BETA

23 Amendments of Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI related to 2016/0280(COD)

Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
(15) While distance learning and cross- border education programmes are mostly developed at higher education level, digital tools and resources are increasingly used at all education levels, in particular to improve and enrich the learning experience. The exception or limitation provided for in this Directive should therefore benefit all educational establishments in primary, secondary, vocational and higher education, as well as organizations such as libraries and other cultural heritage institutions providing non-formal education to the extent they pursue their educational activity for a non- commercial purpose. The organisational structure and the means of funding of an educational establishment are not the decisive factors to determine the non- commercial nature of the activity.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 424 #
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 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, s. Such as implementing effective technologiesmeasures should respect users' rights and process personal data according to Directive 95/46/EC and the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council (General Data Protection Regulation) . 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.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 446 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
(39) Collaboration between information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to large 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.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 495 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. Except in the cases referred to in Article 6, this Directive shall leave intact and shall in no way affect existing rules laid down in the Directives currently in force in this area, in particular Directives 96/9/EC, 2000/31/EC, 2001/29/EC, 2006/115/EC, 2009/24/EC, 2012/28/EU and 2014/26/EU.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 496 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The processing of personal data carried out within the framework of this Directive shall be subject to Directive 95/46/EC and the General Data Protection Regulation.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 511 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
(2) 'text and data mining' means any automated analytical technique aiming to analyse text and datawhich analyses works and other subject matter in digital form in order to generate information such as, including, but not limited to, patterns, trends and correlations;.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 543 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Articles 2, 3 and 4 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 researchas long as the body performing these acts has lawful access.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 555 #
3. Rightholders shall not 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.prevent or to hinder beneficiaries from benefiting from the exception provided in paragraph 1
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 561 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall encourage rightholders and research organisationbeneficiaries to define commonly-agreed best practices concerning the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 3.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 580 #
Proposal for a directive
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 for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching or scientific research, to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved, provided that the use:
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 591 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) takes place on the premises of an educational establishment or other educational venue, such as cultural heritage institutions, or through a secure electronic network accessible only by the educational establishment's pupils or students and teaching staff;
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 617 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Member States availing themselves of the provision of the first subparagraph shall take the necessary measures to ensure appropriate availability and visibility of the licences authorising the acts described in paragraph 1 for educational establishments and cultural heritage institutions.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 643 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 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, Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive, permitting cultural heritage institutions or educational facilities, to make copies of any works or other subject-matter that are permanently in their collections, in any format or medium, for the sole purpose of the preservation of such works or other subject-matter and to the extent necessary for such preservation.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 651 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall recognise that once a work is in the public domain because the copyright and other related rights therein have expired or never existed, accurate reproductions in full or in part of that work shall not be subject to copyright or related rights.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 668 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights to use photographs, video footage or other images of works permanently placed in public spaces.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 693 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Member States shall provide for exceptions to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Article 5(a) and Article 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 cultural heritage institutions to make copies of out-of-commerce works that are permanently located in their collections publicly available for non-commercial purposes on their websites, provided that the name of the author or another identifiable rightholder is indicated, unless such indication turns out to be impossible.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 812 #
Proposal for a directive
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 with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or either conclude agreements with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter and take measures, in cooperation with rightholders, to ensure the functioning of such agreements or 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 recogni referred to in the first sentence shall be appropriate and proportion atechnologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate and shall respect users' rights and process personal data according to Directive 95/46/EC and the General Data Protection Regulation. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of those measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matteruse of the works and other subject- matter. This paragraph shall cover all the service providers which play an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-matter or promoting them, and that are therefore not covered by Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 863 #
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.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 893 #
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, adequccurate 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, revenues generated and remuneration due.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 901 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The obligation in paragraph 1 shall be proportionate and effective and shall ensure an appropriate level of transparency in every sector. However, in those cases where the administrative burden resulting from the obligation would be disproportionate in view of the revenues generated by the exploitation of the work or performance, Member States may adjust the obligation in paragraph 1, provided that the obligation remains effective and ensures an appropriate level of transparency.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 909 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. Member States may decide that the obligation in paragraph 1 does not apply when the contribution of the author or performer is not significant having regard to the overall work or performance.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 945 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that authors and performers are entitled to request additional, proportionate and 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
Amendment 961 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a Member States shall ensure that contracts include a rights reversion mechanism, allowing authors to terminate a contract in cases of unsatisfactory promotion, remuneration or lack of transparency.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI