[Advocacy Advisors] Wikimedia and the EU Report - February 2015

Tue Mar 3 11:08:42 UTC 2015

Hi Dimi,

Thank you very much for sending this over, very useful as always! The move
to end geoblocking is interesting as that is what you would probably expect
in a unified single market. But there's an argument that we can make here
that of geoblocking is going to be removed throughout the EU then it
logically follows that other harmonisation should be treated similarly.

Thanks again for all of the work that you and Karl are doing, makes all of
our lives easier!

Stevie

On 3 March 2015 at 07:43, Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov <
dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov at gmail.com> wrote:

> Wikimedia and the EU
> February 2015 Report
>
> tl;dr
> There are two copyright theatres at this point - the European Parliament
> and the European Commission. The former is working towards the media, the
> latter is writing away in a cloud of mystery. Wikimedia is engaging in both
> on an ongoing basis.
>
>
> This and past reports: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Monitor
>
> ToC
> 1. IMCO, CULT & ITRE Committees Publish Draft Opinions on Copyright Reform
>
> 2. Wikimedia Participates in High-Level Roundtable with Commissioner
> Oettinger
>
> 3. #AskAnsip and #AskOettinger Twitter Events
>
> 4. Scope and Terms of Wikimedia Requested PD Contribution Study
>
>
> -----------------
> -----------------
>
> #fixcopyright ##DigitalSingleMarket
>
> 1. IMCO, CULT & ITRE Committees Opinions on JURI’s Draft Report on the
> Implementation of the InfoSoc Directive
>
> Why is this relevant?
>
> Whenever the European Parliament is working on a dossier, several
> committees are usually involved. In this case there are three additional
> committees giving their opinions on the report. These usually take the form
> of a list of unassorted remarks or amendment proposals that MEPs from
> outside the responsible committee want to float. These may or may not be
> accepted, but they give an idea about how Parliament’s general thoughts on
> a given topic.
>
> What happened?
>
> The three Committees for opinion released their draft opinions on the
> Report on the Implementation of the InfoSoc Directive. [1] These are:
>
> 1. José Blanco López (PT S&D) for the Committee on Industry, Research and
> Energy [2]
>
> 2. Isabella Adinolfi (IT EFDD) for the Committee on Culture and Education
> [3]
>
> Catherine Stihler (UK S&D) Internal Market and Consumer Protection [4]
>
> The texts essentially lack anything very worrisome or positive, in fact
> they stay away from specifics as much as possible. One thing they have in
> common is that they’re all asking the Commission to square the circle,
> meaning that they are saying that we need a copyright reform that
> strengthens authors’ rights, is makes users’ lives easier and facilitates
> access to knowledge. Another thing that can be observed in the reports is
> that they talk about enforcement. Normally enforcement is not part of the
> InfoSoc Directive (it is regulated by the e-Commerce Directive instead),
> but the recent move by the industry in Brussels has been to demand stronger
> enforcement instead of engaging in actual copyright debate.
>
> What comes next?
>
> Just like the actual report, each of these opinion papers will be
> discussed and amended in their respective committee. They will then be sent
> to Julia Reda and the legal Affairs Committee for consideration.
>
> It is clear that everyone would like to be the hero of the day but no one
> believes to have a solution. We should put our energy into selling our
> demands as solutions that facilitate access to knowledge, make users’ lives
> easier and don’t hurt authors.
>
> As for the enforcement talk, my personal take is that this is a tactical
> manœuvre by industry advocates that won’t work. There seems to be very
> little appetite by the Commission to reopen the enforcement dossiers at
> this stage. We should just focus on our core proposals, underlining that
> we’re in favour of authors’ rights and that we (are perhaps the only ones
> that) rigorously apply copyright on our projects.
>
> -----------------
> -----------------
>
> #fixcopyright ##DigitalAgenda
>
> 2. Wikimedia Participates in High-Level Roundtable with Commissioner
> Oettinger
>
> Why is this relevant?
>
> Formally the Commission has had its round of consultations on the topic of
> copyright. However, individual Commissioners continue to meet with
> stakeholders. The type of organisations they tend to meet also reflect
> their political preferences. Participating in a small-scale, pre-selected
> roundtable demonstrates we can be one of the relevant players when it comes
> to the aspects of digitisation and cultural heritage in copyright.
>
> What happened?
>
> Wikimedia had managed to meet the political cabinets of President
> Jean-Claude Juncker and Vice-President Andrus Ansip almost immediately
> after they were confirmed by the Parliament. The office of Commissioner
> Oettinger turned out to be somewhat of a challenge. Eventually we received
> a meeting and were told about these “high-level” roundtable dialogues. We
> asked to be included - which was again a challenge - and in the end
> received an invitation. Lukas Mezger, vice-chair of Wikimedia Deutschland,
> represented us at the event and reported his experience on the WMF blog. [5]
>
> What comes next?
>
> We will follow up by sending a written version of Lukas’ statement and
> some additional information to the Oettinger cabinet and the copyright
> unit. Now that we were a personal invitee of theirs, this gives us the
> extra minute of attention that we must use to generate more attention.
>
> Simultaneously the European Parliament has formed an ad-hoc Working Group
> on Intellectual Property Rights and Copyright Reform coordinated by MEP
> Jean-Marie Cavada (FR ALDE). We’re trying to get invited to one of their
> next coming meetings.
>
> -----------------
> -----------------
>
> #AskAnsip #AskOettinger
>
> 3. #AskAnsip and #AskOettinger Twitter Events
>
> Why is this relevant?
>
> Commissioners Ansip and Oettinger are responsible for the upcoming
> proposal to create a European digital single market. Their participation in
> public discussions, whether online or offline, gives stakeholders a chance
> to reinforce their arguments. It's also an opportunity to get an idea about
> what the Commission is planning and what their priorities are.
>
> In addition, events that attract stakeholders give a good overview of who
> the active players are, which allows us to identify opposing views to
> address as well as potential allies to approach.
>
> What happened?
>
> The #AskAsip event with Commissioner Andrus Ansip had a broad focus on the
> digital single market. While this Twitter chat was largely taken over by
> interest groups with a tax-policy agenda, a number of Wikimedians
> contributed with questions and comments on FoP.
>
> As in many of his previous public appearances, Ansip made clear his
> commitment to get rid of geoblocking. Anyone in Europe should be allowed
> access to any European online service. Except for that, his visions were
> quite vague.
>
> The #AskOettinger event with Commissioner Günther Oettinger dealt
> specifically with copyright. Oettinger repeated Ansips call for ending
> geoblocking and added a few other points. For instance, he said that
> enforcement “is high on the agenda,” adding that “violators need to fear
> the stick.”
>
> On the positive side he expressed that the Commission wants to “unlock
> access to our rich cultural heritage.” He also stated that 28 national sets
> of rules are not practical and that a proposal will be indeed released
> mid-2015.
>
> What comes next?
>
> The EU Commission's online dialogue continues through the newly launched
> website Digital4EU: https://ec.europa.eu/futurium/digital4eu
>
> The web site is a channel for those who want to initiate or participate in
> online discussions. The site also offers an events calendar and will likely
> serve as a portal for anything relating to the Commission's work on related
> to the Digital single market.
>
> -----------------
> -----------------
>
> #PDvalue
>
> 4. Study on the Economic Value of the Public Domain in the EU
>
> Why is this relevant?
>
> As we reported back in November 2013 [6], we’ve been pushing the EU’s IPR
> Infringements Observatory to commission a study on the economic value of
> the Public Domain in the EU ever since they released a rather shameful
> report claiming that restroom maintenance at fast food restaurants creates
> IPR intensive jobs. [7]
>
> What happened?
>
> In 2014 we managed to put a “Study on the Economic Contribution of the
> Public Domain in the EU” in the Observatory’s work programme for 2015. Last
> week in Alicante, they presented the scope, concept and timeline of the
> report. The study will be rather small at first, done in-house and very
> focused. According to the scientists working there, they want to do
> something credible and clean at first with the possibility of expanding it
> later.
>
> The study will analyse the derivative value of the public domain for the
> film industry by analysing which films have been based on public domain
> elements and what part of their economic value (measured in revenues) can
> be attributed to PD elements. For this they will introduce a PD dummy
> variable. [8] The main reason for picking the film industry is the
> availability of information in IMDB.
>
> On a side note, the study plans to build on the work of people already on
> this list (shout out to James and Communia members).
>
> What comes next?
>
> We should follow the process closely and make sure we get decent results
> that will withhold scientific and public scrutiny. The study will be
> attacked even while it is written, which is not always a bad thing, as it
> helps to know what kind of criticism to expect.
>
> We’re already making it known that we’d like the scope of the study to be
> broadened in a second phase.
>
> Some interim information will be presented during the working group
> meetings on 15 September this year and a first draft is planned to be
> published on 16 February 2016.
>
> -----------------
> -----------------
>
> [1]
> http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?reference=2014/2256%28INI%29&l=en
>
> [2]
> http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&reference=PE-549.303&format=PDF&language=EN&secondRef=01
>
> [3]
> http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fNONSGML%2bCOMPARL%2bPE-544.403%2b01%2bDOC%2bPDF%2bV0%2f%2fEN
>
> [4]
> http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&reference=PE-549.108&format=PDF&language=EN&secondRef=01
>
> [5]https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/02/free-knowledge-european-union/
>
> [6]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-December/129015.html
>
> [7]http://keionline.org/node/1803
>
> [8]
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0QRHCpjYWN2a01zUkMwV2dydzA/view?usp=sharing
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
> Advocacy_Advisors at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
>
>

-- 

Stevie Benton
Head of External Relations
Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 20 7065 0993 / +44 (0) 7803 505 173
@StevieBenton

Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England
and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513.
Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street,
London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a
global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the
Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).

*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal
control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/attachments/20150303/fe796c79/attachment-0001.html>