On article 3 we recommend voting against CA 4 (and corresponding CAs in recitals), instead we indicate specific amendments filed by members of JURI that in our opinion define text and data mining exception better.
On article 4 we recommend voting in favor of CA 6 (and corresponding CAs 23 to CA 26)
On article 5 we recommend voting in favor of CA 7 (and corresponding CAs 27 to CA 30)
On new exceptions (FoP, UGC) we recommend voting in favor of CA 56 (and CA 57) as well as CA 58 (and CA 59)
On article 11 we recommend voting against CA 12 (and corresponding CAs) and in favor of CA 12bis (and corresponding CA 20bis and CA 41bis) that are the alternative Compromise Amendments
On article 13 we recommend voting against CA 14 (and corresponding CAs) and in favor of CA 14bis (and corresponding CA 47bis to CA 50bis) that are the alternative Compromise Amendments. In case CA 14 is adopted, we believe the negative consequence can be somehow mitigated by voting in favor of CA 2.
Both IMCO 56 and AM 672 provide that the access gotten under one exception may not be used to exercise rights gotten under another exception - we find this approach harmful to the rights of users and legitimate uses of lawfully accessed content. We recommended voting against IMCO 56 and AM 672 as indicated in the document.