Activities of Jean-Marie CAVADA related to 2014/2151(INI)
Legal basis opinions (0)
Amendments (42)
Amendment 1 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
Subheading 1
Involving all actors in the supply chain, both on line and off line
Amendment 59 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 90 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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;