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(a)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(a)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 past
week.
- 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.pdf
<https://juliareda.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/voting_list.pdf>
Dimi
_______________________________________________
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
Advocacy_Advisors(a)lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
_______________________________________________
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
Advocacy_Advisors(a)lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
_______________________________________________
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
Advocacy_Advisors(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
_______________________________________________
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
Advocacy_Advisors(a)lists.wikimedia.org