44 Amendments of Dietmar KÖSTER related to 2016/0280(COD)
Amendment 44 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Amendment 76 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a directive
Title IV – Chapter 2 – title
Title IV – Chapter 2 – title
Amendment 101 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13
Article 13
Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Amendment 118 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) While distance learning and cross- border education programmes are mostly developed at higher education level, digital tools and resources are increasingly used at all education levels, in particular to improve and enrich the learning experience. The exception or limitation provided for in this Directive should therefore benefit all educational establishments in primary, secondary, vocational and higher education to the extent they pursue their educational activialso benefit entities providing educational activities, such as museums, libraries, archives and civil society for a non-commercial purposeganisations. The organisational structure and the means of funding of an educational establishment or an entity providing educational activities are not the decisive factors to determine the non-commercial nature of the activity.
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The exception or limitation should cover digital uses of works and other subject-matter such as the use of parts or extracts of works to support, enrich or complement the teaching, including the related learning activities. The use of the works or other subject-matter under the exception or limitation should be only in the context of teaching and learning activities carried out under the responsibility of educational establishments, including during examinations, or entities providing educational activities and be limited to what is necessary for the purpose of such activities. The exception or limitation should cover both uses through digital means in the classroom and online uses through the educational establishment's secure electronic network, the access to which should be protected, notably by authentication procedures. The exception or limitation should be understood as covering the specific accessibility needs of persons with a disability in the context of illustration for teaching.
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 268 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Where information society service providers that store and provide access to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, thereby going go beyond the mere provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . . _________________ 34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1–16).
Amendment 272 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
In respect of Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC and the liability exemption provided therein, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider plays an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-matter or promoting them, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefor. In such cases, the provider should no longer be considered to be merely hosting copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by its users, should be ineligible for the liability exemption and therefore subjected to the provisions of Directive 2001/29/EC the sae way as as any digital service provider.
Amendment 280 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
In order to ensure the functioning of any licensing agreement, information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to largesignificant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject- matter uploaded by their users and performing an act of communication to the public should take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure protection of works or other subject-matter, such as implementing effective technologies. This obligation should also apply when the information society service providers are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/ECose measures should not require the identity of individual users uploading content in order to protect their privacy. Furthermore, those measures should be limited to preventing the availability of specifically identified and duly notified works and should not lead to a general obligation to monitor content uploaded by the users.
Amendment 290 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) Collaboration between information society service providers, storing and providing access to the public to largesignificant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users and performing an act of communication to the public, and rightholders is essential for the functioning of technologies, such as content recognition technologies. In such cases, rightholders should provide the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content and t, such as reference files and metadata. They should deliver reference files in a timely fashion and in an appropriate file format. Metadata should be complete and accurate for each reference file. The services should be transparent towards rightholders with regard to the deployed technologies, to allow the assessment of their appropriateness. The services should in particular provide rightholders with information on the type of technologies used, the way they are operated and their success rate for the recognition of rightholders' content. Those technologies should also allow rightholders to get information from the information society service providers on the use of their content covered by an agreement.
Amendment 305 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Certain rightholders such as authors and performers need information to assess the economic value of their rights which are harmonised under Union law. This is especially the case where such rightholders grant a licence or a transfer of rights in return for remuneration. As authors and performers tend to be in a weaker contractualnegotiating position when they grant licences or transfer their rights by contract, they need information to assess the continued economic value of their rights, compared to the remuneration received for their licence or transfer, but they often face a lack of transparency. Therefore, the regular sharing of adequate information by their contractual counterparts orand subsequent transferees or licensees, as well as by their successors in title is important for the transparency and balance in the system that governs the remuneration of authors and performers.
Amendment 310 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) When implementing transparency obligations, the specificities of different content sectors and of the rights of the authors and performers in each sector should be considered. Member States should coensult all relevant stakeholders as that should help determinre that the representative organisations of all relevant stakeholders determine sector-specific requirements and establish reporting standards and procedures for each sector. Member States should ensure a high degree of transparency within these sector- specific requirementstransparency obligations. Moreover, the sharing of information should occur at least once a year. Collective bargaining should be considered as an option to reach an agreement between the relevant stakeholders regarding transparency. To enable the adaptation of current reporting practices to the transparency obligations, a transitional period should be provided for. The transparency obligations do not need to apply to agreements concluded with collective management organisations as those are already subject to transparency obligations under Directive 2014/26/EU.
Amendment 318 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) CertainMost contracts for the exploitation of rights harmonised at Union level are of long duration, offering few no possibilities for authors and performers to renegotiate them with their contractual counterparts or their successors in title. Therefore, without prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in Member States, there should be a remuneration adjustment mechanism for cases where the remuneration originally agreed under a licencse or a transfer of rights is disproportionately low compared to the relevanet revenues and the benefits derived from the exploitation of the work or the fixation of the performance, including in light of the transparency ensured by this Directive. The assessment of the situation should take account of the specific circumstances of each cCollective bargaining should be considered ase as well as of the specificities and practices of the different content sectorsn option to reach an agreement. Where the parties do not agree on the adjustment of the remuneration, the author or performer should be entitled to bring a claim before a court or other competent authority.
Amendment 324 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Authors and performers are often reluctantunable to enforce their rights against their contractual partners before a court or tribunal. Member States should therefore provide for an alternative dispute resolution procedure that addresses claims by authors, performers or their appointed representatives related to obligations of transparency and the contract adjustment mechanism and that it is free of charge as well as accessible for authors and performers. The dispute settlement resolution procedure can also be agreed in collective agreements.
Amendment 400 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Where information society service providers that store and provide access to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, thereby goingo beyond the mere provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . _________________ 34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1–16).
Amendment 409 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
In respect of Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC and the liability exemption provided therein, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider plays an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-matter or promoting them, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefor. In such case, the provider should no longer be considered to be merely hosting copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, should be ineligible for the liability exemption and therefore subjected to the provisions of Directive 2001/29/EC as any digital service provider.
Amendment 420 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
In order to ensure the functioning of any licensing agreement, information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to largesignificant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject- matter uploaded by their users and performing an act of communication to the public should take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure protection of works or other subject-matter, such as implementing effective technologies. This obligation should also apply when the information society service providers are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/ECose measures should not require the identity of individual users uploading content in order to protect their privacy. Furthermore, those measures should be limited to preventing the availability of specifically identified and duly notified works and should not lead to a general obligation to monitor content uploaded by the users.
Amendment 445 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) Collaboration between information society service providers, storing and providing access to the public to largesignificant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users and performing an act of communication to the public, and rightholders is essential for the functioning of technologies, such as content recognition technologies. In such cases, rightholders should provide the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content and t, such as reference files and metadata. They should deliver reference files on a timely basis and in an appropriate file format. Metadata should be complete and accurate for each reference file. The services should be transparent towards rightholders with regard to the deployed technologies, to allow the assessment of their appropriateness. The services should in particular provide rightholders with information on the type of technologies used, the way they are operated and their success rate for the recognition of rightholders' content. Those technologies should also allow rightholders to get information from the information society service providers on the use of their content covered by an agreement.
Amendment 518 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to largesignificant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject- matter uploaded by their users and perform an act of communication to the public shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or, where such agreements have not been concluded, to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and, proportionate and compliant with the relevant industry standards. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the rightholders' own works and other subject- matter in a commonly agreed reporting format. The rightholders shall provide the service providers with the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content, such as reference files and metadata.
Amendment 526 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 530 #
2a. Where a user makes use of the complaints and redress mechanisms referred to in paragraph 2, service providers and rightholders whose content is involved in any such conflict or dispute shall be obliged to resolve the conflict or dispute in a timely manner.
Amendment 545 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that authors and performers receive on a regular basis, at least once a year, and taking into account the specificities of each sector, timely, adequate, accurate and sufficient information on the exploitation and promotion of their works and performances from those to whom they have licensed or transferred their rights as well as subsequent transferees or licensees, notably as regards modes of exploitation, revenues generated and remuneration due.
Amendment 554 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The obligation in paragraph 1 shall be proportionate and effective and shall ensure an appropriate high level of transparency in every sector. However, in those cases where the administrative burden resulting from the obligation would be disproportionate in view of the revenues generated by the exploitation of the work or performance, Member States may adjust the obligation in paragraph 1, under the condition that the level of disproportionality is duly justified, and provided that the obligation remains effective and ensures an appropriate level of transparency.
Amendment 561 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. Member States may decide that the obligation in paragraph 1 does not apply when the contribushall ensure that the representative organisations of the author or performer is not significant having regard to the overall work or performancerelevant stakeholders determine sector- specific reporting standards and procedures.
Amendment 564 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States shall ensure that where an author or performer has transferred or licensed a right to another party, the latter shall provide its contractor with the necessary information to permit the contractor exploiting works and performances to comply with the obligation laid down in paragraph 1.
Amendment 572 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that authors and performers are entitled to request additional, appropriate remuneration from the party with whom they entered into a contract for the exploitation of the rights when the remuneration originally agreed is disproportionately low compared to the subsequent relevant revenues and benefitproportionate and equitable remuneration of the revenues derived from the exploitation of their works or performances.
Amendment 577 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Member States shall ensure that authors and performers or any representatives appointed by them are entitled to claim additional equitable remuneration from the party with whom they entered into a contract for the exploitation of the rights when the remuneration originally agreed is disproportionately low compared to the subsequent net revenues and benefits derived from the exploitation of the works or performances.
Amendment 582 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Member States shall ensure that representative organisations of authors and performers, and relevant representative organisations of right users, set standards for proportionate remuneration of authors and performers for the use of their works and performances, taking into account the specificities of each sector.
Amendment 585 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15a Rights reversion mechanism Member States shall ensure that contracts include a rights reversion mechanism to enable authors and performers to terminate a contract in case of insufficient exploitation or payment of the remuneration provided for, as well as insufficient or lack of regular reporting.
Amendment 591 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
In case of a dispute, proceedings may also be brought on behalf of authors and performers by their appointed representative organisations.
Amendment 595 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) takes place on the premises of an educational establishment or through a secure electronic network accessible only by the educational establishment's pupils or students and teaching staffon the premises of an entity providing educational activities or through a secure electronic communications network;
Amendment 605 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Amendment 608 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 615 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 623 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The use of works and other subject- matter for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching through secure electronic communications networks undertaken in compliance with the provisions of national law adopted pursuant to this Article shall be deemed to occur solely in the Member State where the educational establishment or the entity providing educational activities is established.
Amendment 813 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to largesignificant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject- matter uploaded by their users and perform an act of communication to the public shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or, in case such agreements have not been concluded, to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and, proportionate and compliant with the relevant industry standards. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the rightholders' own works and other subject- matter in a commonly agreed reporting format. The rightholders shall provide the service providers with the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content, such as reference files and metadata.
Amendment 828 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Where information society service providers take the measures referred to in paragraph 1, such measures shall not violate any privacy rights of the users, and shall be in compliance with Directives 95/46/EC and 2002/58/EC, as well as the General Data Protection Regulation. Measures to prevent the availability of copyright protected works or other subject-matter shall be limited to preventing the availability of specifically identified and duly notified works and shall not consist in an active monitoring of all the data of each user of the service.
Amendment 852 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Where a user makes use of the complaints and redress mechanisms referred to in paragraph 2, service providers and rightholders whose content is involved in any such conflict or dispute shall be obliged to resolve such conflict or dispute in a timely manner.