Yes, trying to think constructively this is the advantage of GESAC being to greedy.

Cavada himself was going around telling everyone that he does not want to restrict rights in other countries, just to preserve French culture. Well, what happened is that they passed language copying bad practices to 15 EU countries will a full FoP exception. It is an own initiative report and not even the last word on it was spoken, but the general tendency to vote for any AMs that restrict use was obvious.

In order to fix this in plenary (6th of July I believe), we would need three things now:

1. A sensible text for an amendment to table in for the plenary vote that attracts very little opposition.

2. Getting many rather prominent MEPs from all groups to table this new amendment.

3. Some media fuzz in the countries that currently have a full exception.

2015-06-16 11:44 GMT+02:00 James Heald <j.heald@ucl.ac.uk>:

One advantage is it gives us something very hard and concrete to kick against -- a real threat we can e.g. try to get on the front page of Metro

Sometimes it can be an advantage if people can see the bogeyman in full stark reality.

-- James.

On 16/06/2015 10:39, Stevie Benton wrote:

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> 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>:

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@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

_______________________________________________
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors