<div dir="ltr">Hi Dimi, <div><br></div><div>Thanks for sharing this. Looks to me like there aren't any surprises in there. I'd also be interested to know what others think in terms of responding. </div><div><br></div>
<div>See you all soon,</div><div><br></div><div>Stevie</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 24 July 2014 09:08, Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com" target="_blank">dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div><div>Hello everybody,<br><br></div>The Commission (DG MARKT) published their report on the "Public Consultation on the Review of the EU Copyright Rules" yesterday [1][2].<br>
<br>
</div><div>I haven't had time to read through the 100 pages in detail, but since the major struggle is whether the Commission should legislate on more harmonisation or not and having a universal FoP exception would be an act of harmonisation, I mined the document for just that. <br>
<br></div><div>Pro harmonisation:<br>
<ul><li><b>Institutional users</b>
generally consider that territoriality of copyright creates problems
in particular in the
area of exceptions, where a higher level of harmonisation is needed.</li><li><span><b><i>Many respondents</i></b> consider that <b>market-led solutions have not proven to be effective</b> and that harmonisation measures</span></li>
<li><span>[on collective management] <b><i>Many respondents</i></b> also point out that there are already national systems of identifiers, and that some degree of harmonisation, standardisation and interoperability could be desirable here. </span></li>
<li><span><b>Institutional users</b> generally support copyright harmonisation which implies making exceptions mandatory and harmonising their scope to a greater extent.</span></li><li><b>A minority of authors and performers</b> would seek a harmonisation or clarification of the existing exceptions</li>
<li>[<b>Intermediaries/service providers</b>] Many respondents from this group argue for more harmonisation and legal certainty in the area of exceptions.</li><li>Representatives of <b>academia, civil society or think-tanks</b> generally consider that the optional nature of the exceptions is problematic and that exceptions should be further harmonised.</li>
</ul>
Contra harmonisation:<br><ul><li><b>Film producers</b> generally consider that the current EU copyright rules should not be changed</li><li>[<b>Authors/performers</b>] Most respondents in these stakeholder groups are against any further harmonisation, which they consider would risk a weakening of copyright protection in Europe at the expense of creators.</li>
<li><b>Collective Management Organisations</b> consider that the territoriality of exceptions does not constitute a problem for right holders, businesses or consumers</li><li>Educational <b>publishers</b> and representatives of the <b>software industry</b> warn that a further harmonisation [...] could undermine the role of licences <br>
</li></ul></div><div>Neutral or split on harmonisation:<br><ul><li><b>Academics</b> (depending on the specific question this groups seems divided) <br></li><li><b>Member States</b> (some want more harmonisation, others want to keep options)<br>
</li></ul></div><div><br></div><div>Reminder:<br></div>The White Paper (as an answer to which were/are preparing a position paper) was supposed to be published alongside this document, but was postponed due to negative opinions by other units of the Commission (namely DG CONNECT and DG RESEARCH).<br>
<br></div>The question now is whether we should react to the consultation answers in some way or wait for the actual white paper or do something in-between (e.g. publish a position paper before the white paper is published)? Any thoughts?<br>
<br></div>Cheers,<br></div>Dimi<br><br>[1]<a href="http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2013/copyright-rules/index_en.htm" target="_blank">http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2013/copyright-rules/index_en.htm</a><br>
[2]<a href="http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2013/copyright-rules/docs/contributions/consultation-report_en.pdf" target="_blank">http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2013/copyright-rules/docs/contributions/consultation-report_en.pdf</a><br>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org">Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors" target="_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr"><pre cols="72">Stevie Benton
Head of External Relations
Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 20 7065 0993 / +44 (0) 7803 505 173
@StevieBenton</pre><pre cols="72"><div style="color:rgb(80,0,80);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px;white-space:normal;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><p style="line-height:19.200000762939453px;font-family:sans-serif;margin:0.4em 0px 0.5em">
<font size="1">Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).</font></p>
</div><p style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;white-space:normal;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);line-height:19.200000762939453px;font-family:sans-serif;margin:0.4em 0px 0.5em"><b><font size="1">Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.</font></b></p>
</pre></div>
</div>