[Advocacy Advisors] InfoSoc Own-Initiative Report Vote Today

[Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov]

@Marcin, in this case, anything that flies with the media and helps us
change the text would work. The report that was adopted already calls for
minimum standards for exceptions. We're not getting more, but we might get
less.

I think we should work on a very neutral, non-scary text as an amendment
for the plenary. Perhaps something along the lines of:

16. Invites the EU legislator to recognise that the use of photographs,
video footage or other images of works which are permanently located in
public places is permitted.

Otherwise, working on the original Cavada text, we could go for:

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 *permitted* *subject to prior authorisation from
the authors or any proxy acting for them*.

Which one is likely to attract less opposition?

Dimi


2015-06-16 12:31 GMT+02:00 Marcin Cieslak <saper at saper.info>:

> On Tue, 16 Jun 2015, James Heald wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> Well, but this goes against the general idea of broad, harmonized
> copyright exceptions which we support I think?
>
> ~Marcin
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150616/17229c71/attachment.html>