BETA

8 Amendments of Csaba SÓGOR related to 2011/0167(NLE)

Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Reiterates that Europe needs an international agreement to step up the fight against counterfeit products as these products are causing billions of Euros of damage every year to European companies, thereby also putting European jobs at risk; notes that in addition, counterfeit products often do not fulfil European safety requirements, posing significant health hazards to consumers;
2012/05/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Notes that ACTA must fully respect Union law, especially the Charter and the data protection acquis; reiterates that it is important that ACTA is not open to any interpretation that could lead Member States to infringe the Charter when implementing provisions of ACTA and therefore calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure legal clarity in the provisions of ACTA;
2012/05/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Notes that concern has especially been raised on those provisions that leave room for flexibility in their implementation, on the basis that these provisions might be implemented in the Union in a manner that could be illegal or contrary to fundamental rights; considers that this is an unsubstantiated assumption which is contrary to the general principles of law and to the letter of ACTA itself as it explicitly requires that the optional or flexible provisions therein be implemented in compliance with fundamental rights and applicable domestic provisions; reiterates however that this does not justify ambiguities contained in ACTA;
2012/05/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Notes that despite the ambiguities that remain in ACTA, there is no evidence whatsoever, not even in the European Data Protection Supervisor's opinion on ACTA, that it goes contrary to Union law or that it violates fundamental rights and freedoms in any manner;
2012/05/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Emphasises that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) should not police the Internet and therefore calls on the Commission and the Council to ensure legal clarity on the role of ISPs under ACTA;
2012/05/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Considers that ACTA only targets large-scale infringement of intellectual property rights (IPRs), allowing for signatory states to exempt non- commercial use from its provisions on criminal enforcement procedures; notes, however, that it is unclear where to draw the line between commercial and non- commercial use; calls therefore on the Commission and on Member States to define the notion of infringement of IPRs on a commercial scale and to add legal clarity as to when Member States could impose criminal enforcement measures on internet users;
2012/05/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that when fundamental rights are at stake ambiguity must be avoided and at the least reduced to a minimum; moreover, and without assigning any wrongful intentions ("procès d'intention") to the ACTA implementation measures, takes the view that in the current state of affairs precaution should be exercised as regards ACTA in the light of the serious and remainingthe remaining serious question- marks surrounding the balance reached within the agreement between IPRs and other core fundamental rights and its level of legal certainty. need to be addressed;
2012/05/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Calls therefore on the Commission and on Member States to provide solutions for the concerns identified in this opinion, so as to address ambiguities in ACTA and ensure that the strict observance of fundamental rights and freedoms is clearly guaranteed;
2012/05/21
Committee: LIBE