Activities of Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas on the other hand the Justice Scoreboard should be a useful handbook offering an overview of best practices to be used by Member States in the area of civil, commercial and administrative justice ;

2018/03/08
Committee: JURI

2018/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas the effectiveness of justice system is inseparable from judicial independence;

2018/03/08
Committee: JURI

2018/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Member States to closely cooperate with the European Commission, especially via the informal group of national experts from Ministries and respective justice systems, to fill the lasting data gaps under some categories of Justice Scoreboard ;

2018/03/08
Committee: JURI

2018/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Asks the Commission to consider collective redress procedures in next year’s comparative exercise on accessibility factors of justice systems, as it is increasingly significant for facilitating access to justice and efficient dispute resolution;deleted

2018/03/08
Committee: JURI

2018/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Calls on the Commission to introduce, during next year’s exercise, a new indicator on access to justice for the LGBTI community, for example concerning access to legal aid, the length of proceedings in LGBTI discrimination cases or, where applicable, the impact of measures such as the reversed burden of proof;deleted

2018/03/08
Committee: JURI

2018/2009(INI)

Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Asks the European Commission to consider in the next Justice Scoreboard exercises the inclusion of information on the access to justice for any groups which could possibly be underprivileged due to disability, gender, sexual orientation etc. in order to identify any possible obstacles;

2018/03/08
Committee: JURI

2018/2009(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Takes note of the lack of data availability in the field of matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility; encourages the Commission to include such data in the EU Justice Scoreboard when made available by the Member States, possibly as a midterm objective to be put in place after completion of the review of the Council Regulation No 2201/2003 on Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility and on international child abduction";

2018/03/08
Committee: JURI

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) Those rights and values must continue to be ~~promoted and enforc~~cultivated, protected and ~~shar~~promoted 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 divisions, it is more important than ever to promote, strengthen and defend justice, rights and EU values: human rights, respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law. It is also crucial to create an enabling environment for peaceful democratic dialogue between representatives of different views. 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’) and it will be adjusted to address new challenges to European values. __________________ 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)

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
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 make our common values, rights and rich diversity alive and vibrant. The ultimate objective is to nurture and sustain rights-based, equal, inclusive and democratic society. That includes a vibrant, resilient and empowered civil society, ~~encouraging~~which fosters people’s democratic, civic and social participation and ~~fostering~~cultivates 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 maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with civil society and 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.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) The Rights and Values programme (the ‘Programme’) should allow developing synergies to tackle the challenges that are common to the promotion and protection of values and to reach a critical dimension to have concrete results in the field. That should be achieved byddress the most important challenges to the promotion and protection of values, taking into account that the challenges may vary across the Union. To ensure concrete impact, the Programme should build~~ing~~ on the ~~positive experience~~lessons of the predecessor Programmes. ~~This will enable to fully exploit the potential of synergies, to more effectively support the policy areas covered and to~~It should also take advantage of synergies with other policies and programmes of the Union and of other actors. This will increase their effectiveness and efficiency and will 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.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)

(4a) Full respect and promotion of rule of law and democracy is a fundamental Union value. It is also the basic condition for building citizens’ trust in the Union as well as between Member States. Respect for the rule of law within the Union is a prerequisite for the protection of fundamental rights, as well as for upholding all rights and obligations deriving from the Treaties. This programme should therefore promote and safeguard fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law at local, regional, national and transnational levels.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) Remembrance activities and critical reflection on Europe’s historical memory are ~~necessary~~important to make citizens aware of the common history and values, as the foundation for a common future, moral purpose and shared values. The relevance of historical, cultural and intercultural aspects should also be taken into account, as well as the links between remembrance and the creation of a European identity and sense of belonging together.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) Independent human rights bodies and civil society organisations play an essential role in promoting, safeguarding and raising awareness of the Union’s common values under Article 2 TEU, and in contributing to the effective enjoyment of rights under Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. As reflected in the European Parliament Resolution of 189 April 2018, adequate financial support is key to the development of a conducive and sustainable environment for civil society organisations to strengthen their role and perform their functions independently and effectively. Complementing efforts at national level, EU funding should therefore contribute to support, empower and build the capacity of independent civil society organisations active in the promotion of ~~human~~Union values such as democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights, whose activities help the strategic enforcement of rights under EU law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, including through advocacy and watchdog activities, as well as to promote, safeguard and raise awareness of the Union’s common values at national level.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) TIn relation to the implementation of the specific objectives of promoting equality and rights, citizens’ engagement and participation in the democratic life of the Union, and combating violence against groups at risk, the Programme should be open, subject to certain conditions, to the participation of European Free Trade Association (EFTA) members which are members of the European Economic Area (EEA) and EFTA members which are not members of the EEA and other European countries. Acceding countries, candidate countries and potential candidate countries benefiting from a pre- accession strategy should also be able to participate in the Programme.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) In order to ensure efficient allocation of funds from the general budget of the Union, it is necessary to ensure the European added value of all actions carried out, their complementarity to Member States’ actions, while consistency, complementarity and synergies shall be sought with funding programmes supporting policy areas with close links to each other, in particular within the Justice, Rights and Values Fund — and thus with the Justice Programme — as well as with Creative Europe programme, and Erasmus+ to realise the potential of cultural crossovers in the fields of culture, media, arts, education and creativity. It is necessary to create synergies with other European funding programmes, in particular in the fields of employment, internal market, enterprise, youth, health, citizenship, justice, migration, security, research, innovation, technology, industry, cohesion, tourism, external relations, trade and developmentincluding on local, national and international levels, directed at promoting and safeguarding the values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty of the European Union. The Commission should seek consistency, synergies and complementarity with Member States’ actions and with other funding programmes supporting policy areas with close links to Justice, Rights and Values Fund, including with Creative Europe programme, and Erasmus+, as well as with relevant policies of the Union.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) Regulation (EU, Euratom) No [the new FR] (the ‘Financial Regulation’) applies to this Programme. It lays down rules on the implementation of the Union budget, including the rules on grants, prizes, procurement, indirect implementation, financial assistance, financial instruments and budgetary guarantees. It is necessary to ensure that the Programme’s grant-making procedures and requirements are user- friendly for potential beneficiaries, including for local grassroot civil society organisations, and that they ensure full transparency on the use of resources, sound financial management and prudent use of resources.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24

(24) The types of financing and the methods of implementation under this Regulation should be chosen on the basis of their ability to achieve the specific objectives of the actions and to deliver results, taking into account, in particular, the costs of controls, the administrative burden, for the Commission and the beneficiaries, the capacity of potential beneficiaries and the expected risk of non- compliance. This should include consideration of the use of lump sums, flat rates ~~and~~, unit costs, financial support for third parties, as well as financing not linked to costs as referred to in Article 125(1) of the Financial Regulation. Co- funding should be accepted in kind, including in form of voluntary work, and may be waived in cases of limited complementary funding. In accordance with the Financial Regulation, Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council20 Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2988/9521 Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/9622 and Council Regulation (EU) 2017/193923 the financial interests of the Union are to be protected through proportionate measures, including the prevention, detection, correction and investigation of irregularities and fraud, the recovery of funds lost, wrongly paid or incorrectly used and, where appropriate, the imposition of administrative sanctions. In particular, in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 and Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) may carry out administrative investigations, including on-the-spot checks and inspections, with a view to establishing whether there has been fraud, corruption or any other illegal activity affecting the financial interests of the Union. In accordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/1939, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) may investigate and prosecute fraud and other criminal offences affecting the financial interests of the Union as provided for in Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council24. In accordance with the Financial Regulation, any person or entity receiving Union funds is to fully cooperate in the protection of the Union’s financial interests, to grant the necessary rights and access to the Commission, OLAF, the EPPO and the European Court of Auditors (ECA) and to ensure that any third parties involved in the implementation of Union funds grant equivalent rights. __________________ 20 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 September 2013 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1074/1999,(OJ L248, 18.9.2013, p. 1. 21 Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities financial interests (OJ L 312, 23.12.95, p.1). 22 Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 of 11 November 1996 concerning on-the-spot checks and inspections carried out by the Commission in order to protect the European Communities’ financial interests against fraud and other irregularities (OJ L292.15.11.96, p.2). 23 Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘the EPPO’) (OJ L283, 31.10.2017, p.1). 24 Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law (OJ L 198, 28.7.2017, p. 29).

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)

(24a) In order to increase accessibility and provide guidance and practical information in relation to the Programme, contact points should be set up in Member States to provide assistance to both beneficiaries and applicants.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25

(25) TIn relation to the implementation of the specific objectives of promoting equality and rights, citizens’ engagement and participation in the democratic life of the Union, and combating violence against groups at risk, third countries which are members of the European Economic Area (EEA) may participate in Union programmes in the framework of the cooperation established under the EEA agreement, which provides for the implementation of the programmes by a decision under that agreement. Third countries may also participate on the basis of other legal instruments. A specific provision should be introduced in this Regulation to grant the necessary rights for and access to the authorizing officer responsible, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) as well as the European Court of Auditors to comprehensively exert their respective competences.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
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, in~~cluding~~ particular by supporting civil society organisations at local, national and transnational levels, in order to sustain open, rights-based, democratic, equal and inclusive societies.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

(aa) to promote and protect democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights on local, national and transnational levels (Union values strand).

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(aa) promoting equality as a universal fundamental right and a core value of the Union;

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)

Article 5a Union values strand The programme shall focus on protecting and promoting democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights by providing financial support for independent civil society organisations which cultivate these values at local, national and transnational levels, creating enabling environment for democratic dialogue between representatives of different views, and protecting and promoting fundamental rights, including strengthening freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association, media freedom, and pluralism of the media, academic freedom, freedom of religion or belief and the right to privacy and family life, all by supporting, empowering and building the capacity of independent civil society organisations active in the promotion of values referred to in Article 2 of the Treaty of the European Union.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. No less than 65% of funds referred to in points (a) and (b) of paragraph 2 of this Article shall be allocated to action grants, operating grants and core funding for civil society organisations.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2

2. The Programme may provide funding in any of the forms laid down in the Financial Regulation, which shall ensure sound financial management, prudent use of public funds, low administrative burden for the Programme operator and for beneficiaries as well as accessibility of the Programme funds to potential beneficiaries. The Programme shall provide funding primarily through action grants, annual and multiannual operating grants and core funding. It may use lump sums, unit costs, flat rates and financial assistance for third parties. Co- funding shall be accepted in kind and may be waived in cases of limited complementary funding.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 a (new)

Article 9a Activities eligible for funding The general and specific objectives of the Programme referred to in Article 2 shall be pursued in particular through support to the following activities carried out by one or several eligible entities: (a) awareness raising, public education, promotion and dissemination of information to improve the knowledge of the policies, principles and rights in the areas covered by the Programme and its objectives; (b) analytical monitoring, reporting and advocacy activities to improve the understanding of the situation in the Member States and at Union level in the areas covered by the Programme as well as to improve the proper transposition and implementation of Union law, policies and common Union values within Member States, such activities to include for instance the collection of data and statistics; the development of common methodologies and, where appropriate, indicators or benchmarks; studies, researches, analyses and surveys; evaluations; impact assessment; and the elaboration and publication of guides, reports and educational material; (c) training relevant stakeholders to improve their knowledge of the policies and rights in the fields covered by the Programme and strengthening relevant stakeholders’ capability to advocate for the policies and rights in the fields covered by the Programme; (d) promoting public awareness and understanding of the risks, rules, safeguards and rights in relation to the protection of personal data, privacy, and digital security, as well as addressing targeted misinformation through awareness raising, trainings, studies and monitoring activities; (e) strengthening citizens’ awareness of European culture, history, core values and remembrance as well as their sense of solidarity and belonging to the Union; (f) bringing together Europeans of different nationalities and cultures by giving them the opportunity to participate in town-twinning activities and projects; (g) encouraging and facilitating active and inclusive participation in the construction of a more democratic Union as well as raising awareness, promoting and defending rights and values through support to civil society organisations; (h) financing the technical and organisational support to implement Regulation [(EU)No 211/2011], thereby underpinning the exercise by citizens of the right to launch and support European citizens’ initiatives; (i) supporting civil society organisations active in the areas covered by the Programme at all levels, as well as developing the capacity of European networks and civil society organisations to contribute to the development, awareness raising and monitoring of the implementation of Union law, policy goals, values and strategies; (j) strengthening the capacity and independence of human rights defenders and civil society organisations monitoring the situation of the rule of law and supporting actions on the local, regional and national levels; (k) supporting initiatives and measures to promote and protect freedom and pluralism of the media and to build capacity for new challenges such as new media and countering hate speech; (l) support and build capacity for civil society organisations active in promoting and monitoring transparency and integrity of public administration and fighting corruption; (m) supporting civil society organisations active in the area of protection and promotion of fundamental rights, including support for actions to raise awareness of fundamental rights and contribute to human rights education; (o) supporting activities aimed at promoting peaceful democratic dialogue between people of different political views.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 a (new)

Article 18a Programme Contact Points The Commission shall set up contact points in all Member States in cooperation with local partners or the Member State in question. The contact points shall provide stakeholders and beneficiaries of the Programme with impartial guidance and practical information and assistance in relation to all aspects of the Programme, including in relation to the application procedure, project implementation procedures, reporting and other formalities. The contact points may be managed by Member States or civil society organisations or consortia thereof.

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0207(COD)

Michał BONI, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Alain LAMASSOURE, Jaromír ŠTĚTINA, Carlos COELHO

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I

Activities of the Programme The specific objectives of the Programme referred to in Article 2(2) will be pursued in particular through support to the following activities: (a) of information to improve the knowledge of the policies and rights in the areas covered by the Programme; (b) of good practices among stakeholders to improve knowledge and mutual understanding and civic and democratic engagement; (c) activities31 to improve the understanding of the situation in the Member States and at EU level in the areas covered by the Programme as well as to improve the implementation of EU law and policies ; (d) improve their knowledge of the policies and rights in the fields covered; (e) Technology (ICT) tools development and maintenance; (f) of European culture, history and remembrance as well as their sense of belonging to the Union; (g) different nationalities and cultures by giving them the opportunity to participate in town-twinning activities; (h) participation in the construction of a more democratic Union as well as awareness of rights and values through support to civil society orgadeleted awareness raising, dissemination mutual learning through exchange analytical and monitoring training relevant stakeholders to information and Communiscations (i) organisational support to implement Regulation [(EU)No 211/2011], thereby underpinning the exercise by citizens of the right to launch and support European citizens’ initiatives; (j) European networks to promote and further develop Union law, policy goals and strategies as well as supporting civil society organisations active in the areas covered by the Programme. (k) programme and dissemination and transferability of its results and fostering citizen outreach, including by setting up and supporting programme desks/national contact network. __________________ 31 These activities include for instance the collection of data and statistics; the development of common methodologies and, wher strengthening citizens’ awareness bringing together Europeans of encouraging and facilitating active financing the technical and developing the cap~~propriate, indicators or benchmarks; studies, researches, analyses and surveys; evaluations; impact assessment; the elaboration and publication of guides, reports and educational material.~~acity of enhancing knowledge of the

2018/10/30
Committee: LIBE

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)

(6 a) Active European citizenship, shared values, creativityand innovative spirit need a solid ground on which they can develop. The importance of media literacy, and in particular film literacy, together withthe promotion of films for young people has been recognised by the EuropeanParliament’s resolution about European Film in the digital era from 2015 1a. At the Gothenburg Leaders' Summit in November 20172a media literacy amongst all citizens was again identified as one of the key developments Europe is facing _________________ 1a (2016/C 346/02) 2a COM(2017) 673 final

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) Since its creation, the European Film Academy has developed a unique expertise and is in a unique position to create a pan-European community of film creators and professionals, promoting and disseminating European films beyond their national borders and developing truly European audiences from an early age on. Therefore, it should be eligible for direct Union support.

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) to promote European audiovisual works and support audience development across Europe and beyond. with a particular focus on children, young people, people with disabilities and under- represented groups

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2

These priorities shall be addressed through support to the creation, promotion, access, and dissemination of European works with the potential to reach large audiences of all ages and European works transporting common identity and values within Europe and beyond, thereby adapting to new market developments and accompanying the Audiovisual Media Services Directive.

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. A minimum of 15 % of the amount referred to in paragraph 1 is dedicated to activities aimed at European citizens under the age of 14

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) Production of innovative TV content and serial storytelling;, taking into account the importance of quality children’s and young people’s media

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) Support to international sales and circulation of non-national European works on all platforms, including through coordinated distribution strategies covering several countries; as an exception for live- action and documentary children’s and young people’s films, a sale of educational rights used in a long-term educational programme should be considered as a theatrical release. In the highly competitive distribution market these programmes are often the only access for young audiences to non- national European films and reach a significant audience in the long-term

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)

(k a) European Children’s Film/Media network(s) facilitating the exchange of experiences, know-how and best practicein the field of development, production and/or distribution of children’s films as well as media literacy

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a

(a) Encourage new forms of creation at the cross roads between different cultural and creative sectors, for instance through the use of innovative technologies; or co- creation with young audiences

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0190(COD)

Bogusław SONIK, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Marc JOULAUD, Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4 – point c

(c) Promoting media literacy to allow citizens of all ages to develop a critical understanding of the media.

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)

(6a) The Programme should provide a solid ground for the development of active European citizenship, shared values, creativity and innovation. This needs to be reflected by supporting media literacy, and in particular film literacy, together with the promotion of films for young people.

2018/11/30
Committee: CULT

2018/0190(COD)

Bogusław SONIK, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Marc JOULAUD, Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Milan ZVER, Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH, Andrea BOCSKOR

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) Since its creation, the European Film Academy has developed a unique expertise and is in a unique position to create a pan-European community of film creators and professionals, promoting and disseminating European films beyond their national borders and developing truly European audiences from an early age on. Therefore, it should be eligible for direct Union support.

2018/11/30
Committee: CULT

2018/0190(COD)

Bogusław SONIK, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Marc JOULAUD, Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Milan ZVER, Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH, Andrea BOCSKOR

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) to promote European audiovisual works and support audience development, in particular young audience by raising awareness and development of legal offers across Europe and beyond.

2018/11/30
Committee: CULT

2018/0190(COD)

Bogusław SONIK, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Marc JOULAUD, Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Milan ZVER, Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2

These priorities shall be addressed through support to the creation, promotion, access, and dissemination of European works transporting common identity and values with the potential to reach large audiences of all ages within Europe and beyond, thereby adapting to new market developments and accompanying the Audiovisual Media Services Directive.

2018/11/30
Committee: CULT

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. A minimum of 15% of the amount referred to in paragraph 1 is dedicated to activities aimed at European citizens under age of 14

2018/11/30
Committee: CULT

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) Production of innovative TV content and serial storytelling;, taking into account the importance of quality children's and young people's media

2018/11/30
Committee: CULT

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)

(ka) European Children's Film/Media network(s) facilitating the exchange of experiences, know-how and best practice in the field of development, production and/or distribution of children's films as well as media literacy

2018/11/30
Committee: CULT

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a

(a) Encourage new forms of creation at the cross roads between different cultural and creative sectors, for instance through the use of innovative technologies; or creation with young audiences

2018/11/30
Committee: CULT

2018/0190(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4 – point c

(c) Promoting media literacy to allow citizens of all ages to develop a critical understanding of the media.

2018/11/30
Committee: CULT

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) The absence of any exception in Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 to the protection conferred by a supplementary protection certificate has had the unintended consequence of preventing manufacturers of generics and biosimilars established in the Union from manufacturing, ~~even for the exclusive purpose of exporting to third country~~with a view to enter the Union markets in which such protection does not exist or has expired. A further unintended consequence is that the protection conferred by the certificate makes it more difficult for those manufacturers to enter the Union market immediately after expiry of the certificatemmediately after expiry of the certificate and/or export to countries in which such protection does not exist or has expired, given that they are not in a position to build up production capacity until the protection provided by the certificate has lapsed, by contrast with manufacturers located in third countries where protection does not exist or has expired.

2018/10/17
Committee: ENVI

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) The absence of any exception in Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 to the protection conferred by a supplementary protection certificate has had the unintended consequence of preventing manufacturers of generics and biosimilars established in the Union from manufacturing, ~~even for the exclusive purpose of exporting to third country~~with a view to enter the Union markets in which such protection does not exist or has expired. A further unintended consequence is that the protection conferred by the certificate makes it more difficult for those manufacturers to enter the Union market immediately after expiry of the certificatemmediately after expiry of the certificate and/or export to countries in which such protection does not exist or has expired, given that they are not in a position to build up production capacity until the protection provided by the certificate has lapsed, by contrast with manufacturers located in third countries where protection does not exist or has expired.

2018/11/12
Committee: INTA

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)

(3a) The timely entry of generics and biosimilars onto the Union market is important for increasing competition, reducing prices and ensuring the sustainability of healthcare systems.

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) In those specific and limited circumstances~~, and in order to creat~~ it is appropriate to eliminate the aforementioned, unintended side effects of the supplementary protection certificate so as to enable a level -playing field between Union-based manufacturers and those in third countr~~y manufacturers, it is appropriate to restrict the protection conferred by a~~ies. This would enable making exclusively for (i) export to third countries and (ii) entry onto the Union market immediately after expiry of the relevant supplementary protection certificate so, as ~~to allow making for the exclusive purpose of export to third countrie~~well as and any related acts strictly necessary for that making or for the actual export or that entry onto the Union market itself.

2018/11/12
Committee: INTA

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) The absence of any exception in Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 to the protection conferred by a supplementary protection certificate has had the unintended consequence of preventing manufacturers of generics and biosimilars established in the Union from manufacturing, even for the exclusive purpose of exporting to ~~third~~ country markets in which such protection does not exist or has expired. A further unintended consequence is that the protection conferred by the certificate makes it more difficult for those manufacturers with a view to enter the Union market immediately after expiry of the certificate and/or export to countries in which such protection does not exist or has expired, given that they are not in a position to build up production capacity until the protection provided by the certificate has lapsed, by contrast with manufacturers located in third countries where protection does not exist or has expired.

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) SReasonable and proportionate safeguards should accompany the exception ~~in order to increase transparency, to~~, for the exclusive purpose of helping the holder of a supplementary protection certificate to ~~enfor~~check compliance wit~~s protection in the Union and to reduce the risk of illicit diversion onto the Union market during the term~~h the conditions set out hereunder. Those safeguards should not negatively affect competition among companies and should allow the exception to work effectively with no disruption on the main objectives of the excerpti~~ficate~~on.

2018/11/12
Committee: INTA

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) In those specific and limited circumstances~~, and in order to creat~~ it is appropriate to eliminate the aforementioned, unintended side effects of the supplementary protection certificate so as to enable a level -playing field between Union-based manufacturers and those in third countr~~y manufacturers, it is appropriate to restrict the protection conferred by a~~ies. This would enable making exclusively for (i) export to third countries and (ii) entry onto the Union market immediately after expiry of the relevant supplementary protection certificate so, as ~~to allow making for the exclusive purpose of export to third countrie~~well as and any related acts strictly necessary for that making or for the actual export or that entry onto the Union market itself.

2018/10/17
Committee: ENVI

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) ~~In order to ensure that holders of supplementary protection certificates already in force are not deprived of their acquired rights, t~~The exception provided for in this Regulation should only ~~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 lodged~~become applicable following period of 1 year after the 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.

2018/11/12
Committee: INTA

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) It is necessary and appropriate for the achievement of the basic objective, of providing a level playing field for generic and biosimilar manufacturers with their competitors in third country markets where protection does not exist or has expired, to lay down rules restricting the exclusive right of a supplementary protection certificate holder to make the product in question during the term of the certificate, and also to impose certain information and labelling obligations on makers wishing to take advantage of those rulesenabling the making of the product in question during the term of the certificate. This Regulation complies with the principle of proportionality, and does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve the objectives pursued, in accordance with Article 5(4) of the Treaty on European Union.

2018/11/12
Committee: INTA

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
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 granted on or after a specified date~~the right to health care in Article 35 of the Charter by making medicines more accessible to EU patients, the principle of proportionality in Article 52 of the Charter, point (a) of Article 6 TFEU on the right to health protection for European citizens, while allowing a reasonable predictability for applicants and other relevant market players, by postponing the application of the exception until expiry of a period of 1 year after the entry into force of this Regulation and by imposing certain conditions on the application of the exception,

2018/11/12
Committee: INTA

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) SReasonable and proportionate safeguards should accompany the exception ~~in order to increase transparency, to~~, for the exclusive purpose of helping the holder of a supplementary protection certificate to ~~enfor~~check compliance wit~~s protection in the Union and to reduce the risk of illicit diversion onto the Union market during the term~~h the conditions set out hereunder. Those safeguards should not negatively affect competition among companies and should allow the exception to work effectively with no disruption on the main objectives of the excerpti~~ficate~~on.

2018/10/17
Committee: ENVI

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) SReasonable and proportionate safeguards should accompany the exception ~~in order to increase transparency, to~~, for the exclusive purpose of helping the holder of a supplementary protection certificate to ~~enfor~~check compliance wit~~s protection in the Union and to reduce the risk of illicit diversion onto the Union market during the term~~h the conditions set out hereunder. Those safeguards should not negatively affect competition among companies and should allow the exception to work effectively with no disruption on the main objectives of the excerpti~~ficate.~~on

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) To this end, ~~this Regulation should impose a once-off duty~~ and to the extent it intends to rely on the exception, the person responsible for the 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 placemaker’), or any person acting on its behalf, should provide certain information to the registered holder(s) of the certificate, at its (their) registered address(es) on a confidentiality basis. The information should be provided before the making is intended to start 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, shwould ~~only~~altogether fall within the scope of the exception ~~where~~, provided that 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 s~~holder of the certificate. The notification should be without prejudice to any defences otherwise available to the maker and any other persons conducting the related acts referred to in Recital 9 against a claim from the hould ~~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~~er of the certificate in relation to an alleged infringement or threat of infringement of the certificate, and should not be construed as an acknowledgment by the maker that the certificate or the basic patent is valid and/or that the making~~. The authority should be required to publish that information, in the interests of transparency and for the purpose of informing the holder of the certificate of the maker’s in~~ or any of the related acts referred to in Recital 9 would otherwise infringe the certificate and/or the basic patent~~ion~~.

2018/10/17
Committee: ENVI

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) To this end, and to the extent it intends to rely on the exception, this Regulation should impose a once-off duty on the person ~~making~~responsible for the making, or any person acting on its behalf, 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 start 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, shwould ~~only~~altogether fall within the scope of the exception ~~where~~, provided that 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~~Only the making should be notified, not the related acts. Should making ~~is to~~ take place~~, both as regards the making in that Member State, and as regards related acts, whether performed in that or ano~~ in more than one Member State where a certificate exists, a notification should be required in each of therse Member State~~, related to that making. The authority should be required to publish~~s. Given the confidential and highly sensitive nature of thate information~~, in the interests of transparency and for the purpose of informing the holder of the certificate of the maker’s intention~~ contained in the notification, the authority should keep the notification and the information it contains confidential and take practical measures to protect such confidentiality.

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)

(13a) The maker should also inform the holder of the certificate, in writing, that a notification has been sent to the authority in relation the certificate

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EC) No 469/2009
Article 4 – paragraph 5

5. ~~Paragraph 2 shall apply in the case only of certificates granted on o~~The exception set out in Paragraph 2 shall become applicable following a period of 1 year after [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)].;

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

~~(f) an indicative list of the intended third country or third countries to which the product is to be exported.~~deleted

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EC) No 469/2009
Article 4 – paragraph 5

5. ~~Paragraph 2 shall apply in the case only of certificates granted on o~~The exception set out in Paragraph 2 shall become applicable following a period of 1 year after [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)].;

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0161(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

4. The ~~notification sent to an~~ authority as referred to in Article ~~4(2)(b~~9(1) shall ~~be published by that authority within 15 days of receipt of the notification.;~~keep the notification referred to in paragraph 2(b) and the information listed in paragraph 3 confidential and shall take appropriate measures to preserve such confidentiality

2018/11/28
Committee: JURI

2018/0161(COD)

Pavel SVOBODA, Max ANDERSSON, Joëlle BERGERON, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS, Angel DZHAMBAZKI, António MARINHO E PINTO, Kazimierz Michał UJAZDOWSKI, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Poland 515

2017/10/20
Committee: AFCO

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
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;

2017/03/27
Committee: ITRE IMCO

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
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;

2017/03/27
Committee: ITRE IMCO

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
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;

2017/03/27
Committee: ITRE IMCO

2016/2143(INI)

Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marc JOULAUD, Milan ZVER, Stefano MAULLU, Hannu TAKKULA, Therese COMODINI CACHIA, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Ivo BELET, Andrea BOCSKOR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission to develop the pledge board and explore the possibility to create a code of conduct in the areas of good governance in sport;

2016/10/19
Committee: CULT

2016/2143(INI)

Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marc JOULAUD, Milan ZVER, Stefano MAULLU, Hannu TAKKULA, Therese COMODINI CACHIA, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Ivo BELET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses that information-sharing and cooperation between sports bodies, state authorities and ~~licensed~~ betting operators iswithin the framework of national platforms are essential to detect, investigate and prosecute match- fixing and calls on Member States to consider dedicated prosecution services with primary responsibility for investigating sports fraud cases;

2016/10/19
Committee: CULT

2016/2143(INI)

Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marc JOULAUD, Milan ZVER, Stefano MAULLU, Hannu TAKKULA, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Therese COMODINI CACHIA, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Petra KAMMEREVERT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Calls on the European Commission to continue to support anti- doping projects through the Erasmus+ programme, while assessing its impact and ensuring that it usefully complements existing funding schemes within anti- doping;

2016/10/19
Committee: CULT

2016/2143(INI)

Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marc JOULAUD, Milan ZVER, Stefano MAULLU, Hannu TAKKULA, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Therese COMODINI CACHIA, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Ivo BELET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Calls on the Commission and the Council to encourage and facilitate the negotiation of agreements between countries permitting duly authorized doping control teams from other countries to conduct testing, respecting athletes' fundamental rights and in accordance with the International Convention against doping in sport;

2016/10/19
Committee: CULT

2016/2143(INI)

Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marc JOULAUD, Milan ZVER, Stefano MAULLU, Hannu TAKKULA, Krystyna ŁYBACKA, Therese COMODINI CACHIA, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Ivo BELET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Calls on the Commission to explore ways of information sharing in the context of violence in sport through the existing networks;

2016/10/19
Committee: CULT

2016/2143(INI)

Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Milan ZVER, Stefano MAULLU, Hannu TAKKULA, Marc JOULAUD, Krystyna ŁYBACKA, Therese COMODINI CACHIA, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Petra KAMMEREVERT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Underlines that ~~participation in sport in schools and universities, as well as by older people, is vital~~schools and universities should play a vital role in providing sport opportunities and to maintain healthy lifestyles;

2016/10/19
Committee: CULT

2016/2143(INI)

Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Milan ZVER, Stefano MAULLU, Marc JOULAUD, Hannu TAKKULA, Krystyna ŁYBACKA, Therese COMODINI CACHIA, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Petra KAMMEREVERT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30a. Takes into account that the EU population is ageing, therefore specific attention should be paid to the positive impact that physical activity can have on the health and wellbeing of the elderly;

2016/10/19
Committee: CULT

2016/2114(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 4 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

Where the competent authorities of the Member States ornotify the President of the ~~Union~~end 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 of~~term 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 (2~~3) 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.

2016/09/27
Committee: AFCO

2016/2114(REG)

Pavel SVOBODA, Max ANDERSSON, Joëlle BERGERON, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS, António MARINHO E PINTO, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
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.

2016/09/27
Committee: AFCO

2016/2114(REG)

Pavel SVOBODA, Max ANDERSSON, Joëlle BERGERON, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS, Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, António MARINHO E PINTO, Evelyn REGNER, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 9 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1

The committee's ~~report~~proposal for a decision shall be placed ~~at the head of~~on the agenda of the first sitting following the day on which it was tabled. No amendments may be tabled to ~~the~~such a proposal~~(s) for a decision~~.

2016/09/27
Committee: AFCO

2016/2114(REG)

Pavel SVOBODA, Max ANDERSSON, Joëlle BERGERON, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS, António MARINHO E PINTO, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
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)

2016/09/27
Committee: AFCO

2016/2114(REG)

Pavel SVOBODA, Max ANDERSSON, Joëlle BERGERON, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS, António MARINHO E PINTO, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
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.

2016/09/27
Committee: AFCO

2016/2114(REG)

Pavel SVOBODA, Max ANDERSSON, Joëlle BERGERON, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS, Angel DZHAMBAZKI, António MARINHO E PINTO, Kazimierz Michał UJAZDOWSKI, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 1

– where the Commission ~~withdraws~~replaces, 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;

2016/09/27
Committee: AFCO

2016/2114(REG)

Pavel SVOBODA, Max ANDERSSON, Joëlle BERGERON, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS, António MARINHO E PINTO, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 2

~~– where the Commission substantially amends or intends to amend its initial proposal, except where this is done in order to take account of Parliament's position; or~~deleted

2016/09/27
Committee: AFCO

2016/2114(REG)

Pavel SVOBODA, Max ANDERSSON, Joëlle BERGERON, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS, António MARINHO E PINTO, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
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

2016/09/27
Committee: AFCO

2016/2114(REG)

Pavel SVOBODA, Max ANDERSSON, Joëlle BERGERON, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS, Angel DZHAMBAZKI, António MARINHO E PINTO, Kazimierz Michał UJAZDOWSKI, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 63 – paragraph 2

2. ~~Parliam~~The 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 proposal~~provided for in Parliament's position at first reading with the result that the ordinary legislative procedure w~~ill~~ould no longer apply.

2016/09/27
Committee: AFCO

2016/2114(REG)

Pavel SVOBODA, Max ANDERSSON, Joëlle BERGERON, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Kostas CHRYSOGONOS, Angel DZHAMBAZKI, António MARINHO E PINTO, Kazimierz Michał UJAZDOWSKI, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
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.

2016/09/27
Committee: AFCO

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas the information on the form is in part inadequate and ~~does not enabl~~makes it difficult for the Parliament to ~~correct~~properly evaluate either the existence of a~~ctual or potential~~ conflicts of interests on the part of Commissioners- designate or their ability to carry out their mandate in line with the code of conduct for Commissioners;

2016/09/14
Committee: JURI

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that the aim of scrutinising Commissioners' financial declarations is to ensure that the Commissioners-designate are able to fulfil their mandates completely independently, in accordance with Article 17(3) of the Treaty on European Union and with the code of conduct for Commissioners; ~~considers, accordingly, that this should not be restricted to the appointment of the new Commission;~~

2016/09/14
Committee: JURI

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 – point c

(c) if the Committee on 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~~; the President of the Commission shall inform the European Parliament on the further steps he intends to take;

2016/09/14
Committee: JURI

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Notes that, pursuant to the second sub-paragraph of Article 246 of the Treaty on Functioning of the European Union, Parliament shall be consulted in the event of a Commissioner being replaced during her/his term of office; considers that this ~~must include~~situation requires verification of the absence of a conflict of interests of a new Commissioner-designate, among other things, in line with paragraph 7 of this resolution;

2016/09/14
Committee: JURI

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a resolution
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 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 asking the President of the Commission to withdraw confidence in the Commissioner in question;deleted

2016/09/14
Committee: JURI

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Considers that the current ~~scope~~form of the Commissioners’ declarations of interests is too limited and calls on the Commission to revise its rules on this as soon as possible6 ; __________________ 6 See paragraph 13 of the European Parliament’s resolution of 8 September 2015 referred to above.

2016/09/14
Committee: JURI

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Considers that the family interests referred to in point 1.6 of the code of conduct for Commissioners should be included in the declarations of financial interests in the same way as are the financial interests of their partners or spouses;deleted

2016/09/14
Committee: JURI

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Considers that, pursuant to point 1.4 of the code of conduct for Commissioners, point V of the declarations of financial interests should include ~~all the~~financial interests and activities of the spouse or partner ~~and should on no account be limited to those 'likely to constitute a conflict of interests';~~

2016/09/14
Committee: JURI

2016/2080(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Calls on the Commission to begin negotiations with Parliament aimed at making any necessary changes to the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission;deleted

2016/09/14
Committee: JURI

2016/2057(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas the WTO Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health ~~acknowledges the role of~~recognises that intellectual property protection ins important for the development of new medicines, while ~~expres~~recognising concerns about its effects on prices;

2016/10/04
Committee: JURI

2016/2057(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital E

E. whereas the rationale ofor patent rights is to make investment in innovation possible and attractive and to ensure that the knowledge contained in patent applications is accessible;

2016/10/04
Committee: JURI

2016/2057(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights ~~the fact~~ that the WTO TRIPS Agreement provides flexibilities to patent rights, such as compulsory licensing, which ~~have proved to be a major tool in bringing prices to reasonable level~~can be used as an effective tool in exceptional circumstances established by the law of each WTO member to address public health problems;

2016/10/04
Committee: JURI

2016/2057(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Considers that exclusive protection periods granted to pharmaceuticals through patents or other mechanisms ~~hinder competition, lead to high prices and negatively impact access to needed medicine~~are an important tool to encourage R&D and provide incentives to innovation; acknowledges, at the same time, the importance of promoting competition and preventing cases of market abuse, as well as the need of ensuring access to needed medicines at affordable prices and guaranteeing the sustainability of national healthcare systems;

2016/10/04
Committee: JURI

2016/2057(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Recalls that the Pharmaceutical Sector Inquiry Report ~~adopt~~led by the Commission in 2009 ~~showed that manufactur~~indicated a numbers of ~~medicines have developed abusive strategies in connection with~~problems in companies' practices that, among other factors such as shortcomings in the regulatory framework, paotent ~~claims in order to hinder~~ially contribute to delays to the market entry of generic medicines~~, which should be avoided~~ and emphasised the importance of stronger competition law enforcement;

2016/10/04
Committee: JURI

2016/2057(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to undertake a critical review of the impact of intellectual-property-related incentives on biomedical innovation, to explore effective alternatives to ~~monopolie~~patents for the financing of medical R&D and to evaluate the functioning of the applicable limitations to patent ~~allocation~~rights;

2016/10/04
Committee: JURI

2016/2057(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the European Patent Office (EPO) and the Member States to continue to grant patents on health products that strictly fulfil the patentability requirements of novelty, inventive step and industrial applicability as enshrined in the European Patent Convention;

2016/10/04
Committee: JURI

2016/2057(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the Commission to encourage Member States to fully implement existing patent limitations and flexibilities ~~when confronted with excessive pricing or abuse of monopoly right~~in duly justified cases, such as cases of national emergencies, other circumstances of extreme urgency or anti- competitive practices;

2016/10/04
Committee: JURI

2016/2057(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish full transparency on the results of publicly financed R&D so that patenting and licensing conditions guarantee a public health return on public investments and reflect the structure of R&D funding.

2016/10/04
Committee: JURI

2016/2011(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

~~J. whereas the Commission should consider proposing the revision of the provisions on the scope of the procedure and on the exceptional review of orders;~~deleted

2016/07/14
Committee: JURI

2016/2011(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that a future review of the regulation should look at removing certain exceptions to the scope of the procedure and at revising the provisions on the review of European Orders for Payment;deleted

2016/07/14
Committee: JURI

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) Operators of retransmission services, that normally offer multiple programmes which use a multitude of works and other protected subject matter included in the retransmitted television and radio programmes, have ~~a very short time- frame for~~the possibility, in the context of contractual freedom, of obtaining ~~the~~ necessary licences and thence also face a significant rights clearing burden. There is also a risk for right holders of having their works and other protected subject matter exploited without authorisation or payment of remunerationreby guaranteeing right holders the necessary equitable remuneration they need so that they can continue to offer a wide variety of content, also in the consumer's interest.

2017/06/23
Committee: JURI

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) The rights in works and other protected subject matter are harmonised, among others, through Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council15 and Directive 2006/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.16 _________________ 15 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 OJ L 167, 22.6.2001, p. 10–19. 16 Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 28–35., which serves in particular to ensure protection of right holders. Directive 2006/115/EC of the European

2017/06/23
Committee: JURI

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) Therefore, cross-border provision of online services ancillary to broadcast and retransmissions of television and radio programmes originating in other Member States should be facilitated by adapting the legal framework on the exercise of copyright and related rights relevant for those activities. Whereas the adaptation of the legal framework may result in limitations on the exercise of exclusive rights, it should only apply in certain special cases which do not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work or other protected subject-matter and do not unreasonably prejudice legitimate interests of the rightholders.

2017/06/23
Committee: JURI

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The ancillary online services covered by this Regulation are those services offered by broadcasting organisations which have a clear and subordinate relationship to the broadcast. They include services giving access to television and radio programmes in a linear manner simultaneously to the broadcast and services giving access, within a defined time period after the broadcast, to television and radio programmes which have been previously broadcast by the broadcasting organisation (so-called catch-up services). In addition, ancillary online services include services which give access to material which enriches or otherwise expands television and radio programmes broadcast by the broadcasting organisation, including by way of previewing, extending, supplementing or reviewing the relevant programme's content. The provision of access to individual works or other protected subject matter that have been incorporated in a television or radio programme should not be regarded as an ancillary online service. Similarly, the provision of access to works or other protected subject matter independently of broadcast, such as services giving access to individual musical or audiovisual works, music albums or videos, do not fall under the definition of ancillary online service.deleted

2017/06/23
Committee: JURI

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11

(11) Through the principle of contractual freedom ~~it will~~and in order to support existing licensing models, such us exclusive territorial licensing which enables the financing mechanism which are vital to audiovisual production, optimal distribution and the promotion of cultural diversity it should be possible to continue limiting the exploitation of the rights affected by the principle of country of origin laid down in this Regulation, especially as far as certain technical means of transmission, such as geoblocking an geo-filtering, or certain language versions are concerned, provided that any such limitations of the exploitation of those rights are in compliance with Union law.

2017/06/23
Committee: JURI

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) Operators of retransmission services offered on satellite, digital terrestrial, or 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 are offered on the open internet should be excluded from 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 limited when compared for example to cable or closed circuit IP-based networks.

2017/06/23
Committee: JURI

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) In order to provide legal certainty to operators of retransmission services offered on satellite, digital terrestrial, or 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. The right of prohibition as such is maintained, and only the way in which it is exercised is regulated to a certain extent. This also means that retransmission rights remain assignable. _________________ 18 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. 72–98.

2017/06/23
Committee: JURI

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) This Regulation respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union while also taking account of the rules laid down in Directive 2001/29/EC, which aims to ensure a high level of protection of the affected copyright, related rights and other subject-matter. 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 rightsn the light of contractual freedom, such a condition should be voluntary. 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.

2017/06/23
Committee: JURI

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a(new)

(19 a) The retransmission of programmes from other Member States is an act subject to copyright and, as the case may be, rights related to copyright. The online- service must, therefore, obtain the authorisation from every holder of rights in each part of the programme retransmitted. Pursuant to this regulation, the authorisations should be granted contractually unless a temporary exception is provided for in the case of existing legal licence schemes.

2017/06/23
Committee: JURI

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) "ancillary online service" means an online service consisting in the provision to the public, by or under the control and responsibility of a broadcasting organisation, of radio or television programmes simultaneously with or for a defined period of time after their broadcast by the broadcasting organisation as well as of any material produced by or for the broadcasting organisation which is ancillary to such broadcast;deleted

2017/06/23
Committee: JURI

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2

Application of the principle of ‘country of origin’ to ancillary online services (1) The acts of communication to the public and of making available occurring when providing an ancillary online service by or under the control and responsibility of a broadcasting organisation as well as the acts of reproduction which are necessary for the provision of, the access to or the use of the ancillary online service shall, for the purposes of exercising copyright and related rights relevant for these acts, be deemed to occur solely in the Member State in which the broadcasting organisation has its principal establishment. (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 audience, and the language version.rticle 2 deleted

2017/06/23
Committee: JURI

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
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 on an individual basis but to exercise them in accordance with this Regulation.deleted

2017/06/23
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
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 and in such instances no authorisation would be required.deleted

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9

(9) Union law already provides certain exceptions and limitations covering uses for scientific research purposes which may apply to acts of text and data mining. However, those exceptions and limitations are optional and not fully adapted to the use of technologies in scientific research. Moreover, where researchers have lawful access to content, for example through subscriptions to publications or open access licences, the terms of the licences may exclude text and data mining. As research is increasingly carried out with the assistance of digital technology, there is a risk that the Union's competitive position as a research area will suffer unless steps are taken to address the legal uncertainty for text and data mining.deleted

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) This legal uncertainty should be addressed by providing for a mandatory exception to the right of reproduction and also to the right to prevent extraction from a database. The new exception should be without prejudice to the existing mandatory exception on temporary acts of reproduction laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29, which should continue to apply to text and data mining techniques which do not involve the making of copies going beyond the scope of that exception. Research organisations should also benefit from the exception when they engage into public-private partnerships.deleted

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11

(11) Research organisations across the Union encompass a wide variety of entities the primary goal of which is to conduct scientific research or to do so together with the provision of educational services. Due to the diversity of such entities, it is important to have a common understanding of the beneficiaries of the exception. Despite different legal forms and structures, research organisations across Member States generally have in common that they act either on a not for profit basis or in the context of a public- interest mission recognised by the State. Such a public-interest mission may, for example, be reflected through public funding or through provisions in national laws or public contracts. At the same time, organisations upon which commercial undertakings have a decisive influence allowing them to exercise control because of structural situations such as their quality of shareholders or members, which may result in preferential access to the results of the research, should not be considered research organisations for the purposes of this Directive.deleted

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) In view of a potentially high number of access requests to and downloads of their works or other subject- matter, rightholders should be allowed to apply measures where there is risk that the security and integrity of the system or databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted would be jeopardised. Those measures should not exceed what is necessary to pursue the objective of ensuring the security and integrity of the system and should not undermine the effective application of the exception.deleted

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Andrzej GRZYB

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13

(13) There is no need to provide for compensation for rightholders as regards uses under the text and data mining exception introduced by this Directive given that in view of the nature and scope of the exception the harm should be minimal.deleted

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
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~~.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Andrzej GRZYB

Proposal for a directive
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~~. 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.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Mary HONEYBALL, Christian EHLER, Robert ROCHEFORT, Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Pervenche BERÈS, Milan ZVER, Christine REVAULT D'ALLONNES BONNEFOY, Giorgos GRAMMATIKAKIS, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Luigi MORGANO, Constance LE GRIP, Mady DELVAUX

Proposal for a directive
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))"

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Mary HONEYBALL, Christian EHLER, Robert ROCHEFORT, Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Pervenche BERÈS, Milan ZVER, Christine REVAULT D'ALLONNES BONNEFOY, Giorgos GRAMMATIKAKIS, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Luigi MORGANO, Constance LE GRIP, Mady DELVAUX

Proposal for a directive
Recital 37 a (new)

(37 a) The creative sector contributes significantly both economically and culturally to the strength of the Union, and the importance of the sector has long been recognised by European Union legislation including Directive 2001/29/EC, which aims to guarantee a framework wherein the exploitation of works or other protected subject-matter can take place. The difficulties faced by rightholders when seeking to license their rights to certain online services and to receive remuneration for the online distribution of their works or other subject matter risk undermining that aim. To uphold a high level of protection that enables the creative sectors to continue to contribute culturally and economically to the Union it is necessary to ensure that legal certainty is provided both for rightholders and users of protected works or other subject-matter and that rightholders are able to negotiate copyright licenses with user – uploaded content services that distribute their content.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
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.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Virginie ROZIÈRE, Mary HONEYBALL, Christian EHLER, Robert ROCHEFORT, Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Pervenche BERÈS, Milan ZVER, Christine REVAULT D'ALLONNES BONNEFOY, Giorgos GRAMMATIKAKIS, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Luigi MORGANO, Constance LE GRIP

Proposal for a directive
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.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1

Where information society service providers store and provide access to the public to significant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, therebyfore going beyond the mere provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public as well as an act of reproduction, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholderes that request such agreements, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . _________________ 34 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).

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2

In respect of Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider plays an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the ~~uploaded works or subject-matter~~content provided by the service or promoting ~~them~~such content, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefor.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3

In order to ensure the functioning of any licensing agreement, information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to ~~large~~significant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject- matter uploaded by their users should take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure protection of works or other subject-matter, such as implementing effective technologies. This obligation should also apply when the information society service providers ~~are~~, eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC, store and provide access to the public to significant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3 a (new)

For the implementation of such measures rightholders should provide the information society service providers with the necessary data to ensure the proper functioning of the measures they deployed. Rightholders should also provide due justification for the rights they claim.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 39

(39) Collaboration between information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to ~~large~~significant 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 should provide the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content and the services should 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. Given the requirements under this Directive in terms of agreements and cooperation between information society service providers and rightholders, it is necessary to provide an intermediary procedure for parties to seek an amicable solution to any dispute regarding the relevant provisions thereof. Members States should support such a mechanism by designating an impartial body with relevant experience and competence to assist the parties in the resolution of their dispute.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2

~~(2) ‘text and data mining’ means any automated analytical technique aiming to analyse text and data in digital form in order to generate information such as patterns, trends and correlations;~~deleted

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4 a (new)

(4a) 'significant amount' means fairly large in quantity or relevant in quality in the sense of importance of the uploaded copyright protected works for the creative sector or the users;

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Andrzej GRZYB

Proposal for a directive
Article 3

Text and data mining 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 text and data mining of works or other subject-matter to which they have lawful access for the purposes of scientific research. 2. Any contractual provision contrary to the exception provided for in paragraph 1 shall be unenforceable. 3. Rightholders shall be allowed to apply measures to ensure the security and integrity of the networks and databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted. Such measures shall not go beyond what is necessary to achieve that objective. 4. Member States shall encourage rightholders and research organisations to define commonly-agreed best practices concerning the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 3.Article 3 deleted

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – title

Protection of press publications ~~concerning digital uses~~

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Andrzej GRZYB

Proposal for a directive
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 ~~digital~~ use of their press publications.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Ivo BELET, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marc TARABELLA, Hannu TAKKULA, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Constance LE GRIP

Proposal for a directive
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.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – title

Use of protected content by information society service providers storing and giving access to ~~large amounts of~~significant amounts of copyright protected works and other subject-matter uploaded by their users

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1

1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to ~~large~~significant amounts of copyright-protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall~~, in cooperation~~ enter into fair licensing agreements with any requesting rightholder of such works or other subject matter. Under the terms of such agreements concluded with the rightholders, such information society service providers shall take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or. Where information society service providers are eligible to the liability exemption provided for in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC but store and provide access to the public to significant amounts of copyright-protected works or other subject matter, such information society service providers shall take measures 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.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Rightholders shall provide the information society service providers with the necessary data to ensure the proper functioning of the measures deployed by the providers in application of paragraph 1. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter .

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Any complaint filed under the mechanism referred to in paragraph 2 shall be dealt with by the relevant rightholder within a reasonable period of time and in an effective manner. The rightholder shall provide due justification for the rights it claims.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Member States shall provide that disputes between rightholders and information society service providers concerning the application of paragraph 1 of this Article may be submitted to an alternative dispute resolution mechanism. Member States shall create or designate an impartial body with relevant expertise to assist the parties in the resolution of their dispute under the mechanism provided for in the first subparagraph of this paragraph. No later than [date mentioned in Article 21(1)] Member States shall notify to the Commission the body referred to in second subparagraph of this paragraph.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
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. In cooperation with the Member States, the Commission shall encourage the exchange of best practices regarding the results of any cooperation established pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Member States shall implement proportionate and dissuasive remedies for non - compliance with the obligations set out in paragraph 1.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall ensure that authors and performers receive on a regular basis and taking into account the specificities of each sector, timely, adequate, accurate and sufficient information on the exploitation of their works and performances from those to whom they have licensed or transferred their rights, notably as regards modes of exploitation, modes of promotion, revenues generated and remuneration due.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1

Member States shall ensure that authors and performers or their representative organisations 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 compared to the subsequent relevant revenues and benefits derived from the exploitation of the works or performances.

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0280(COD)

Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Marc JOULAUD, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Marek PLURA

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Member States shall provide authors with a reversion right to enable them to terminate a contract when the other party fails to meet its obligation to exploit, to promote copyright-protected works or to pay the remuneration foreseen as well as when it does not meet its regular reporting duties as foreseen in Article 14(1).

2017/04/28
Committee: JURI

2016/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) This Directive should therefore provide for mandatory exceptions to the rights that are harmonised by Union law and are relevant for the uses and works covered by the Marrakesh Treaty. These include in particular the rights of reproduction, communication to the public, making available, distribution and lending, as provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC, Directive 2006/115/EC, and Directive 2009/24/EC, as well as the corresponding rights in Directive 96/9/EC. As the scope of exceptions and limitations required by the Marrakesh Treaty also includes works in audio form, like audiobooks, it is necessary that these exceptions also apply to related rights. The exercise of the exceptions provided for by this Directive is without prejudice to exceptions for persons with disabilities provided for by the Member States on the basis of point (b) of Article 5(3).

2017/01/30
Committee: CULT

2016/0278(COD)

Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Marc JOULAUD, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Marek PLURA

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)

By [date], Member States shall provide the Commission, on the basis of the information at their disposal, with a list of authorised entities established in their territories. Member States shall notify any changes to that list to the Commission without undue delay. The Commission shall publish that information and keep it up to date.

2017/01/30
Committee: CULT

2016/0151(COD)

Marc JOULAUD, Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21

Directive 2010/13/EU
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.

2016/10/27
Committee: CULT

2016/0151(COD)

Marc JOULAUD, Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, Louis MICHEL

Tadeusz ROSS, György SCHÖPFLIN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, József SZÁJER, Manfred WEBER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Is of the opinion that the elected President of the Commission should act more autonomously in the process of selecting the other Members of the Commission; calls upon the governments of the Member States to each propose a list of at least three candidates for the office of European Commissioner, allowing the elected President of the Commission to choose one of the candidates from that list; urges the newly elected President of the Commission to insist with the governments of the Member States that the list of candidates for the office of Commissioner must enable him to ensure the gender-balanced composition of the European Commission;deleted

2014/01/24
Committee: AFCO

2013/2130(INI)

Tadeusz ROSS, György SCHÖPFLIN, Tadeusz ZWIEFKA, József SZÁJER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Considers that, under the Treaties in force, the ~~solution to be adopted may involve the establishment of a rotation system of Commissioners with portfolio~~ composition of the Europeand Commission~~ers without portfolio, thus ensuring relativ~~ must ensure stability in the number and content of portfolios and guarantee~~ing~~ at the same time that the representation of the specificities and interests of all Member States i~~s well balanced in the Commission’s decision- making process; believes that, within this framework, Commissioners without portfolio should fully participate in the~~n order to balance the Commission's decision- making process ~~and could undertake representative duties for the Commission at European level~~;

2014/01/24
Committee: AFCO

2013/2119(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Deplores the lack of legal status ~~and legitimacy~~ of the EU Pilot and considers that ‘legitimacy can only be ensured by enabling transparency, participation of complainants and European Parliament in the EU Pilot and legality can be ensured through the adoption as soon as possible of a legally binding act containing the rules governing the whole pre-infringement and infringement procedure’ as stated in a recent Parliament study 4; considers that such a legally binding act should clarify the legal rights and obligations of individual complainants and the Commission, respectively, and should strive to allow participation of complainants into the EU Pilot, as far as possible, at least ensuring that they are informed of the different stages of the procedure; ___________________ 4 ‘Tools for Ensuring Implementation and Application of EU Law and Evaluation of their Effectiveness’, p. 13.

2014/01/08
Committee: JURI

2013/2119(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Reiterates, therefore, that Parliament is entitled to receive ‘detailed information on specific acts or provisions raising problems of transposition, as well as on the number of complaints for specific acts or provisions’ 5, and that, while ‘the Commission is entitled to refuse European Parliament access to personal data of the EU pilot data base’, Parliament is ‘entitled to request information in anonymous form in order to be fully aware of all relevant aspects in the implementation and application of Union law’ 6; notes ‘that the Commission already publishes much information in its annual report on monitoring the application of EU law’; ___________________ 5 Access to information about pre- infringement cases in the context of the EU Pilot and the annual report on the monitoring of the application of EU law’, p. 4 6 Access to information about pre- infringement cases in the context of the EU Pilot and the annual report on the monitoring of the application of EU law’, p. 4

2014/01/08
Committee: JURI

2013/2117(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Asks the Commission to consider cross-border mediation procedures in its next such exercise; encourages Member States to actively promote mediation procedures with special regard to commercial matters and to family matters regulated at EU level, such as Rome III and Brussels II;

2013/10/24
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas in the case of online music sales, licence-granting practices are ~~being viewed as an alternative~~complementary to the system of private copying levies;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that the private copying system is a virtuous system that balances the ~~right~~exception to copy~~ing~~ for private use with the right to fair remuneration to rightholders, and that it is a system worth preserving, especially in cases when rightholders are not in a position to license directly the reproduction right on multiple devices;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Recommends that, in the case of cross- border transactions, private copying levies be collected in the Member State in which the ~~product is placed on the market and that the product then be allowed to circulate freely in the internal market without being subject to additional levi~~final user resides;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
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 replace~~to complement their anti- piracy campaigns with ‘positive’ campaigns highlighting the benefits of private copying levies;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Points out that ~~private copying exemption arrangements~~contractual arrangements between services providers and right holders are increasingly enabling the licensing of the reproduction right, enableing consumers to ~~copy freely~~access their musical and audio-visual material from ~~one medium or type of multimedia material to another without the need to seek the authorisation of rightholders, provided that this is for private use~~several devices;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

~~21. Calls for the elimination of technical protection measures causing an imbalance between freedom to copy and fair remuneration for rightholders under private copying arrangements;~~deleted

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. ~~Observes that, despite permanent access to online works,~~In the view of downloading, storage and private copying for offline use ~~is continuing;~~ takes the view that a private copying levy system ~~cannot therefore be replaced by~~remains complementary to a licencing system;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Stresses that, as for online services, contractual authorisations can~~not~~ be ~~allowed to prevail to the detriment of private copying exception arrangement~~supplemented by private copying levies;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Calls on the Commission and Member States to examine the possibility of legalising works sharing for non- commercial purposes so as to guarantee consumers access to a wide variety of content and real choice in terms of cultural diversity;deleted

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2024(INI)