[Advocacy Advisors] InfoSoc Own-Initiative Report Vote Today
Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov
dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov at gmail.com
Tue Jun 16 10:02:44 UTC 2015
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.
D
2015-06-16 11:44 GMT+02:00 James Heald <j.heald at 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 at 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 at 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 at lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
>>> Advocacy_Advisors at lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
>> Advocacy_Advisors at lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
> Advocacy_Advisors at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/attachments/20150616/b4b45ca8/attachment.html>
More information about the Advocacy_Advisors
mailing list