Activities of Daniel DALTON related to 2014/2256(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights (debate)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the implementation of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society
Amendments (8)
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that copyright and related rights play an important role, as they protect and stimulate both the development and marketing of new products and services and the creation and exploitation of their creative content, thereby contributing to improved competitiveness, employment and innovation across several industry sectors in the EU; stresses that copyright is only as effective as the enforcement measures in place to protect it and that in order to ensure a flourishing and innovative creative sector copyright enforcement must be robust;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Believes that the modernisation of copyright rules in the EU would be incomplete without an update of Directive 2000/31/EC on electronic commerce and suggests that the European Commission should consider actions in this direction;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recognises the need to ensure apprat the purpose of copyriate remuneration andght is to protect the rights of all categories of right holders in a better way and to allow creators to gain appropriate remuneration for their efforts through others making use of their work, and therefore to encourage future creativity; recalls that while the cultural and creative industries (CCI) employ more than seven million people and contribute 4.5% of EU GDP annually, and that even though the services, technologies and options permitting the general public to access creative works grow every day, the earnings of right holders in the CCI sector keep decreasing;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights the fact that Member States’ provisions on copyright and related rights vary considerably, and that the exclusivity which copyright grants its owner is, in principle, limited to the territorial boundaries of the Member State where the right has been granted, which may leads to market fragmentation across the EU;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Believes that common effort should be made in combatting copyright infringements in the EU in order to ensure the protection of copyright and fair remuneration for authors of copyrighted online content;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that territorial fragmentation may require users aspiring to offer content- related services across the EU to secure multiple licenses; emphasises the factnotes that differences in limitations and exceptions may create additional legal costs and legal uncertainty; recalls that consumers may be denied access to certain content services on geographical grounds; believes that consumers should be able to buy online content from another Member State when it is not easily accessible from a home provider; stresses that clear information should be provided to consumers at the time of purchase of a digital content license on the geographical limitations of the use of that content; highlights that Europe's creative output is one of its richest resources, and those who want to enjoy it should be able to pay to do so, even when it is only sold in another Member State;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Urges the Commission to promote a flexible and balanced framework for exceptions and limitations that does not cause any harm to right holders and that conforms with consumer expectationshigher level of common approaches towards narrow, targeted and format- neutral exceptions and limitations that do not weaken copyright protection as part of a balanced framework for exceptions and limitations that does not cause any harm to right holders and that conforms with consumer expectations; encourages Member States to make use of those exceptions in a narrow, targeted and technology-neutral way where evidence demonstrates they would be necessary to promote access to creative content and support creativity; emphasises the important role that exceptions and limitations agreed on for public-interest reasons, for the purpose of education and teaching, play in providing access to knowledge as well as in encouraging cultural and societal participation; highlights the importance of copyright exceptions that allow enhanced accessibility to digital content for persons with disabilities; urges the Commission and the Member States to consider e-books as part of public lending schemes, provided that all necessary agreements with the relevant right holders have been reached beforehand;
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights the importance of promoting greater interoperability for software, as lack of interoperability hampers innovation and reduces competition in the EU; believes that lack of interoperability may lead to market dominance of one particular product, which in turn stifles competition and limits consumer choice in the EU; highlights the importance of copyright exceptions that allow enhanced accessibility to digital content for persons with disabilities; recognises that the inability to purchase content in an appropriate format for users with disabilities also creates a barrier to trade for enterprises; recognises that a number of these issues are linked to competition law and highlights that healthy competition along with the protection of intellectual property rights are essential for doing business with legal content; further recognises that the inability to purchase content in an appropriate format that can support users with disabilities reduces the cultural output and content offer available across the Member States.