantive law applicable in his or her country of domicile.
Amendment 20 #
2009/2170(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annexe - Article 5 a – paragraph 4 a (new)
Annexe - Article 5 a – paragraph 4 a (new)
(4a) In relation to paragraph 1, the litigation costs shall not exceed those imposed by the country of the applicable law.
Amendment 5 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the European digital library should be more than a digital collection with information management tools, but should rather embrace the development of a whole range of technical capacities and resources for the creation, research and use of information,
Amendment 6 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas account must be taken of the rapid development of new technologies with resulting changes in cultural practices, and of existing digitisation projects outside Europe, such as Google Books and the results of the settlement of its case in the United States of America,
Amendment 8 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas there is, consequently, an urgent need for Member States to step up their efforts, join forces and equip themselves with the requisite means to maintain and encourage their contribution to Europeana so as to raise Europe’s profile in the world,
Amendment 9 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas only a tiny part of European cultural heritage has been digitised so far, Member States are progressing at different speeds, and public funding allocated to mass digitisation is insufficient; whereas Member States should step up their efforts to speed up the process of digitising public and private works,
Amendment 18 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas urgent efforts are needed to solve the issue of a "digital black hole" with regard to 20th and 21st century content, where works of high cultural value are languishing unused; whereas any solution must take proper account of the interests of all parties involved; whereas, notably, a two-tier protection system must not be created through the presumption that no rightholders exist,
Amendment 22 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas any protected or disclosed work for which, despite a documented and serious search being made, one or more copyright holders or holders of related rights cannot be identified or located should be considered an orphan work,
Amendment 26 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. States that the primary role of the Europeana digital library should be to protect European cultural heritage so that future generations may be able to put together a collective European memory and more fragile documents may be protected from the damage caused by constant use;
Amendment 27 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that the European digital library, being available to everyone from afar, constitutes a tool for the democratisation of culture and will therefore allow a very wide section of the public to access rare or old documents in Europe’s heritage whose conservation renders their consultation difficult;
Amendment 39 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Urges the Commission and Member States to take all necessary steps to avoid a knowledge gap between Europe and the United States of Americanon- Community countries and to ensure full access for Europeans to their own cultural heritage;
Amendment 44 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Encourages content providers to increase the diversity of the types of content for Europeana, especially audio and video content, paying special attention to those works which deteriorate easily, while respecting intellectual property rights, especially authors and performers' rights; stresses, in this regard, the importance of respecting moral rights in order to protect the integrity of the work, and avoid any possible changes (censorship, alterations to works, etc.);
Amendment 48 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Stresses that the digital library must not depart from its prime objective, namely to ensure that the dissemination of knowledge on the Internet is not left to private commercial firms, in order that the digitisation of works does not equate to a stranglehold on Europe’s public heritage that results in the public domain being privatised;
Amendment 49 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Recalls that as regards works not in the public domain, the European digital library is duty bound to maintain the limitations and exceptions to intellectual property without impeding people’s ability to access knowledge;
Amendment 51 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses that solutions should be found for Europeana also to offer in-copyright as well as out-of-print and orphan works with a sector-by-sector approach, while complying with laws governing intellectual property; believes that srecognises in this regard the essential role of collective management in ensuring users have legal certainty and that rightholders’ interests are respected. Solutions such as extended collective licensing or other collective management practices could be favoured;
Amendment 57 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Favours a balanced Europe-wide solution for digitising and disseminating orphan works, starting by clearly defining them, establishing common standards (including that of due diligence applied in searching for their owners in the country in which the works were originally published), and resolving the issue of potential copyright infringement when orphan works are used;
Amendment 60 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Recalls that Europeana must be able to benefit from agreements signed with other libraries under public-private partnerships and that said libraries must therefore be provided with a physical copy of the files already digitised;
Amendment 68 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses that, in order to meet the high costs of digitisation and time pressures, new methods of financing must be developed, such as public-private partnerships on the basis of well- understood conditions and common guidelines, ensuring digitised files will be freely available to libraries with no time limits;
Amendment 73 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Recalls that the main objective of European digitisation policy must be the protection of Europe’s cultural heritage, and that guarantees must be given in this regard to ensure that digitisation activities have a non-exclusive status, so that these activities do not lead to the appearance of ‘new rights’ derived from the digitisation process, such as, for example, an obligation to pay for the reuse of works in the public domain;
Amendment 75 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. States that physical files of works in the public domain which have been digitised by public-private partnerships must remain the property of the public partner institution, and that, should this prove impossible and cultural institutions from Member States are led, under a public-private partnership, to conclude agreements with exclusivity clauses for the digitisation of works from their national heritage, then assurances must be obtained before accessing the Europeana portal that the digitised files will become the property of the institutions upon the expiry of said clauses;
Amendment 76 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 c (new)
Paragraph 18 c (new)
18c. Points out that the digitisation of works in national libraries is the fruit of the financial investment of taxpayers via payment of their taxes; stresses, therefore, that public-private partnership contracts must stipulate that the copy of the work digitised by the private half of the partnership on behalf of the library may be indexed by all search engines, so that it may be consulted on the library’s website and not solely on the website of the partner private company;
Amendment 80 #
2009/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Stresses that sponsorship is an interesting alternative for Europeana insofar as it offers an opportunity to fund not just digitisation activities but also the management of copyright payments for out-of-print, orphan and copyrighted works, as well as putting them online;
Amendment 4 #
2008/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraphe 1
Paragraphe 1
1. Regrets that, owing to the change of legal basis which will result from the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, there are plans to put back to 2012 the deadline for completion of the second phase of the common European asylum system, which is due to put an end to the unhealthy disparities between the asylum systems of Member States;
Amendment 1 #
2008/2160(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the evolution of the Internet proves that it is becoming an indispensable tool for promoting democratic initiatives, a new arena for the political debate (e.g., e- campaigning, e-voting), a key instrument at world level for exercising freedom of expression (e.g., blogging) and for developing business activities,
Amendment 12 #
2008/2160(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas, in a democratic society, it is the citizens who are entitled to observe and to judge daily the actions and beliefs of their governments and of private companies that provide them with services, and not the governments or companies who are entitled to observe and to judge daily the actions and beliefs of their citizens; whereas technologically advanced surveillance techniques, csombined with lax lawetimes coupled with the absence of adequate legal guarantees prescribgarding the limits of their application, increasingly threaten this principle,
Amendment 17 #
2008/2160(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas it should be recalled that, when dealing with rights such as freedom of expression or respect for private life, interferences withlimits to the exercise of such rights may only be imposed by public authorities if they are ‘in accordance with the law' and necessary and proportionate in a democratic society,
Amendment 23 #
2008/2160(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas e-illiteracy will be the new illiteracy of the 21st century; whereas ensuring that all citizens have access to the Internet is therefore equivalentcontributes to ensuring that all citizens have access to schooling, and; whereas such access should not be punitively denied by governments or private companiesa fair balance between the fundamental rights guaranteed under Community law must be ensured; whereas it is important to deal with emerging issues such as network neutrality, interoperability, global reachability of all Internet nodes, and the use of open formats and standards,
Amendment 33 #
2008/2160(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 - point c
Paragraph 1 - point c
(c) ensure together with other relevant actors that security, freedom of expression and the protection of privacy, as well as openness on the Internet, are approached not as competing goals, but instead are delivered simultaneously within a comprehensive vision that responds adequately to all these imperatives;
Amendment 44 #
2008/2160(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 - point h
Paragraph 1 - point h
(h) proceed to the adoption of the directive on criminal measures aimed at the enforcement of intellectual property rights while simultaneously prohibiting, in pursuit of that purpose, the systematic monitoring and surveillance of all users’ activities on the Internet, and ensuring that the penalties are proportionate to the infringements committed; within this context, also respect the freedom of expression and association of individual users and combat the incentives for cyber- violations of intellectual property rights, including certain excessive access restrictions placed by intellectual property holders themselves;
Amendment 49 #
2008/2160(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 - point i
Paragraph 1 - point i
Amendment 320 #
2008/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14
Article 14
Member States shall lay down the rules on sanctions applicable to breaches of the national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive, and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are applied. Sanctions may comprise the payment of compensation, which may not be restricted by the fixing of a prior upper limit, and must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Member States shall ensure that any injury suffered by a person who has been wronged as a result of failure to apply the principle of equal treatment to them is remedied effectively. Sanctions may comprise the payment of compensation, which may not be restricted by the fixing of a prior upper limit, and must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
Amendment 15 #
2007/0248(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) A television broadcast is a linearLegal “must-carry” obligations may be applied in the case of radio and audiovisual media services as dend to specified complementary services supplied by a specifined in themedia service provider. Audiovisual Mmedia Sservices Directiveare defined in Article 1(a) of Directive 89/551/EEC of 3 October 1989 of the European Parliament and of the Council of [….] 2007, which is provided by a media service provider for simultaneous viewing of programmes on the basis of a programme schedule; a media service provider may provide a number of audio or audio visual programme schedules (channels). Legal “must-carry” obligations may be applied, but only to specified broadcast channels supplied by a specified mn the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media sService providers Directive). Member States should provide a clear justification for the “must carry” obligations in their national law so as to ensure that such obligations are transparent, proportionate and properly defined. In that regard, “must carry” rules should be designed in a way which provides sufficient incentives for efficient investment in infrastructure. “Must carry” rules should be periodically reviewed in order to keep them up-to-date with technological and market evolution in order to ensure that they continue to be proportionate to the objectives to be achieved. Given the rapid change in technology and market conditions such a full review would need to be carried out at least every three years and would require a public consultatiComplementary services include, among of all stakeholders. One or more broadcast channels may be complemented bythers, services to improve accessibility for users with disabilities, such as a videotext service, subtitling service, an audio description or sign language.
Amendment 21 #
2007/0248(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 19
Article 1 – point 19
Directive 2002/22/EC
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. Member States may impose reasonable “must carry” obligations, for the transmission of specified radio and television broadcast channels and accessibilitaudiovisual media services and complementary services, on undertakings under their jurisdiction providing electronic communications networks used for the distribution of radio or television broadcastaudiovisual media services to the public where a significant number of end-users of such networks use them as their principal means to receive radio and television broadcastor audiovisual media services. Such obligations shall only be imposed where they are necessary to meet general interest objectives as clearly and specifically defined by each Member State in its national law and shall be proportionate and transparent.
Amendment 24 #
2007/0248(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 19
Article 1 – point 19
Directive 2002/22/EC
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Member States shall hereafter review “must-carry” obligations at least every three yearregular intervals.
Amendment 37 #
2007/0248(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30a) When implementing measures transposing this Directive, the authorities and courts of the Member States must not only interpret their national law in a manner consistent with the directive but also make sure that they do not rely on an interpretation of the directive which would be in conflict with fundamental rights or other general principles of Community law, such as the principle of proportionality.
Amendment 50 #
2007/0248(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 2 - point -1 c (new)
Article 2 - point -1 c (new)
Directive 2002/58/EC
Article 2 - point (d)
Article 2 - point (d)
(-1c) Article 2(d) shall be replaced by the following: (d) "communication" means any information exchanged or conveyed between a finite number of parties by means of a publicly available electronic communications service. This does not include any information conveyed as part of a broadcasting service to the public or any other communication to the public over an electronic communications network except to the extent that the information can be related to the identifiable subscriber or user receiving the information;
Amendment 80 #
2007/0248(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 2 - point -7 c (new)
Article 2 - point -7 c (new)
Directive 2002/58/EC
Article 15 - paragraph 1
Article 15 - paragraph 1
(-7c) In Article 15, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 1. Member States may adopt legislative measures to restrict the scope of the rights and obligations provided for in Article 5, Article 6, Article 8(1), (2), (3) and (4), and Article 9 of this Directive when such restriction constitutes a necessary, appropriate and proportionate measure within a democratic society to safeguard national security (i.e. State security), defence, public security, and the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences or of unauthorised use of the electronic communication system, as well as the protection of the rights and freedoms of others, as referred to in Article 13(1) of Directive 95/46/EC. To this end, Member States may, inter alia, adopt legislative measures providing for the retention of data for a limited period justified on the grounds laid down in this paragraph. All the measures referred to in this paragraph shall be in accordance with the general principles of Community law, including those referred to in Article 6(1) and (2) of the Treaty on European Union.
Amendment 33 #
2007/0247(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Spectrum users should also be able to freely choose the services they wish to offer over the spectrum subject to transitional measures to cope with previously acquired rights. It should be possible for exceptions to the principle of service neutrality which requireOn the other hand, spectrum use may also be explicitly assigned to the provision of a specific service or through a specific technology, to meet clearly defined general interest objectives such as safety of life, the need to promote social, regional and territorial cohesion, or the avoidance of inefficient use of spectrum to be permitted where necessary and proportionate. Those objectives should include cultural and media policy objectives such as the promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism as defined in national legislation in conformity with Community law. Except where necessary to protect safety of life, exceptions should not result in exclusive use for certain services, but rather grant priority so that other services or technologies may coexist in the same band insofar as possible. In order that the holder of the authorisation may choose freely the most efficient means to carry the content of services provided over radio frequencies, the content should not be regulated in the authorisation to use radio frequencies..
Amendment 55 #
2007/0247(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Spectrum users should also be able to freely choose the services they wish to offer over the spectrum subject to transitional measures to cope with previously acquired rights. It should be possible for exceptions to the principle of service neutrality which requireHowever, spectrum use may also be expressly assigned for the provision of a specific service to meet clearly defined general interest objectives such as safety of life, the need to promote social, regional and territorial cohesion, or the avoidance of inefficient use of spectrum to be permitted where necessary and proportionate. Those objectives should include the promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism as defined in national legislation in conformity with Community law. Except where necessary to protect safety of life, exceptions should not result in exclusive use for certain services, but rather grant priority so that other services or technologies may coexist in the same band insofar as possible. In order that the holder of the authorisation may choose freely the most efficient means to carry the content of services provided over radio frequencies, the content should not be regulated in the authorisation to use radio frequencies.
Amendment 56 #
2007/0247(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) It lies within the competence of the Member States to define the scope and nature of any exception regarding the promotion of cultural and media policy objectives, such as, for example, cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism in accordance with their own national law.
Amendment 61 #
2007/0247(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 59
Recital 59
(59) Measures necessary for the implementation of the Framework, Access and Authorisation Directives should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission. These measures should not have an adverse impact on cultural and media policy objectives as laid down by Member States.
Amendment 62 #
2007/0247(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 - point 2 - point e
Article 1 - point 2 - point e
Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive)
Article 2 - point s
Article 2 - point s
(s) “harmful interference” means interference which endangers the functioning of a radionavigation service or of other safety services or which otherwise seriously degrades, obstructs or repeatedly interrupts a radiocommunications service operating in accordance with the applicable Community or national regulations and with international frequency plans.’
Amendment 67 #
2007/0247(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 - point 9
Article 1 - point 9
Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive)
Article 9 - paragraph 3 - subparagraph 2 - point d
Article 9 - paragraph 3 - subparagraph 2 - point d
(d) comply with a restriction in accordance with paragraph 4 below, including restrictions to ensure promotion of cultural and media policy objectives, such as, for example, cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism.
Amendment 69 #
2007/0247(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 - point 9
Article 1 - point 9
Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive)
Article 9 - paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 9 - paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Member States shall be competent to lay down the scope, nature and duration of restrictions to promote cultural and media policy objectives, such as, for example, cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism, in accordance with their own national law.
Amendment 70 #
2007/0247(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 - point 10
Article 1 - point 10
Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive)
Article 9a - paragraph 2
Article 9a - paragraph 2
2. Where the right holder mentioned in paragraph 1 is a provider of radio or television broadcast content services, and the right to use radio frequencies has been granted for the fulfilment of a specific general interest objective, an application for reassessment can only be made in respect of the part of the radio frequencies which is necessary for the fulfilment of such objective. The part of the radio frequencies which becomes unnecessary for the fulfilment of that objective as a result of application of Article 9(3) and (4) shall be subject to a new assignment procedure in conformity with Article 7(2) of the Authorisation DirectiveThis article shall not apply to restrictions introduced by Member States with a view to promoting cultural and media policy objectives, such cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism.
Amendment 71 #
2007/0247(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 - point 10
Article 1 - point 10
Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive)
Article 9b - paragraph 1 - subparagraph 1
Article 9b - paragraph 1 - subparagraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that undertakings may transfer or lease to other undertakings individual rights to use radio frequencies in the bands for which this is provided in the implementing measures adopted pursuant to Article 9c without the prior consent of the national regulatory authority. However, the transfer or leasing of frequencies intended by a Member State for radio services shall require the prior consent of the national regulatory authority responsible for radio broadcasting in order specifically to ensure that obligations intended to promote cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism are maintained.
Amendment 73 #
2007/0247(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 - point 10
Article 1 - point 10
Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive)
Article 9c - subparagraph 1 -point d
Article 9c - subparagraph 1 -point d
(d) create an exception to the principle of services or technology neutrality, as well as to harmonise the scope and nature of any exceptions to these principles in accordance with Article 9(3) and (4) other than those aimed at ensuring the promotion of cultural and media policy objectives, such as, for example, cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism.
Amendment 76 #
2007/0247(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 10
Article 1 – point 10
Directive 2002/21/EC
Article 9 a – paragraph 2
Article 9 a – paragraph 2
2. Where the right holder mentioned in paragraph 1 is a provider of radio or television broadcast content services, and the right to use radio frequencies has been granted for the fulfilment of a specific general interest objective, an applThis article shall not apply to restrication for reassessment can only be made in respect of the part of the radio frequencies which is necessary for the fulfilment of such objective. The part of the radio frequencies which becomes unnecessary for the fulfilment of that objective as a result of application of Article 9(3) and (4) shall be subject to a new assignment procedure in conformity with Article 7(2) of the Authorisation Directives imposed by Member States with a view to promoting cultural and media policy objectives such as cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism.
Amendment 27 #
2007/0229(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Third-country nationals who have been admitted to the territory of a Member State for a period not exceeding 6 months in any twelve-month period to work on a seasonal basis should not be covered by the Directive given their temporary status, which will shortly become the subject of a legislative proposal from the Commission.
Amendment 45 #
2007/0229(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point (a)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point (a)
(a) to third-country nationals seeking to reside and work in the territory of a Member State as employees or self- employed workers, and
Amendment 47 #
2007/0229(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory clause
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory clause
2. This Directive provisions of this Directive concerning the single procedure for issuing a single permit authorising third- country nationals to live and work in the territory of a Member State shall not apply to third- country nationals:
Amendment 83 #
2007/0229(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Any decision rejecting the application, not granting, modifying or renewing, suspending or withdrawing a single permit shall be open to challenge before the courts of the Member State concerned. The written notification shall specify the possible redress procedures available and the time-limit for taking action. The challenge shall suspend the administrative decision until the final court decision is given.