18 Amendments of Dietmar KÖSTER related to 2014/2151(INI)
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the EU faces a high number of intellectual property rights infringements, and whereas the volume and financial value of these infringements are alarmingnot insubstantial, as reported by the Commission in its report on the application of the Directive on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (COM(2010)0779);
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. wWhereas law enforcement is essential, and whereas it is of the utmost importance to find effectivDirective 2000/31/EC (the Electronic Commerce Directive) is an appropriate means of enforcing IPR;.
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas IPR infringements have a particularn impact on SMEs, including i and on business-to- business services, and can lead to the loss of markets and bankruptcy;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes in principle the communication of the Commission of 1 July 2014 presenting an action plan on the enforcement of intellectual property rights; supports its approach to IPR enforcement, based on preventive actions and on policy tools which intend to deprive commercial-scale infringers of their revenues and make it more difficult for infringing goods to be put on the market;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that one of the main objectives of the EU action plan is to provide reliable data on the socio-economic impact of commercial- scale IPR infringements;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that, at times of financial crisis, when major cuts are being made in financial support for the cultural sector, IPR are often among individual creators’ main sources of income; stresses, therefore, that ensuring fair remuneration for creators should be a crucial element of the EU action plan;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Takes the view that in the interests of innovation, creativity and competitiveness, it is crucial that IPR protection measures are transparent and that full information is available to the public and to all other actors concerned;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that all actors in the supply chain in the offline context have a role to play in the fight against IPR infringement and should be involved in this process; stresses that anthe approach involving all actors should be develadopted both in the online and in the offline context;must involve all actors
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that the inclusion of online actors in measures to combat IPR infringements must comply with the principles of Directive 2000/31/EC (the Electronic Commerce Directive) and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that applying due diligence throughout the supply chain, particularly in the interests of SMEs, would improve the business environment and contribute to preventing infringing goods from entering the market; stresses, however, that the cost-benefit rwelcomes the Commission’s initiatiove of qualitative auditing schemes should be well assessed and that providing support to SMEs should be considered in that respectexploring what EU-wide measures can improve the enforcement of IPR and thus where necessary reduce any dispute costs incurred, particularly for SMEs;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that the lack, to some extent, of a competitive supply of non-infringing products and content makes it difficult to deter consumers from buying unlawful goods or using unlawful content; takes the view that sufficientfurther progress has notneeds to been made in this area, and reiterates its demand that the Commission and Member States put more pressure on the industry to develop, in all Member States, licit offers that are both diversified and attractive;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes the view as well that opportunities for infringement should not be created, and that business models should be reconsidered by the industry in certain sectorsne way of strengthening IPR could be to develop innovative business models; further stresses that the improvement and constant adaptation of such models to the advance of technology should be reconsidered for certain sectors of the industry;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. WelcomNotes the Commission’s declared intention to support SMEs in enforcing their IPR and, in particular, to further assess SMEs’ needs for future EU actionfurther assess the need for the enforcement of IPR for SMEs with a view to future EU action; further stresses that this should also apply to independent creators;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Insists on the need to take into account SMEs when drafting legislation for businesses, and reiterates that the ‘think small first’ principle should be applied at all timestaken into account;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. . Stresses the importance of access to justice and of the cost-effectiveness of judicial proceedings, especially for SMEs, and calls for the development of mediation services and other business-to- business alternative dispute resolution schemes in the area of IPR;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Reiterates its call for a comprehensiven IPR strategy, including a complete and strong legal framework to combat counterfeiting and piracy adapted to the online environment;