[ParlTrack]

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1

(1) The Treaty provides for the establishment of an internal market and the institution of a system ensuring that competition in the internal market is not distorted. Harmonisation of the laws of the Member States on copyright and related rights shwould in no way contribute ~~further to the achievement of those obj~~to the development of a free digital single market, because uniform regulation stifles, rather than encouraging, market activity. Indeed, competition between differing national systems of laws is a guarantee that legal errors have only limited impact and that more effective systems of laws have a beneficial influence on less effective ones.

2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO

Marcus PRETZELL

Proposal for a directive
Recital 31

(31) A free and pluralist press is essential to ensure quality journalism and citizens' access to information. It provides a fundamental contribution to public debate and the proper functioning of a democratic society. In the transition from print to digital, publishers of press publications are facing problems in licensing the online use of their publications and recouping their investments. In the absence of recognition of publishers of press publications as rightholders, licensing and enforcement in the digital environment is often complex and inefficient.deleted

2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO

Marcus PRETZELL

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32

(32) The organisational and financial contribution of publishers in producing press publications needs to be recognised and further encouraged to ensure the sustainability of the publishing industry. It is therefore necessary to provide at Union level a harmonised legal protection for press publications in respect of digital uses. Such protection should be effectively guaranteed through the introduction, in Union law, of rights related to copyright for the reproduction and making available to the public of press publications in respect of digital uses.deleted

2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO

Marcus PRETZELL

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33

(33) For the purposes of this Directive, it is necessary to define the concept of press publication in a way that embraces only journalistic publications, published by a service provider, periodically or regularly updated in any media, for the purpose of informing or entertaining. Such publications would include, for instance, daily newspapers, weekly or monthly magazines of general or special interest and news websites. Periodical publications which are published for scientific or academic purposes, such as scientific journals, should not be covered by the protection granted to press publications under this Directive. This protection does not extend to acts of hyperlinking which do not constitute communication to the public.deleted

2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO

Marcus PRETZELL

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34

(34) The rights granted to the publishers of press publications under this Directive should have the same scope as the rights of reproduction and making available to the public provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC, insofar as digital uses are concerned. They should also be subject to the same provisions on exceptions and limitations as those applicable to the rights provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC including the exception on quotation for purposes such as criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive.deleted

2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO

Marcus PRETZELL

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1

1. This Directive lays down rules which aim at further harmonising the Union law applicable to copyright and related rights in the framework of the internal market, taking into account in particular digital and cross-border uses of protected content. It also lays down rules on exceptions and limitationsHarmonisation of Union law applicable to copyright and related rights by means of a directive should be rejected. Harmonisation of this kind will come about automatically when the interplay of free market forces with the various national systems of laws gives rise to a body of European private law for the digital single market. Harmony cannot be created by means of a legislative act, oin ~~the facilitation of licences as well as rules aiming~~particular if a significant proportion of the provisions of that legislative act ~~ensuring a well-functioning marketplace for the exploitation of works and other subject-matter~~concern ancillary copyright, whose ineffectiveness has only just been demonstrated at national level.

2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO

Marcus PRETZELL

Proposal for a directive
Article 11

1. Member States shall provide publishers of press publications with the rights provided for in Article 2 and Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the digital use of their press publications. 2. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall leave intact and shall in no way affect any rights provided for in Union law to authors and other rightholders, in respect of the works and other subject- matter incorporated in a press publication. Such rights may not be invoked against those authors and other rightholders and, in particular, may not deprive them of their right to exploit their works and other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. 3. Articles 5 to 8 of Directive 2001/29/EC and Directive 2012/28/EU shall apply mutatis mutandis in respect of the rights referred to in paragraph 1. 4. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall expire 20 years after the publication of the press publication. This term shall be calculated from the first day of January of the year following the date of publication.Article 11 deleted Protection of press publications concerning digital uses

2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO

Marcus PRETZELL

Proposal for a directive
Article 13

Use of protected content by information society service providers storing and giving access to large amounts of works and other subject-matter uploaded by 1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users 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 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. 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 works and other subject-matter. 2. Member States shall ensure that the service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 1. 3. Member States shall facilitate, where appropriate, the cooperation between the information society service providers and rightholders through stakeholder dialogues to define best practices, such as appropriate and proportionate content recognition technologies, taking into account, among others, the nature of the services, the availability of the technologies and their effectiveness in light of technological developments.Article 13 deleted their users

2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO

Activities of Marcus PRETZELL related to 2016/0280(COD)

Plenary speeches (1)

Amendments (8)

ParlTrack - 2011-2024