Activites

• 2004/04/30 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Directive 2004/48
  • OJ L 195 02.06.2004, p. 0016-0025
• 2004/04/30 Final act signed
• 2004/04/29 End of procedure in Parliament
• #2578
• 2004/04/26 Council Meeting
• 2004/04/26 Act adopted by Council after Parliament's 1st reading
• #2570
• 2004/03/11 Council Meeting
• 2004/03/09 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
  • T5-0147/2004 summary

    The European Parliament adopted a resolution based on the draft by Janelly FOURTOU (EPP-ED, F). The resolution was adopted by 330 votes in favour, 151 against and 39 abstentions. Parliament welcomed a compromise agreement with the Council, which means that the Directive can be adopted before the European elections. The main amendments are as follows: -the measures and procedures outlined in the Directive should apply to all violations of intellectual property rights covered by Community legislation and/or the national legislation of the Member State concerned; -for the purposes of the directive, the term "intellectual property rights" includes industrial property rights; -the main enforcement measures need to be applied only in respect of acts committed on a commercial scale. The latter are those carried out for direct or indirect economic or commercial advantage; this would normally exclude acts done by end consumers acting in good faith. Private individuals who download music or films for their personal use will not be targeted; -measures and remedies provided for in the Directive should be determined on a case by case basis, taking into account the specific features of each intellectual property right as well as the intentional or unintentional character of the infringement. -the main enforcement measures mentioned above, that are applied in respect of acts committed on a commercial scale, concern elements of proof (Article 7), the right to information (Article 9) and provisional measures such as court orders and seizures (Article 10.). The text adopted provides that remedies available to right holders consist in the destruction, recall or permanent withdrawal from the market, as well as financial compensation and interest. Information rights permit judges to order certain persons to reveal details of anyone having participated in the distribution of illegal goods and services, as well as details regarding quantities and prices; -Parliament adopted amendments regarding persons authorised to bring proceedings, the presumption of ownership of copyright, and the award of legal costs; -with regard to obtaining and protecting evidence, Parliament stated that the procedures must have regard to the rights of the defence and must provide the necessary guarantees including the protection of confidential information. For infringements carried out on a commercial scale it is also important that the courts may order access, where appropriate, to banking, financial or commercial documents under the control of the alleged infringer; -where the evidence-protection measures have been revoked, or where they lapse due to any act or omission by the applicant, or where it is subsequently found that there has been no infringement or threat of infringement of any intellectual property right, the judicial authorities shall have the authority to order the applicant, upon request of the defendant, to provide the defendant with appropriate compensation for any injury caused by these measures; -Member States may take measures to protect witnesses' identity; -in addition to the civil and administrative measures and procedures provided for under the directive, criminal sanctions also constitute, in appropriate cases, a means of ensuring the enforcement of intellectual property rights. The directive does not oblige governments to launch criminal proceedings overinfringement of intellectual property rights as originally drafted by the European Commission. Parliament limited the scope to administrative and civil action alone. However, the Directive will not affect any national provisions in Member States on criminal penalties for IPR infringement, nor will it affect Member States' international obligations, including those relating to criminal procedures and penalties. Remedies under this directive must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive; -finally, the date of transposition will be 24 months after the entry into force of the directive rather than 18 months.�

• 2003/11/27 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • A5-0468/2003
• #X019
• 2003/11/10 Council Meeting
• 2003/03/10 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• #2490
• 2003/03/03 Council Meeting
  • 2490
• 2003/01/30 Legislative proposal published
  • COM(2003)0046 summary

    PURPOSE : to harmonise the legislation of the Member States on the means of enforcing intellectual property rights in the Internal Market and to establish a general framework for the exchange of information and administrative cooperation. CONTENT : the protection of intellectual property rights is an essential element for the success of the internal market. The protection of intellectual property is important not only for promoting innovation and creativity but also for developing employment and improving competitiveness. The means of enforcing these rights are of paramount importance for the success of the single market. In the Member States, and despite the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement, there are still major disparities as regards the means of enforcing intellectual property rights. For instance the arrangements for applying provisional measures, which are used in particular to safeguard evidence, the calculation of damages, or the arrangements for applying injunctions, vary widely from one Member State to another. In some Member States, there are no measures and procedures such as the right of information and recall, at the infringers' expense, of the goods placed on the market. The current disparities also lead to a weakening of the substantive law on intellectual property and to a fragmentation of the internal market in this field. The main provisions of this proposal are as follows: - the scope of the directive is defined as widely as possible in order to encompass all the intellectual property rights covered by Community provisions in this field; - the measures and procedures will be such as to remove from those responsible for an infringement the economic benefits of that infringement; - the persons entitled to apply for an application of the measures and procedures are first and foremost the right holders and their representatives. Member States must also provide for rights management or professional defence bodies to be entitled to apply for the application of the measures and to initiate legal proceedings of the defence of those rights; - the proposal adopts Rule 15 of the Bernie Convention, which establishes the presumption whereby the author of a literary or artistic work is regarded as such if his name appears in the work. - the evidence protection measures provide that, even before an examination of the merits of a case have started, the right holder may invoke a procedure involving seizure if there is a risk that evidence may be destroyed. Physical seizure may be subject to the lodging of a guarantee to ensure compensation for the defendant in the event of an unjustified application. The applicant has 31 calendar days to initiate substantive proceedings, failing which the seizure is null and void. This measure is modelled on the Anton Pillar order in England and Wales and the saisie-contrefacon in France; - the right holder has the right to certain prescribed information on the infringing goods and on the networks for their distribution; - there are a number of provisions with regard to provisional measures which competent authorities may take. The measures are of paramount importance, since in almost all cases, it is in the interest of the right holder to take rapid action; - in certain cases, and particularly if the right holder demonstrates circumstances likely to threaten the recovery of damages, the courts may order the precautionary seizure of property, including the blocking of the defendant's bank accounts and other assets. This is modelled on the law of England and Wales known as the Mareva injunction; - damages are intended to compensate for the prejudice suffered because of an infringement committed intentionally or by mistake. The level and calculation of damages are proposed as part of the legislation.�

  • DG [{'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/internal_market/', 'title': 'Internal Market and Services'}],

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: COM(2003)0046
• Debate in Council: 2490
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A5-0468/2003
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T5-0147/2004
• : Directive 2004/48
• : OJ L 195 02.06.2004, p. 0016-0025

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)