Activities of Sabine VERHEYEN related to 2023/2019(INI)
Opinions (1)
OPINION on the implementation of the 2018 Geo-blocking Regulation in the digital single market
Amendments (42)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas Parliament requested that the Commission carefully assess the possible inclusion of electronically supplied services whose main feature is the provision of access to and use of copyright protected works or other protected subject matter into the scope of the Geo-blocking Regulation; whereas the Commission report on the first short-term review of the Geo-blocking Regulation stated that, as regards audiovisual content, the Commission would engage in dialogue with stakeholders with a view to fostering the circulation of quality content across the EU; whereas this dialogue is included as Action 7 in the Media and Audiovisual Action Plan9 ; whereas each and every organisation of the audiovisual sector reminded the utmost importance of its territorial functioning throughout the whole stakeholder’s dialogue; __________________ 9 COM(2020)0784.
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas the film and audiovisual sector is of crucial importance audiovisual sector for the EU at both economic and cultural level; and whereas this sector is vital for safeguarding the EU’s cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism; whereas territorial and exclusive allocation of licensing rights and contractual freedom are sine qua non conditions for the proper functioning of the audiovisual sector in the EU;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Emphasises that investments in the production, the distribution and exhibition of films is a high-risk enterprise and that this investment is safeguarded through the ability to secure exclusivity of the film on a territorial basis;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the sector has a broad range of stakeholders many of which are SMEs, including a large number of highly innovative and creative independent production and, film distribution companies that producand cinemas that produce, distribute and showcase a wide variety of content across the EU;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the film and audiovisual sector is of crucial importance for the EU at both economic and cultural level; and whereas this sector is vital for safeguarding the EU's cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Emphasises the pragmatic and constant adaptation by the film and audiovisual sector in Europe to the cultural and economic realities of a Union comprising 27 countries, with diverse national and regional cultures, habits, market conditions and audience demand, require tailored approach to content development, production and distribution;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas territorial and exclusive allocation of licensing rights and contractual freedom are sine qua non conditions for the proper functioning of the audiovisual sector in the EU;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Notes that distributors and cinema operators work together to create markets for content in their respective territories with targeted marketing efforts taking into account cultural and linguistic specificities;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the Commission’s review shows that European consumers only have access to a smallwo Regulations already constitute an exception to territorial exclusivity of the audiovisual sector, such as the portability of a subscription to an online content service across Member States, as provided in Regulation (EU) 2017/1128, and the access to news and current affairs programmes and fully financed own proporductions of the total content made available online in the Union;broadcasting organisation across the European Union, as provided in Directive (EU) 2019/789, for which there was no appropriate evaluation to date. Whereas a report on the application of the Portability Regulation has been issued in June 2022 whereasby the number of consumers trying to access digital media content ofCommission’s services identified compliance issues by some VOD platforms that it undertook to investigate futher. Whereas no fered iback on other Member States is growing rapidly and a third of citizens have expressed interest in doing sose key investigation has been provided to the Parliament leaving the sector blind on the marge of maneuver left to increase the cross-border access of more content online;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises the key financing principles of the sector, notably the indispensable territorial and exclusive allocation of licensing rights and contractual freedom and notes that the film value chain is a closely connected eco-system; stresses that what happens online also has an impact on what happens offline; recalls that time exclusivity and territorial exclusivity are strongly interlinked;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the remaining untapped potential for cross-border economic activities that could be encouraged by the removal of all geo-blocking barriers and the continued promotion of the free movement of products and services in line with the principles of the Geo-blocking Regulation, except for the audiovisual and book sector, in compliance with Directive 2006/123/CE which excludes it from its scope (Article 2.2(g)) and with Article 167 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union which gives the cultural competence to Member States to ensure cultural diversity;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas citizens who have purchased digital media content and move to another Member State often faccess to an important quantity of audiovisual works in each Member State; whereas demand for cross border access to audiovisual works remains very low ind they can no longer access that content due to geo-blocking; EU and whereas accepting this request would put in jeopardy the entire european audiovisual sector, affecting de facto consumer’s access to diverse and highly cultural European audiovisual creations;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Welcomes the Council Conclusions (2021/C 501 I/02 & 7809/22) underling the importance of territorial exclusivity and exclusive licensing for the sustainability of the audiovisual sector;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the importance of the Geo-blocking Regulation in building a more robust, coherent and accessible internal market for all citizens and businesses in the EU, regardless of their place of residence or establishment; stresses that further steps need to be taken to achieve the full potential of the Regulation, including by strengthening the legal framework supporting the cross- border exchange of goods and services, lifting the principle of territorial exclusivity would be detrimental for the entire audiovisual sector but also for every EU citizen, since it could lead to an increase in prices for the public;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Emphasises that the current system of territorial exclusivity in sport helps maintaining content quality, offers and the sustainability in organising sport events, while ensuring the financing of grassroots sports and investment in talent promotion;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recalls the role of the EU Portability regulation in improving accessibility to film and audiovisual content when European residents travel abroad;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the inclusion of audiovisual services in the scope of the Geo-blocking Regulation would result in a significant loss of revenue, putting investment in new content at risk, while eroding contractual freedom and reducing cultural diversity in both content production and distribution,and distribution and exhibition; emphasises that such inclusion would result in fewer distribution channels, ultimately driving up the prices for consumers;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas citizens living in border regions or belonging to linguistic minorities alre often prevented from accessing content in their native languages due to geo-blocking, which hinders theirady have access to news and current affairs programmes and fully financed own production of the broadcasting organisation acceross to and enjoyment of cultural contenthe EU, as provided in Directive (EU) 2019/789;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Highlights that recent European Audiovisual Observatory Data proves the market is delivering increasing number of European films to audiences across Europe; this surge in availability proves the business model of territorial exclusivity is ensuring an abundance of films and that the continued exclusion of audiovisual services from the scope of the regulation remains fit for purpose;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas Parliament called for these issues to be addressed in its resolution of 13 November 2018 on minimum standards for minorities in the EU; whereas the ‘Minority SafePack’ European Citizens’ Initiative called for these issues to be addressed through the development of a unitary European copyright that will lead to the abolition of licensing barriers within the Unthe Commission’s first short-term review of Regulation (EU) 2018/302 (the Geo-blocking Regulation) upholds the continued exclusion of audiovisual services from the scope of the regulation;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Recalls that, as indicated by the Commission report on the first short-term review of the Geo-blocking Regulation of November 2020, geo-blocking in the book sector does not constitute a concern for the vast majority of consumers, and the inclusion of ebooks in the scope of the Regulation would only have the effect of pushing out of the market many SMEs, strengthening the position of a few internet giants and bringing virtually no benefit to consumers;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises that the Commission carried out its first review prwo Regulations already constitute an exceptiorn to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, which means that changes to both consumer and trading behaviour triggered by the pandemic were therefore not reflected in the 2020 Commission report; recalls the changes in consumer habits and the rising preference for online services that were additionally strengthened by the COVID-19 pandemic; underlines, therefore, the need to draw further conclusions based on the new data in this area, as 12 % of EU businesses10 started or increased efforts to sell goods or services online due to theerritorial exclusivity of the audiovisual sector, such as the portability of a subscription to an online content service across Member States, as provided in Regulation (EU) 2017/1128, and the access to news and current affairs programmes and fully financed own productions of the broadcasting organisation across the European Union, as provided in Directive (EU) 2019/789, for which there was no appropriate evaluation to date except that the Commission carried out its first review prior to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic; __________________ 10 Eurostat, ‘Online sales efforts on the rise due to the pandemic’, 11 April 2022.
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas Directive 2006/123/CE excludes from its scope “audiovisual services, including cinematographic services, whatever their mode of production, distribution and transmission” (Article 2.2(g)) in compliance with Article 167 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Considers that the report by the Commission’s services on the application of the Portability Regulation issued in June 2022 identified compliance issues by some VOD platforms that it undertook to investigate further; considers that no feedback on these key investigation has been provided to the Parliament leaving the sector blind on the marge of maneuver left to increase the cross-border access of more content online; underlines, therefore, the need to draw conclusions based on the new data in this area;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the Commission organised a stakeholder dialogue to find solutions for these issues, but no significant agreements were reached and the proposals put forward would not adequately address the geo-blocking of digital media contentduring which each and every trade organization of the audiovisual sector reminded the upmost importance of its territorial functioning;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas persistent barriers to accessing to digital media content, such asjeopardising the territoriality of the audiovisual sector could lead to an increase in price,s fragmentation, geo-blocking and the unavailability of dubbing or subtitles force citizens to resort to piracy in order to access content; or spectators, in particular the price of a cinema ticket and of a subscription to an online content service. It would have several consequences: it would encourage citizens to resort to piracy in order to access content and would be detrimental to the EU consumers particularly in countries where they have smaller purchasing powers. Furthermore, lifting territoriality would lead to an uniformisation of the works linked to the concentration of distribution methods;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to rapidly creevaluate the legal and regulatory conditions to guarantee the freedom to provide digital media content services and to ensure the dissemination and reception of digital media content from regions where minorities live, so that they can watch and listen to content in their mother tongue without geo-blocking of this content if it is broadcast or provided from another countrybenefits regulations Regulation (EU) 2017/1128 and Directive (EU) 2019/789 have on consumer ’s and linguistic minorities' access to audiovisual content;
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 1 – point 1 (new)
(1) Recalls that territoriality is the foundation of the European audiovisual sector, which enables cultural and linguistic diversity;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. RExcept for the audiovisual and book sectors that do follow cultural goals, recommends a broader and more detailed analysis to address concerns regarding the selective distribution and exclusive rights agreements that undermine the right of passive sale and competition in online and offline products and services distribution channels;
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. CRecalls on the Commission to investigatethere are already ways of granting citizens access to the public media platforms of the Member State whose citizenship they hold, regardless of where they residenews and current affairs of public media platforms regardless of where they reside thanks to Directive (EU) 2019/789;
Amendment 79 #
2b. Calls on the Commission to start researches on the discoverability of European works online, in order to initiate reflections on the role of recommendation algorithms in the cultural sector, on the transparency of these algorithms, and to propose courses of action, notably in terms of standardization, metadata provision, interoperability and tools to facilitate public access;
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. CRecalls onthat the Commission to guarantee citizens’ long-term access to the digital media content they have purchased, regardless of where that content was purchasedcurrent system of exclusive territorial licensing ensures the sustainable financing of films and audiovisual content, and is crucial to ensuring both content diversity and a wide range of distribution business models, which ultimately benefit EU citizens;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recalls that, according to Article 1(5) of the Regulation, it should not affect copyright law; emphasises that Parliament requested, in line with the review clause of the Regulation, that the Commission assess whethered that the Regulation should alsonot apply to electronically supplied services whose main feature is the provision of access to and use of copyright protected works or other protected subject matter, including the selling of copyright protected works or protected subject matter in an intangible form, provided thateven if the trader has the requisite rights for the relevant territories11 ; __________________ 11 European Commission, ‘Study on the impacts of the extension of the scope of the geo-blocking regulation to audiovisual and non-audiovisual services giving access to copyright protected content’, 2020.
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the progress made in terms of the cross-catalogue availability of music, e-book, video game and software products and services, both in subscription and transaction-based models; regrets the limited improvements regarding the cross- catalogue availability of video content and live sports events, which contribute to consumers’ perception that the audiovisual services sector is applying the highest level of geo-blocking; points out that the financing of audiovisual and cinematographic works involves such large sums that it is necessary to maintain its territorial functioning;
Amendment 85 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission to use the Creative Europe MEDIA programme to fund a selection of emblematic European films to be made available online in all countries and languages, with an appropriate promotional campaign to ensure that the works reach their audiences. Calls on the Commission to fund more projects for dubbing and subtitling audiovisual works through Creative Europe MEDIA programme, and to work towards improving access to cinematic heritage works;
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Recalls the importance of supporting a policy of European co- productions, reflecting the richness and diversity of European culture, and the importance of strengthening the international distribution of works;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14 b. Recalls the importance of supporting a policy of European co- productions, reflecting the richness and diversity of European culture, and the importance of strengthening the international distribution of works;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes the popularity of different tools among consumers usedre is different legislative tools that exist which constitute an exception to avoid geo- blocking restrictions, especially for audiovisual content, such as the portability of a subscription to an online content service across Member States, as provided in Regulation (EU) 2017/1128, and the access to news and current affairs programmes and to fully financed own productions of the broadcasting organisation across the European Union, as provided in Directive (EU) 2019/789; considers it important to recognise that the steady modernisation and adaptation of the audiovisual services sector to new consumer expectations might be more effective than undermining the effective use of such tools;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Recognizes that citizens have access to an important quantity of audiovisual works and ebooks in each Member State; whereas demand for cross border access to audiovisual works and ebooks remains very low in the EU and whereas accepting this request EU would put in jeopardy the entire audiovisual and book sectors, affecting de facto consumer’s access to diverse and highly cultural European creations;
Amendment 100 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to prohibit geo-blocking by digital media content platforms and ban restrictions by rights-holders on passive sales of individual content or subscriponsiders that the inclusion of audiovisual services in the scope of the Geo-blocking Regulation would result in a significant loss of revenue, putting investment in new content at risk, while eroding contractual freedom and reducing cultural diversity in both content production and distributions;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15 b. Calls on the Commission to start researches on the discoverability of European works online, in order to initiate reflections on the role of recommendation algorithms in the cultural sector, on the transparency of these algorithms, and to propose courses of action, notably in terms of standardization, metadata provision, interoperability and tools to facilitate public access;
Amendment 106 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the current model for media licensing is incompatible with the trend away from television and radinclusion of the audiovisual sector in the scope of the Geoblocking Regulation is incompatible with the production of diverse audiovisual content and could trigger a chain of negative effects for the creation, financing, production and towards on-demand content; calls on the Commission todistribution of films and audiovisual content in the mid to long term, thus potentially damaging cultural diversity and a whole value chain that revliew the Union’s approach to media licensings entirely on the principle of territorial exclusivity.