BETA

20 Amendments of Catherine SOULLIE related to 2009/2158(INI)

Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the European digital library should be more than a digital collection with information management tools, but should rather embrace the development of a whole range of technical capacities and resources for the creation, research and use of information,
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas account must be taken of the rapid development of new technologies with resulting changes in cultural practices, and of existing digitisation projects outside Europe, such as Google Books and the results of the settlement of its case in the United States of America,
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas there is, consequently, an urgent need for Member States to step up their efforts, join forces and equip themselves with the requisite means to maintain and encourage their contribution to Europeana so as to raise Europe’s profile in the world,
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas only a tiny part of European cultural heritage has been digitised so far, Member States are progressing at different speeds, and public funding allocated to mass digitisation is insufficient; whereas Member States should step up their efforts to speed up the process of digitising public and private works,
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
I. whereas urgent efforts are needed to solve the issue of a "digital black hole" with regard to 20th and 21st century content, where works of high cultural value are languishing unused; whereas any solution must take proper account of the interests of all parties involved; whereas, notably, a two-tier protection system must not be created through the presumption that no rightholders exist,
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas any protected or disclosed work for which, despite a documented and serious search being made, one or more copyright holders or holders of related rights cannot be identified or located should be considered an orphan work,
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. States that the primary role of the Europeana digital library should be to protect European cultural heritage so that future generations may be able to put together a collective European memory and more fragile documents may be protected from the damage caused by constant use;
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that the European digital library, being available to everyone from afar, constitutes a tool for the democratisation of culture and will therefore allow a very wide section of the public to access rare or old documents in Europe’s heritage whose conservation renders their consultation difficult;
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Urges the Commission and Member States to take all necessary steps to avoid a knowledge gap between Europe and the United States of Americanon- Community countries and to ensure full access for Europeans to their own cultural heritage;
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Encourages content providers to increase the diversity of the types of content for Europeana, especially audio and video content, paying special attention to those works which deteriorate easily, while respecting intellectual property rights, especially authors and performers' rights; stresses, in this regard, the importance of respecting moral rights in order to protect the integrity of the work, and avoid any possible changes (censorship, alterations to works, etc.);
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Acknowledges that Europeana’s success depends mainly on appropriate copyright protection and on prior authorisation by, and the remuneration of, publishers and authors for the content they have agreed to provide via Europeana as well as the sums they have invested in producing and disseminating said content;
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Stresses that the digital library must not depart from its prime objective, namely to ensure that the dissemination of knowledge on the Internet is not left to private commercial firms, in order that the digitisation of works does not equate to a stranglehold on Europe’s public heritage that results in the public domain being privatised;
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Recalls that as regards works not in the public domain, the European digital library is duty bound to maintain the limitations and exceptions to intellectual property without impeding people’s ability to access knowledge;
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses that solutions should be found for Europeana also to offer in-copyright as well as out-of-print and orphan works with a sector-by-sector approach, while complying with laws governing intellectual property; believes that srecognises in this regard the essential role of collective management in ensuring users have legal certainty and that rightholders’ interests are respected. Solutions such as extended collective licensing or other collective management practices could be favoured;
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Favours a balanced Europe-wide solution for digitising and disseminating orphan works, starting by clearly defining them, establishing common standards (including that of due diligence applied in searching for their owners in the country in which the works were originally published), and resolving the issue of potential copyright infringement when orphan works are used;
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Recalls that Europeana must be able to benefit from agreements signed with other libraries under public-private partnerships and that said libraries must therefore be provided with a physical copy of the files already digitised;
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses that, in order to meet the high costs of digitisation and time pressures, new methods of financing must be developed, such as public-private partnerships on the basis of well- understood conditions and common guidelines, ensuring digitised files will be freely available to libraries with no time limits;
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Recalls that the involvement of private partners in the digitisation process must not lead to the creation of private monopolies, which would threaten cultural diversity and pluralism, and that compliance with the rules of competition is a prerequisite to the involvement of private companies;
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 c (new)
18c. Points out that the digitisation of works in national libraries is the fruit of the financial investment of taxpayers via payment of their taxes; stresses, therefore, that public-private partnership contracts must stipulate that the copy of the work digitised by the private half of the partnership on behalf of the library may be indexed by all search engines, so that it may be consulted on the library’s website and not solely on the website of the partner private company;
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Stresses that sponsorship is an interesting alternative for Europeana insofar as it offers an opportunity to fund not just digitisation activities but also the management of copyright payments for out-of-print, orphan and copyrighted works, as well as putting them online;
2010/01/13
Committee: CULT