Activities of Helga TRÜPEL related to 2011/0136(COD)
Plenary speeches (1)
Permitted uses of orphan works (debate)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain permitted uses of orphan works
Amendments (20)
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The exclusive rights for authors of reproduction and of making availablecommunication to the public of their works, 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 author prior to the digitisation and making available of a work.
Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In the case of orphan works, such prior consent to carry out acts of reproduction or of making availablecommunication to the public cannot be obtained.
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In particular, a common approach to determine the orphan status and the permitted uses of orphan works is necessary to ensure legal certainty in the internal market with respect to the use of orphan works by libraries, museums, educational establishments, archives, film heritage institutions and public service broadcasting organisations.
Amendment 76 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) For the purposes of this Directive, cinematographic,works forming part of 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 80 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) For reasons of international comity, this Directive should only apply to works that are first published, exhibited or broadcast in a Member State.
Amendment 81 #
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 author 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, in particular duly entitled collecting societies.
Amendment 90 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) It is appropriate to provide for a harmonised approach concerning such diligent search in order to ensure a high level of protection of copyright in the Union. A diligent search should involve the consultation of publicly accessible databases that supply information on the copyright status of a work. Moreover, in order to avoid duplication of costly digitisation, Member States should ensure that use of orphan works by the organisations referred to in this Directive, in particular duly entitled collecting societies, is recorded in a publicly accessible database. To the extent possible, publicly accessible databases of search results and use of orphan works should be designed and implemented so as to permit interlinkage with each other on a pan- European level and consultation thereof through a single entry point.
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Orphan works may have several authors or holders of related rights or include other works or protected subject matter. This Directive should not affect the rights of known or identified rightholders.
Amendment 95 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) In order to avoid duplication of search efforts, a diligent search should be conducted only in the Member State where the work was first published or broadcast. In order to enable other Member States to ascertain whether the orphan status of a work has been established in another Member State, Member States should ensure that the results of diligent searches carried out in their territories are recorded in a publicly accessible database.
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) This Directive should be without prejudice to existing arrangements in the Member States concerning the management of rights such as extended collective licences.
Amendment 117 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) When a Member State authorises, under the conditions established in this Directive, the use of orphan works by publicly accessible libraries, educational establishments, museums, archives, film heritage institutions or public service broadcasting organisations for purposes beyond their public interest mission, rightholdeauthors who come forward to claim their works should be remunerated. Such remuneration should take account of the type of work and the use concerned. Member States may provide that revenues collected from such use of orphan works for the purpose of remuneration but which are unclaimed after the expiry of the period fixed in accordance with this Directive should contribute to financing rights information sources that will facilitate diligent search, by low-cost and automated means, in respect of categories of works that fall actually or potentially within the scope of application of this Directivebe used to finance those cultural institutions or facilities which help to promote cultural diversity.
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point 3
(3) Cinematographic, audio or audiovisual wWorks produced by public service broadcasting organisations before the 31 December 2002 and contained in their archives.
Amendment 154 #
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 or copyright collection societies referred to in Article 1(1) shall ensure that a diligent search is carried out for each work, by consulting the appropriate sources for the category of works in question.
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The sources that are appropriate for each category of works shall be determined by each Member State, in consultation with rightholdeagreement with authors and users, and include, the sources listed in the Annex.
Amendment 162 #
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.
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that the results of diligent searches carried out in their territories are recorded in a database publicly accessible databaseto all Member States.
Amendment 177 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where this is compatible with Community law and international agreements on copyright and related rights, Member States may adopt comprehensive arrangements providing for simple and extended systems for the declaration of rights.
Amendment 178 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) by makcommunicating the orphan work availableto the public, within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC;
Amendment 230 #
Proposal for a directive
Annex – point 5 – point d a (new)
Annex – point 5 – point d a (new)
(da) Professional associations in relevant Member States.