31 Amendments of Philippe JUVIN related to 2016/0280(COD)
Amendment 99 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
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 newis 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 toapplies only to the mining of texts and data for non- commercial purposes. In order not to prejudice the normal exploitation of their works in the interests of developing the mining of texts 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, rightholders should be allowed to develop licences on the market and receive remuneration. The flexibility of the contractual solutions should also make it possible to take into account the diversity of the mining acts carried out and their purpose.
Amendment 115 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The exception or limitation should cover digital uses of works and other subject-matter such as the use of parts or extracts of works to support, enrich or complement the teaching, including the related learning activities. The use of the works or other subject-matter or extracts under the exception or limitation should be only in the context of teaching and learning activities carried out under the responsibility of educational establishments, including during examinations, and be limited to what is necessary for the purpose of such activities. Thus, for example, the exception should be limited to the use of brief extracts for intellectual works, except in the case of plays and poems. The exception or limitation should cover both uses through digital means in the classroom and online uses through the educational establishment's secure electronic network, the access to which should be protected, notably by authentication procedures. The exception or limitation should be understood as covering the specific accessibility needs of persons with a disability in the context of illustration for teaching.
Amendment 139 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Different arrangements, based on the implementation of the exception provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC or on licensing agreements covering further uses, are in place in a number of Member States in order to facilitate educational uses of works and other subject-matter. Such arrangements have usually been developed taking account of the needs of educational establishments and different levels of education. Whereas it is essential to harmonise the scope of the new mandatory exception or limitation in relation to digital uses and cross-border teaching activities, the modalities of implementation may differ from a Member State to another, to the extent they do not hamper the effective application of the exception or limitation or cross-border uses. This should allow Member States to build on the existing arrangements concluded at national level. In particular, Member States could decide to subject the application of the exception or limitation, fully or partially, to the availability of adequate licences, covering at least the same uses as those allowed under the exception. This mechanism wshould, for example, allow giving precedence to licences f not, on the other hand, apply to sheet music or materials which are primarily intended for the educational market, for which it should be possible to arrange licences. In order to avoid that such mechanism results in legal uncertainty or administrative burden for educational establishments, Member States adopting this approach should take concrete measures to ensure that licensing schemes allowing digital uses of works or other subject-matter for the purpose of illustration for teaching are easily available and that educational establishments are aware of the existence of such licensing schemes.
Amendment 160 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Member States should,This directive is based on specific solutions developed by Member States in order to deal within the framework provided for in this Directive, have flexibility in choosing the specific type of mechanism allowing for licences fissues raised by mass digitisation through systems for out- of-commerce works. Such solutions take into account the specific characteristics of the various types of work out-of-commerce works to extend tor other subject- matter and of the various users; they are devised on the basis of consensus between the stakeholders. This Directive also embodies the prights of rightholders that are not represented by the collective management organisation,nciples informing the Memorandum of Understanding on Key Principles on the Digitisation and Making Available of Out-of-Commerce Works, signed on 20 September 2011 by representatives of European libraries, authors, publishers and collective management organisations under the aegis of the Commission. Member States should have a certain margin of discretion to choose the specific type of arrangement in accordance towith their legal traditions, practices or circumstances. Such mechanisms can include extended collective licensing, legal mandates and presumptions of representation.
Amendment 240 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Where information society service providers store and provide access to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, thereby going beyond the mere provision of physical facilities andinstallations and thus performing an act of communication to the public and/or making available to the public, as well as an act of reproduction, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholders who so request, 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).
Amendment 251 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
In respect ofthe interests of ensuring legal certainty for users of services, these agreements should cover the liability of the latter when they are not acting professionally for acts falling under Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC that they perform. In respect of this Article 14, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider plays an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-mattercontent provided by the service or promoting themat content, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefor.
Amendment 276 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) Collaboration between information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to largesignificant 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.
Amendment 282 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 a (new)
Recital 39 a (new)
(39 a) In view of the requirements imposed by this directive regarding contracts and cooperation between information society service providers and rightholders, it is necessary to provide for an intermediate procedure which will permit the parties to seek an amicable solution to any dispute concerning the relevant provisions of this directive. Member 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.
Amendment 283 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 b (new)
Recital 39 b (new)
(39 b) It should be recalled that, both in general and in the light of the references to Article 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC made in this directive, a work and/or other subject-matter is communicated to the public and/or made available to the public when a natural or legal person affords access to it to persons outside their normal family circle or most immediate associates. For this purpose it makes no difference that the latter can gain access to the works and/or other subject-matter at the same place or in different places and at the same time or at different times.
Amendment 293 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41 a) Authors and performers very often receive no remuneration when their works or interpretations are exploited, especially through online services, and do not have the legal tools to enable them to receive such remuneration. This situation is particularly evident in the audiovisual sector and the bargaining power of the authors and performers of audiovisual works is significantly weakened as a result. Therefore, without prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in the Member States, a principle of fair remuneration should be put in place which is tailored to each mode of exploitation. Member States should be allowed great flexibility so that they can implement this remuneration in accordance with their legal traditions and national practices.
Amendment 319 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(4a) ‘lawful access’ means access to lawfully acquired content.
Amendment 327 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
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 thenon-commercial purposes of scientific research.
Amendment 346 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive in order to allow for the digital use of works and other subject- matter, or of extracts thereof, with the exception of content intended chiefly for the educational market and the market in musical scores, for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching, to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved, provided that the use:
Amendment 355 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) is limited to the duration justified for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching;
Amendment 361 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States may provide that the exception adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 does not apply generally or as regards specific types of works or other subject- matter, to the extent that adequate licences authorising the acts described in paragraph 1 are easily available in the market.
Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Member States mayshall provide for fair compensation for the harm incurred by the rightholders due to the use of their works or other subject-matter pursuant to paragraph 1.
Amendment 394 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Access to content permitted by an exception or limitation shall not give the beneficiary of the exception or limitation the right to use the content concerned in the context provided for by another exception or limitation. Article 5(5) and the first, third and fifth subparagraphs of Article 6(4) of Directive 2001/29/EC shall apply to the exceptions and the limitation provided for under this Title.
Amendment 396 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – title
Article 7 – title
Use of out-of-commerce works by cultural heritage institutions
Amendment 399 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall provide that when a collective management organisation, on behalf of its members, concludes a non-exclusive licence for non-commercial purposes with a cultural heritage institution, following consultations with representatives of rightholders, cultural heritage institutions and other users, a legal mechanism whereby exclusive or non-exclusive licences may be granted for the digitisation, distribution, communication to the public or making available of out-of-commerce works or other subject-matter permanently in the collections of the institution, such a non-exclusive licence may be extended or presumed to apply to rightholders of the same category as those covered by the licence who are not represented by the collective management organisations, provided that:
Amendment 401 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the collective management organisation is, on the basis of mandates from rightholders, broadly representative of rightholders in the category of works or other subject-matter and of the rights which are the subject of the licencorganisation responsible for granting licences is broadly representative of rightholders in accordance with the procedures laid down in the legislation of the Member State;
Amendment 403 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) all rightholders may at any time object to their works or other subject- matter being deemed to be out of commerce and exclude the application of the licence to their works or other subject- matter. This legal mechanism may take the form, in particular, of an extended collective licence, a legal mandate or a presumption.
Amendment 410 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
A work or other subject-matter shall be deemed to be out of commerce when the whole work or other subject-matter, in all its translations, versions and manifestations, is not available to the public through customary channels of commerce and cannot be reasonably expected to become so.
Amendment 412 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Member States shall ensure that the licences referred to in paragraph 1 are sought from a collective management organisation that is representative forin the Member State where:
Amendment 460 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – title
Article 13 – title
Use of protected content by information society service providers storing and giving access to large amounts of works andor other subject-matter uploaded by their users
Amendment 469 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject- matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperation conclude equitable agreements with all holders of rights to those works at the request of the rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided for in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC. Under the terms of the agreements concluded with the rightholders, the 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 to prev. The agreements should cover the liability of users of information society service providers whent the availability on their services ofse users are not acting professionally in respect of acts falling under Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/31/EC which they perform. When information society service providers (i) play an active part but are not required to conclude a licence agreement by the holders of rights to works or other subject- matter stored by them and to which they provide public access, or (ii) are eligible for the liability exemption provided for in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC, but store and provide to the public access to a large number of protected works or other subject-matter, these information society service providers shall take measures to prevent protected works or other subject- matter identified by rightholders through theolders in cooperation with the service providers from being made available by their services. 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. Rightholders shall provide information society service providers with all relevant and necessary details to ensure the functioning of measures taken by the service providers pursuant to this article.
Amendment 492 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 1. Any complaint filed under one of the mechanisms shall be processed by the relevant rightholder within a reasonable period of time. The rightholder shall provide evidence for the rights being claimed.
Amendment 504 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
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 across the Union regarding the results of any cooperation established pursuant to the implementation of paragraph 1.
Amendment 513 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13a 1. Member States shall provide that where an author of an audiovisual work transfers to a producer his right to authorise or prohibit the making available of that work to the public, he shall retain the right to obtain equitable remuneration for making such work available. 2. That right to equitable remuneration for making the work available shall be nontransferable and may not be renounced. 3. The management of that right to equitable remuneration for making the work available shall be equitable shall be entrusted to collective management organisations representing audiovisual authors, unless other collective agreements, including voluntary collective management agreements, already guarantee such remuneration for audiovisual authors. 4. Authors’ societies shall receive this equitable remuneration from the audiovisual media services which make the audiovisual works available to the public.
Amendment 541 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14a Fair and separate remuneration Member States shall ensure that authors and performers receive fair remuneration for each mode of exploitation of their protected works and other subject-matter.
Amendment 548 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that authors and performers 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.