BETA

Activities of Emma McCLARKIN related to 2014/2151(INI)

Shadow opinions (1)

OPINION on ‘Towards a renewed consensus on the enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: an EU action plan’
2016/11/22
Committee: CULT
Dossiers: 2014/2151(INI)
Documents: PDF(149 KB) DOC(180 KB)

Amendments (16)

Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Welcomes the EU Action Plan on the enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and particularly emphasises and supports the application of due diligence throughout the supply chain, the ‘follow the money’ approach, the improvement of IP civil enforcement procedures for SMEs, the targeted communication campaign and the focus on commercial scale IPR infringements;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Notes that according to the Commission, the cultural and creative sectors, often IPR intensive, already account for up to 4.5% of GDP and up to 8.5 million jobs in the European Union and are not only essential for cultural diversity but also significantly contribute to social and economic development;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that the key objective of the aAction pPlan should be to ensure that future measures taken toe effective enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) are not based solely on data provided by the industry, in particular in the cultural and creative sectors, but on precise, unbiased data documenting IPR infringements; emphasises that the duty of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) to generate reliable data which allow an analysis of the real impact of infringements on the industry should be part of the ten-point action planwhich plays a key role in stimulating innovation, creativity, competitiveness, growth and cultural diversity;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that while data on the number and type of intellectual property rights in existence is relatively easy to collect and analyse, studies on the scope and scale of IP infringements and their relation to criminality have been more difficult; to this end emphasises the important role played by the European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights in providing data, tools and databases to support the fight against IP infringement;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that in a time of financial crisis when funding for culture suffers from severe cuts, IPR enforcement is often a primary source of revenue for artists and creators; stresses therefore that attaining and safeguarding a fair remuneration for artists, creators and right holders should be one of the key objectives of the Action Plan;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Stresses the importance of ensuring the application of due diligence throughout the supply chain, including the digital supply chain and all the key actors and operators in it, such as creators, artists and right holders, producers, intermediaries, internet service providers, online sales platforms, end users and public authorities;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Emphasises the importance of improving IP civil enforcement procedures for SMEs and individual creators, as they play a key role in the creative and cultural sectors and often do not have the capacity to enforce their rights given the complexity, cost and length of such procedures;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)
1e. Supports the launching of targeted communication campaigns to raise awareness on the economic and potential health and safety risks associated with commercial scale IPR infringements, particularly amongst the younger generations growing up in the digital era;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that in the interests of innovation, creativity and competitiveness, it is crucial that the IPR infrastructure is transparent and that full information is available to the public and to all other actors concernedo achieve a meaningful enforcement of IPR through a fully transparent, holistic, balanced and flexible system that can react rapidly to the evolving challenges that face the EU knowledge economy in the digital era;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Takes account of the need for a stable and harmonised framework for the enforcement of IPR and recalls that the current legal framework constitutes no impediment to the development of multi- territory licensing systems; to this end encourages the Commission to take note of the European unitary patent and the current revision of the trademark regulation as well as the high fragmentation of cultural and creative markets along cultural and linguistic lines;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses in particular that in order to achieve a meaningful enforcement of IPR, full information should include a clear indication of the type of IPR (for example patent, trademark, copyright), the status of its validity identity of the owners and where relevandt the identity of the ownersstatus of its validity;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises that in order to stimulate innovation and competitiveness in knowledge-based sectors in the Union, IPR enforcement should not prevent opengoes hand in hand with the promotion of research and knowledge sharing, which are also identified as key elements in the ‘Global Europe’ and ‘Europe 2020’ strategies;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Emphasises the need for preventive measures and precise detection systems that lead to the swift interruption of commercial scale IPR infringing activities;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that potential health and safety risks of marketed goods are a very serious issue; stresses in this context that the quality of a product is a diffeStresses that IPR infringing products not only cause the direct loss of revenue to legitimate businesses but also lead to direct and indirenct issue from the status of IPR and whether there has been an infringement, and thus should be dealt with separately.job losses, to reputational damage and to increased enforcement costs whilst often having links to organised crime and posing potential health and safety risks;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Recalls that several other issues of IPR enforcement not included in the Action Plan were identified in the consultation process on the civil enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights carried out by the Commission from 2012-2013, including the difficulties in identifying infringers and alleged infringers, the role of intermediaries in assisting the fight against IPR infringements and the attribution of damages in IPR disputes; thus recalls that the Action Plan is only a starting point in securing the enforcement of IPR;
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Calls on the Commission to consider all possible options to address the enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, including the proposal of more concrete legislative actions.
2015/01/26
Committee: CULT