I see this as a "Euro-sausage" issue -- a case of the EU threatening to interfere with UK laws, and make lots of good things illegal.
Papers like the Express, the Mail, the Telegraph, and Metro could go wild for it.
Images of prominent UK buildings and sculptures blacked out could have a lot of resonance.
-- J.
On 16/06/2015 11:00, Karl Sigfrid wrote:
Pitching this to the media is a wise idea. I will work out a media strategy for Sweden, and before the plenary vote we should try to activate all countries which would be directly affected by a NC condition. It is also good if we can make national governments pay attention since the council is already discussing the Digital Single Market Strategy, which this is a (very small) part of.
Even if it's only an own-initiative report that the Legal Affairs Committee voted on, there's a risk that the issue due to it's narrow nature will not get enough attention from those who are our natural allies and thus be taken over by collecting societies and the likes.
While the result of the vote is disappointing, I agree that it's fuel for the media, and we might want to shift our strategy to focus more on getting this threat out in the open.
Karl
Stevie Benton wrote on 6/16/2015 11:39 AM:
This is terrible.
I will start a page on the UK wiki where we can throw something together
On 16 Jun 2015 10:37, "James Heald" <j.heald@ucl.ac.uk mailto:j.heald@ucl.ac.uk> wrote:
I think we should go the full Daily Mail. Talk about books being pulped, blacked out photos of the buildings at Canary Wharf, etc, etc Did anyone spot how Honeyball voted on the Wikstrom amendment (good) and the Cavada amendment (bad) ? -- James. On 16/06/2015 10:12, Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov wrote: So, the French visual artists collecting society got their preferred amendment through (Cavada). Unfortunately this is the worst possible for us. It says: 16. Considers that the commercial use of photographs, video footage or other images of works which are permanently located in physical public places should always be subject to prior authorisation from the authors or any proxy acting for them We need to consider if we'll try to further amend it in plenary in several weeks or we just concentrate on the Commission. Dimi 2015-06-16 5:35 GMT+02:00 Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov < dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com <mailto:dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov@gmail.com>>: Hi, in a few hours the Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) will vote on the own-initiative report (not a legal instrument, but rather a recommendation) by Julia Reda. The full name of the document is Report on the Implementation of Directive 2001/29/EC on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society. It is about the implementation of the current copyright framework and how it could be updated. It is also a very first step in the process that will continue with the Commission proposing a reform text before the end of the year. What's in it for us? - *Freedom of Panorama* is looking good as it stands, but there is high chance of "non-commercial" being added to it. There was no compromise on this, so we tried everything we could in the pastweek. - In order for Freedom of Panorama to be preserved or even extended, following amendments need to be rejected: 414/415/417/420/422/423/424/426 - *Compromise Amendment 5* will call for "lowering the barriers to Public Sector Information". - *Compromise Amendment 6* will say that it "urges the Commission to clarify that once a work is in the public domain, any digitisation of the work which does not constitute a new, transformative work, stays in the public domain." - *Compromise Amendment 6 *will also call the Commission to examine "whether rightholders may be given the right to dedicate their works to the public domain, in whole or in part". - *Compromise Amendment 7* will explicitly call on the Commission to refrain from further copyright term extentions. - While very watered down, *Compromise Amendments 10 and 11* call for at least some harmonisation by mentioning "minimum standards across the exceptions and limitations". - *Compromise Amendments 13 and 14* try to propose introduce an "open norm" to EU copyright, but are so watered down, that the initial intention is almost gone. Still OK to have. - *Compromise Amendment 18* on Text and Data Mining is rather weak, but at least it doesn't do any harm. - The paragraph on linking liability is completely off, which is to be welcomed, since it would have gone in the wrong direction.
All in all, I am very happy and excited about Compromises 6 and 7. Compromise 5 is a step in the right direction, although not as clear as we wanted it. Freedom of Panorama remains a major worry. In a worst case scenario we might just want to kill it in a later stage of the legislative process to guard the status quo if the the "non-commercial" fixation remains this sticky. Voting should begin around 10:30. Live stream: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ep-live/en/committees/video…http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ep-live/en/committees/video?event=20150616-0900-COMMITTEE-JURI
Voting list: https://juliareda.eu/wp-content/uploads/…/03/voting_list.pdfhttps://juliareda.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/voting_list.pdf
Dimi _______________________________________________ Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors _______________________________________________ Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors