European Parliament
2014-2019!
Plenary sitting

A8-0245/2018
29.6.2018***I
REPORTon the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council
on copyright in the Digital Single Market(COM(2016)0593 – C80383/2016 – 2016/0280(COD))
Committee on Legal Affairs
Rapporteur: Axel Voss
Rapporteur for the opinion (*):
Catherine Stihler, Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection(*)

Associated committee – Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure

RR\1157669EN.docx

EN

PE601.094v02-00
United in diversity

ENPR_COD_1amCom

Symbols for procedures
*
***
***I
***II
***III

Consultation procedure
Consent procedure
Ordinary legislative procedure (first reading)
Ordinary legislative procedure (second reading)
Ordinary legislative procedure (third reading)(The type of procedure depends on the legal basis proposed by the draft act.)

Amendments to a draft act
Amendments by Parliament set out in two columns
Deletions are indicated in bold italics in the left-hand column. Replacements
are indicated in bold italics in both columns. New text is indicated in bolditalics in the right-hand column.
The first and second lines of the header of each amendment identify therelevant part of the draft act under consideration. If an amendment pertains toan existing act that the draft act is seeking to amend, the amendment heading
includes a third line identifying the existing act and a fourth line identifying
the provision in that act that Parliament wishes to amend.
Amendments by Parliament in the form of a consolidated text
New text is highlighted in bold italics. Deletions are indicated using either the▌symbol or strikeout. Replacements are indicated by highlighting the newtext in bold italics and by deleting or striking out the text that has been
replaced.
By way of exception, purely technical changes made by the drafting
departments in preparing the final text are not highlighted.

PE601.094v02-00

EN2! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

CONTENTS
Page
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION ..................................5
OPINION of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (*).................87
OPINION of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy ............................................142
OPINION of the Committee on Culture and Education .........................................................185
OPINION of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs ...........................255
PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE .................................................................266
FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE...................................267

RR\1157669EN.docx

3! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENPE601.094v02-00

EN4! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on
copyright in the Digital Single Market(COM(2016)0593 – C80383/2016 – 2016/0280(COD))(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)
The European Parliament,–

having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council(COM(2016)0593),–

having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of theEuropean Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to
Parliament (C80383/2016),–

having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,–

having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 25
January 2017 1,–

having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 8 February 2017 2,–

having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,–

having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinions of theCommittee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, the Committee on
Industry, Research and Energy, the Committee on Culture and Education and theCommittee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0245/2018),

1.

Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;2.

Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces,
substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and thenational parliaments.

Amendment 1
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
1 Not yet published in the Official Journal.
2 Not yet published in the Official Journal.

RR\1157669EN.docx

5! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENText proposed by the Commission

Amendment(2)
The directives which have been
adopted in the area of copyright and related
rights provide for a high level of protection
for rightholders and create a framework
wherein the exploitation of works and otherprotected subject-matter can take place. This
harmonised legal framework contributes to
the good functioning of the internal market;
it stimulates innovation, creativity,
investment and production of new content,also in the digital environment. The
protection provided by this legal framework
also contributes to the Union's objective ofrespecting and promoting cultural diversity
while at the same time bringing the European
common cultural heritage to the fore. Article
167(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of
the European Union requires the Union totake cultural aspects into account in its
action.

(2)
The directives which have been
adopted in the area of copyright and related
rights contribute to the functioning of theinternal market, provide for a high level ofprotection for rightholders, facilitate theclearance of rights and create a framework
wherein the exploitation of works and otherprotected subject-matter can take place. This
harmonised legal framework contributes to
the good functioning of a truly integrated
internal market; it stimulates innovation,
creativity, investment and production of newcontent, also in the digital environment, witha view to avoiding fragmentation of theinternal market. The protection provided bythis legal framework also contributes to theUnion's objective of respecting andpromoting cultural diversity while at thesame time bringing the European common
cultural heritage to the fore. Article 167(4) of
the Treaty on the Functioning of theEuropean Union requires the Union to takecultural aspects into account in its action.

Amendment 2
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

6! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(3)Rapid technological developments
continue to transform the way works andother subject-matter are created, produced,
distributed and exploited. New businessmodels and new actors continue to emerge.
The objectives and the principles laid downby the Union copyright framework remainsound. However, legal uncertainty remains,for both rightholders and users, as regards
certain uses, including cross-border uses, ofworks and other subject-matter in the digital
environment. As set out in theCommunication of the Commission entitled‘Towards a modern, more European
copyright framework’26 , in some areas it isnecessary to adapt and supplement thecurrent Union copyright framework. This
Directive provides for rules to adapt certain
exceptions and limitations to digital andcross-border environments, as well as
measures to facilitate certain licensing
practices as regards the dissemination of outof-commerce works and the online
availability of audiovisual works on videoon-demand platforms with a view toensuring wider access to content. In order toachieve a well-functioning marketplace forcopyright, there should also be rules onrights in publications, on the use of works
and other subject-matter by online service
providers storing and giving access to user
uploaded content and on the transparency ofauthors' and performers' contracts.

(3)
Rapid technological developments
continue to transform the way works andother subject-matter are created, produced,
distributed and exploited, and relevant
legislation needs to be future proof so as
not to restrict technological development.
New business models and new actors
continue to emerge. The objectives and theprinciples laid down by the Union copyrightframework remain sound. However, legal
uncertainty remains, for both rightholders
and users, as regards certain uses, including
cross-border uses, of works and othersubject-matter in the digital environment. As
set out in the Communication of theCommission entitled 'Towards a modern,more European copyright framework'26, insome areas it is necessary to adapt andsupplement the current Union copyrightframework. This Directive provides for rules
to adapt certain exceptions and limitations todigital and cross-border environments, aswell as measures to facilitate certain
licensing practices as regards thedissemination of out-of-commerce works
and the online availability of audiovisual
works on video-on-demand platforms with aview to ensuring wider access to content. In
order to achieve a well-functioning and fairmarketplace for copyright, there should also
be rules on the exercise and enforcement of
the use of works and other subject-matter on
online service providers’ platforms and on
the transparency of authors' and performers'
contracts and of the accounting linked withthe exploitation of protected works inaccordance with those contracts.

____________________________________

26 COM(2015) 626 final.

26 COM(2015) 626 final.

Amendment 3
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
RR\1157669EN.docx

7! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENText proposed by the Commission

Amendment(4)This Directive is based upon, andcomplements, the rules laid down in the
Directives currently in force in this area, inparticular Directive 96/9/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council27 , Directive
2001/29/EC of the European Parliament andof the Council28 , Directive 2006/115/EC of
the European Parliament and of theCouncil29 , Directive 2009/24/EC of theEuropean Parliament and of the Council30 ,Directive 2012/28/EU of the European
Parliament and of the Council31 andDirective 2014/26/EU of the European
Parliament and of the Council32 .

(4)This Directive is based upon, andcomplements, the rules laid down in the
Directives currently in force in this area, inparticular Directive 96/9/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council27 , Directive
2000/31/EC of the European Parliamentand of the Council 27a, Directive 2001/29/
EC of the European Parliament and of theCouncil28 , Directive 2006/115/EC of theEuropean Parliament and of the Council29 ,Directive 2009/24/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council30 , Directive
2012/28/EU of the European Parliament andof the Council31 and Directive 2014/26/EUof the European Parliament and of theCouncil32 .

__________________________________

27 Directive 96/9/EC of the European

27 Directive 96/9/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 11 March
Parliament and of the Council of 11 March
1996 on the legal protection of databases (OJ 1996 on the legal protection of databases (OJ
L 77, 27.3.1996, p. 20–28).
L 77, 27.3.1996, p. 20–28).
27a Directive 2000/31/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 8 June
2000 on certain legal aspects of informationsociety services, in particular electroniccommerce, in the Internal Market(Directive on electronic commerce) (OJ L
178, 17.7.2000, p. 1).
28 Directive 2001/29/EC of the European

28 Directive 2001/29/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 22 May
2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspectsof copyright and related rights in theinformation society (OJ L 167, 22.6.2001, p.
10–19).

Parliament and of the Council of 22 May
2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspectsof copyright and related rights in theinformation society (OJ L 167, 22.6.2001, p.
10–19).

29 Directive 2006/115/EC of the European

29 Directive 2006/115/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 12
December 2006 on rental right and lending
right and on certain rights related tocopyright in the field of intellectual property(OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 28–35).

Parliament and of the Council of 12
December 2006 on rental right and lending
right and on certain rights related tocopyright in the field of intellectual property(OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 28–35).

PE601.094v02-00

EN

8! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

30 Directive 2009/24/EC of the European

30 Directive 2009/24/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 23 April
2009 on the legal protection of computer
programs (OJ L 111, 5.5.2009, p. 16–22).

Parliament and of the Council of 23 April
2009 on the legal protection of computer
programs (OJ L 111, 5.5.2009, p. 16–22).

31 Directive 2012/28/EU of the European

31 Directive 2012/28/EU of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 25 October
2012 on certain permitted uses of orphan
works (OJ L 299, 27.10.2012, p. 5–12).

Parliament and of the Council of 25 October
2012 on certain permitted uses of orphan
works (OJ L 299, 27.10.2012, p. 5–12).

32 Directive 2014/26/EU of the European

32 Directive 2014/26/EU of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 26 February
2014 on collective management of copyrightand related rights and multi-territorial
licensing of rights in musical works foronline use in the internal market (OJ L 84,
20.3.2014, p. 72–98).

Parliament and of the Council of 26 February
2014 on collective management of copyrightand related rights and multi-territorial
licensing of rights in musical works foronline use in the internal market (OJ L 84,
20.3.2014, p. 72–98).

Amendment 4
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

9! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

(5)
In the fields of research, educationand preservation of cultural heritage, digitaltechnologies permit new types of uses thatare not clearly covered by the current Union
rules on exceptions and limitations. In
addition, the optional nature of exceptions
and limitations provided for in Directives
2001/29/EC, 96/9/EC and 2009/24/EC in
these fields may negatively impact thefunctioning of the internal market. This isparticularly relevant as regards cross-borderuses, which are becoming increasingly
important in the digital environment.
Therefore, the existing exceptions andlimitations in Union law that are relevant forscientific research, teaching and preservationof cultural heritage should be reassessed in
the light of those new uses. Mandatory
exceptions or limitations for uses of text anddata mining technologies in the field of
scientific research, illustration for teaching in
the digital environment and for preservationof cultural heritage should be introduced. For
uses not covered by the exceptions or thelimitation provided for in this Directive, theexceptions and limitations existing in Union
law should continue to apply. Directives
96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC should be adapted.

(5)
In the fields of research, innovation,
education and preservation of cultural
heritage, digital technologies permit new
types of uses that are not clearly covered by
the current Union rules on exceptions andlimitations. In addition, the optional natureof exceptions and limitations provided for in
Directives 2001/29/EC, 96/9/EC and2009/24/EC in these fields may negatively
impact the functioning of the internal market.
This is particularly relevant as regards crossborder uses, which are becoming
increasingly important in the digital
environment. Therefore, the existing
exceptions and limitations in Union law thatare relevant for innovation, scientificresearch, teaching and preservation ofcultural heritage should be reassessed in thelight of those new uses. Mandatory
exceptions or limitations for uses of text anddata mining technologies in the field ofinnovation and scientific research,illustration for teaching in the digital
environment and for preservation of cultural
heritage should be introduced. For uses notcovered by the exceptions or the limitation
provided for in this Directive, the exceptions
and limitations existing in Union law should
continue to apply. Therefore, existing wellfunctioning exceptions in those fields
should be allowed to continue to beavailable in Member States, as long as they
do not restrict the scope of the exceptions orlimitations provided for in this Directive.
Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC should
be adapted.

Amendment 5
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

10! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(6)The exceptions and the limitation set
out in this Directive seek to achieve a fairbalance between the rights and interests ofauthors and other rightholders on the one
hand, and of users on the other. They can beapplied only in certain special cases which
do not conflict with the normal exploitationof the works or other subject-matter and do
not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate
interests of the rightholders.

(6)
The exceptions and the limitations
set out in this Directive seek to achieve a fairbalance between the rights and interests ofauthors and other rightholders on the one
hand, and of users on the other. They can beapplied only in certain special cases which
do not conflict with the normal exploitationof the works or other subject-matter and do
not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate
interests of the rightholders.

Amendment 6
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!11/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

(8)
New technologies enable theautomated computational analysis of
information in digital form, such as text,
sounds, images or data, generally known astext and data mining. Those technologies
allow researchers to process large amounts
of information to gain new knowledge anddiscover new trends. Whilst text and data
mining technologies are prevalent across thedigital economy, there is widespreadacknowledgment that text and data mining
can in particular benefit the researchcommunity and in so doing encourage
innovation. However, in the Union, researchorganisations such as universities andresearch institutes are confronted with legal
uncertainty as to the extent to which they can
perform text and data mining of content. In
certain instances, text and data mining may
involve acts protected by copyright and/or by
the sui generis database right, notably the
reproduction of works or other subjectmatter and/or the extraction of contents froma database. Where there is no exception orlimitation which applies, an authorisation toundertake such acts would be required fromrightholders. Text and data mining may also
be carried out in relation to mere facts ordata which are not protected by copyrightand in such instances no authorisation would
be required.

(8)
New technologies enable theautomated computational analysis of
information in digital form, such as text,
sounds, images or data, generally known astext and data mining. Text and data mining
allows the reading and analysis of large
amounts of digitally stored information to
gain new knowledge and discover new
trends. Whilst text and data mining
technologies are prevalent across the digital
economy, there is widespreadacknowledgment that text and data mining
can in particular benefit the researchcommunity and in so doing encourage
innovation. However, in the Union, researchorganisations such as universities andresearch institutes are confronted with legal
uncertainty as to the extent to which they can
perform text and data mining of content. In
certain instances, text and data mining may
involve acts protected by copyright and/or by
the sui generis database right, notably the
reproduction of works or other subjectmatter and/or the extraction of contents froma database. Where there is no exception orlimitation which applies, an authorisation toundertake such acts would be required fromrightholders. Text and data mining may also
be carried out in relation to mere facts ordata which are not protected by copyrightand in such instances no authorisation would
be required.

Amendment 7
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

12! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(8a) For text and data mining to occur, it
is in most cases necessary first to accessinformation and then to reproduce it. It is
generally only after that information isnormalised that it can be processed throughtext and data mining. Once there is lawfulaccess to information, it is when that
information is being normalised that a
copyright-protected use takes place, since
this leads to a reproduction by changing theformat of the information or by extracting itfrom a database into a format that can be
subjected to text and data mining. The
copyright-relevant processes in the use of
text and data mining technology isconsequently not the text and data mining
process itself which consists of a reading
and analysis of digitally stored, normalised
information, but the process of accessing
and the process by which information isnormalised to enable its automatedcomputational analysis, insofar as thisprocess involves extraction from a databaseor reproductions. The exceptions for text
and data mining purposes provided for inthis Directive should be understood as
referring to such copyright-relevant
processes necessary to enable text and data
mining. Where existing copyright law has
been inapplicable to uses of text and data
mining, such uses should remain
unaffected by this Directive.

Amendment 8
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

13! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(10) This legal uncertainty should be
addressed by providing for a mandatory
exception to the right of reproduction andalso to the right to prevent extraction from a
database. The new exception should be
without prejudice to the existing mandatory
exception on temporary acts of reproduction
laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive
2001/29, which should continue to apply totext and data mining techniques which do not
involve the making of copies going beyond
the scope of that exception. Researchorganisations should also benefit from theexception when they engage into publicprivate partnerships.

(10) This legal uncertainty should be
addressed by providing for a mandatory
exception for research organisations to theright of reproduction and also to the right toprevent extraction from a database. The new
exception should be without prejudice to theexisting mandatory exception on temporary
acts of reproduction laid down in Article 5(1)of Directive 2001/29, which should continue
to apply to text and data mining techniques
which do not involve the making of copies
going beyond the scope of that exception.
Educational establishments and cultural
heritage institutions that conduct scientificresearch should also be covered by the text
and data mining exception provided that theresults of the research do not benefit anundertaking exercising a decisive influence
upon such organisations in particular. In
the event that the research is carried out inthe framework of a public privatepartnership, the undertaking participatingin the public private partnership should
also have lawful access to the works andother subject matter. The reproductions andextractions made for text and data mining
purposes should be stored in a securemanner and in a way that ensures that the
copies are only used for the purpose ofscientific research.

Amendment 9
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

14! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(13a) To encourage innovation also in theprivate sector, Member States should be
able to provide for an exception goingfurther than the mandatory exception
provided that the use of works and othersubject matter referred to therein has notbeen expressly reserved by theirrightholders including by machine readable
means.

Amendment 10
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(15) While distance learning and crossborder education programmes are mostly
developed at higher education level, digital
tools and resources are increasingly used at
all education levels, in particular to improveand enrich the learning experience. The
exception or limitation provided for in thisDirective should therefore benefit all
educational establishments in primary,secondary, vocational and higher education
to the extent they pursue their educational
activity for a non-commercial purpose. The
organisational structure and the means offunding of an educational establishment are
not the decisive factors to determine the noncommercial nature of the activity.

(15) While distance learning and crossborder education programmes are mostly
developed at higher education level, digital
tools and resources are increasingly used at
all education levels, in particular to improveand enrich the learning experience. The
exception or limitation provided for in thisDirective should therefore benefit all
educational establishments in primary,secondary, vocational and higher education
to the extent they pursue their educational
activity for a non-commercial purpose. The
organisational structure and the means offunding of an educational establishment are
not the decisive factors to determine the noncommercial nature of the activity. Where
cultural heritage institutions pursue an
educational objective and are involved inteaching activities, it should be possible forMember States to consider those institutions
as an educational establishment under thisexception in so far as their teachingactivities are concerned.

RR\1157669EN.docx

15! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 11
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(16) The exception or limitation should
cover digital uses of works and other subjectmatter such as the use of parts or extracts ofworks to support, enrich or complement theteaching, including the related learning
activities. The use of the works or othersubject-matter under the exception orlimitation should be only in the context ofteaching and learning activities carried out
under the responsibility of educational
establishments, including during
examinations, and be limited to what isnecessary for the purpose of such activities.
The exception or limitation should coverboth uses through digital means in theclassroom and online uses through theeducational establishment's secure electronic
network, the access to which should beprotected, notably by authentication
procedures. The exception or limitation
should be understood as covering thespecific accessibility needs of persons with adisability in the context of illustration forteaching.

(16) The exception or limitation should
cover digital uses of works and other subjectmatter to support, enrich or complement theteaching, including the related learning
activities. The exception or limitation of use
should be granted as long as the work orother subject-matter used indicates thesource, including the authors’ name, unlessthat turns out to be impossible for reasonsof practicability. The use of the works orother subject-matter under the exception orlimitation should be only in the context ofteaching and learning activities carried out
under the responsibility of educational
establishments, including during
examinations, and be limited to what isnecessary for the purpose of such activities.
The exception or limitation should coverboth uses through digital means where theteaching activity is physically provided,
including where it takes place outside thepremises of the educational establishment,
for example in libraries or cultural heritage
institutions, as long as the use is madeunder the responsibility of the educational
establishment, and online uses through theeducational establishment's secure electronic
environment, the access to which should beprotected, notably by authentication
procedures. The exception or limitation
should be understood as covering thespecific accessibility needs of persons with adisability in the context of illustration forteaching.

Amendment 12
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16 a (new)PE601.094v02-00

EN

16! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(16a) A secure electronic environment
should be understood as a digital teaching
and learning environment, access to which
is limited through an appropriate
authentication procedure to the educational
establishment’s teaching staff and to thepupils or students enrolled in a study
programme.

Amendment 13
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

17! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(17) Different arrangements, based on theimplementation of the exception provided forin Directive 2001/29/EC or on licensing
agreements covering further uses, are inplace in a number of Member States in orderto facilitate educational uses of works andother subject-matter. Such arrangements
have usually been developed taking accountof the needs of educational establishments
and different levels of education. Whereas itis essential to harmonise the scope of the
new mandatory exception or limitation in
relation to digital uses and cross-borderteaching activities, the modalities of
implementation may differ from a Member
State to another, to the extent they do nothamper the effective application of the
exception or limitation or cross-border uses.
This should allow Member States to build on
the existing arrangements concluded atnational level. In particular, Member States
could decide to subject the application of the
exception or limitation, fully or partially, tothe availability of adequate licences,
covering at least the same uses as thoseallowed under the exception. Thismechanism would, for example, allow giving
precedence to licences for materials which
are primarily intended for the educational
market. In order to avoid that suchmechanism results in legal uncertainty or
administrative burden for educational
establishments, Member States adopting thisapproach should take concrete measures toensure that licensing schemes allowing
digital uses of works or other subject-matterfor the purpose of illustration for teachingare easily available and that educational
establishments are aware of the existence ofsuch licensing schemes.

PE601.094v02-00

EN(17) Different arrangements, based on theimplementation of the exception provided forin Directive 2001/29/EC or on licensing
agreements covering further uses, are inplace in a number of Member States in orderto facilitate educational uses of works andother subject-matter. Such arrangements
have usually been developed taking accountof the needs of educational establishments
and different levels of education. Whereas itis essential to harmonise the scope of the
new mandatory exception or limitation in
relation to digital uses and cross-borderteaching activities, the modalities of
implementation may differ from a Member
State to another, to the extent they do nothamper the effective application of the
exception or limitation or cross-border uses.
This should allow Member States to build on
the existing arrangements concluded atnational level. In particular, Member States
could decide to subject the application of the
exception or limitation, fully or partially, tothe availability of adequate licences. Suchlicences can take the form of collective
licensing agreements, extended collective
licensing agreements and licences that arenegotiated collectively such as “blanket
licences”, in order to avoid educational
establishments having to negotiate
individually with rightholders. Suchlicenses should be affordable and cover at
least the same uses as those allowed underthe exception. This mechanism would, forexample, allow giving precedence to licences
for materials which are primarily intended
for the educational market, or for teachingin educational establishments or sheetmusic. In order to avoid that suchmechanism results in legal uncertainty or
administrative burden for educational
establishments, Member States adopting thisapproach should take concrete measures toensure that such licensing schemes allowing
digital uses of works or other subject-matterfor the purpose of illustration for teachingare easily available and that educational18! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 14
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(17 a) In order to guarantee legal certainty
when a Member State decides to subject theapplication of the exception to theavailability of adequate licences, it isnecessary to specify under which conditions
an educational establishment may use
protected works or other subject-matter
under that exception and, conversely, whenit should act under a licensing scheme.
Justification

The proposed amendment is needed in order to provide legal certainty in cases when aMember State decides to subject the application of the exception to the availability ofadequate licences.
Amendment 15
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

19! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(18) An act of preservation may require a
reproduction of a work or other subjectmatter in the collection of a cultural
heritage institution and consequently theauthorisation of the relevant rightholders.
Cultural heritage institutions are engaged in
the preservation of their collections for future
generations. Digital technologies offer new
ways to preserve the heritage contained inthose collections but they also create newchallenges. In view of these new challenges,
it is necessary to adapt the current legal
framework by providing a mandatory
exception to the right of reproduction inorder to allow those acts of preservation.

(18) An act of preservation of a work orother subject-matter in the collection of acultural heritage institution may require a
reproduction and consequently require theauthorisation of the relevant rightholders.
Cultural heritage institutions are engaged in
the preservation of their collections for future
generations. Digital technologies offer new
ways to preserve the heritage contained inthose collections but they also create newchallenges. In view of these new challenges,
it is necessary to adapt the current legal
framework by providing a mandatory
exception to the right of reproduction inorder to allow those acts of preservation bysuch institutions.

Amendment 16
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(19) Different approaches in the Member
States for acts of preservation by cultural
heritage institutions hamper cross-bordercooperation and the sharing of means ofpreservation by cultural heritage institutionsin the internal market, leading to an
inefficient use of resources.

(19) Different approaches in the Member
States for acts of reproduction forpreservation hamper cross-bordercooperation, the sharing of means ofpreservation and the establishment of crossborder preservation networks in the internalmarket organisations that are engaged inpreservation, leading to an inefficient use ofresources. This can have a negative impact
on the preservation of cultural heritage.

Amendment 17
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

20! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(20) Member States should therefore be
required to provide for an exception topermit cultural heritage institutions to
reproduce works and other subject-matter
permanently in their collections forpreservation purposes, for example toaddress technological obsolescence or the
degradation of original supports. Such an
exception should allow for the making of
copies by the appropriate preservation tool,means or technology, in the required number
and at any point in the life of a work or othersubject-matter to the extent required in orderto produce a copy for preservation purposes
only.

(20) Member States should therefore be
required to provide for an exception topermit cultural heritage institutions to
reproduce works and other subject-matter
permanently in their collections forpreservation purposes, to address
technological obsolescence or the
degradation of original supports or to insure
works. Such an exception should allow for
the making of copies by the appropriate
preservation tool, means or technology, in
any format or medium, in the required
number, at any point in the life of a work orother subject-matter and to the extent
required in order to produce a copy forpreservation purposes only. The archives ofresearch organisations or public-service
broadcasting organisations should beconsidered cultural heritage institutions
and therefore beneficiaries of thisexception. Member States should, for the
purpose of this exception, be able tomaintain provisions to treat publicly
accessible galleries as museums.

Amendment 18
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

21! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(21) For the purposes of this Directive,
works and other subject-matter should beconsidered to be permanently in thecollection of a cultural heritage institution
when copies are owned or permanently heldby the cultural heritage institution, forexample as a result of a transfer of ownershipor licence agreements.

(21) For the purposes of this Directive,
works and other subject-matter should beconsidered to be permanently in thecollection of a cultural heritage institution
when copies of such works or other subject
matter are owned or permanently held bythose organisations, for example as a resultof a transfer of ownership, licenceagreements, a legal deposit or a long-termloan. Works or other subject matter that
cultural heritage institutions accesstemporarily via a third-party server are notconsidered as being permanently in theircollections.

Amendment 19
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(21a) Technological developments havegiven rise to information society services
enabling their users to upload content andmake it available in diverse forms and forvarious purposes, including to illustrate anidea, criticism, parody or pastiche. Suchcontent may include short extracts of preexisting protected works or other subjectmatter that such users might have altered,combined or otherwise transformed.

Amendment 20
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 b (new)Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

22! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(21b) Despite some overlap with existing
exceptions or limitations, such as the ones
for quotation and parody, not all content
that is uploaded or made available by a userthat reasonably includes extracts ofprotected works or other subject-matter iscovered by Article 5 of Directive 2001/29/
EC. A situation of this type creates legal
uncertainty for both users and rightholders.
It is therefore necessary to provide a new
specific exception to permit the legitimate
uses of extracts of pre-existing protected
works or other subject-matter in content
that is uploaded or made available by users.
Where content generated or made available
by a user involves the short andproportionate use of a quotation or of an
extract of a protected work or other subjectmatter for a legitimate purpose, such use
should be protected by the exception
provided for in this Directive. This
exception should only be applied in certain
special cases which do not conflict withnormal exploitation of the work or othersubject-matter concerned and do notunreasonably prejudice the legitimate
interests of the rightholder. For the purposeof assessing such prejudice, it is essentialthat the degree of originality of the content
concerned, the length/extent of thequotation or extract used, the professional
nature of the content concerned or the
degree of economic harm be examined,
where relevant, while not precluding thelegitimate enjoyment of the exception. This
exception should be without prejudice to themoral rights of the authors of the work orother subject-matter.

Amendment 21
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 c (new)RR\1157669EN.docx

23! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENText proposed by the Commission

Amendment(21c) Information society service
providers that fall within the scope of
Article 13 of this Directive should not beable to invoke for their benefit the exception
for the use of extracts from pre-existing
works provided for in this Directive, for theuse of quotations or extracts from protected
works or other subject-matter in content
that is uploaded or made available by users
on those information society services, toreduce the scope of their obligations under
Article 13 of this Directive.

Amendment 22
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(22) Cultural heritage institutions should
benefit from a clear framework for thedigitisation and dissemination, including
across borders, of out-of-commerce works orother subject-matter. However, the particularcharacteristics of the collections of out-ofcommerce works mean that obtaining theprior consent of the individual rightholders
may be very difficult. This can be due, forexample, to the age of the works or othersubject-matter, their limited commercial
value or the fact that they were neverintended for commercial use. It is therefore
necessary to provide for measures tofacilitate the licensing of rights in out-ofcommerce works that are in the collectionsof cultural heritage institutions and thereby
to allow the conclusion of agreements withcross-border effect in the internal market.

(22) Cultural heritage institutions should
benefit from a clear framework for thedigitisation and dissemination, including
across borders, of out-of-commerce works orother subject-matter. However, the particularcharacteristics of the collections of out-ofcommerce works mean that obtaining theprior consent of the individual rightholders
may be very difficult. This can be due, forexample, to the age of the works or othersubject-matter, their limited commercial
value or the fact that they were neverintended for commercial use or have neverbeen in commerce. It is therefore necessary
to provide for measures to facilitate the useof out-of-commerce works that are in thecollections of cultural heritage institutions
and thereby to allow the conclusion ofagreements with cross-border effect in theinternal market.

PE601.094v02-00

EN24! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 23
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

25! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENPE601.094v02-00

EN(22a) Several Member States have alreadyadopted extended collective licencing
regimes, legal mandates or legal
presumptions facilitating the licencing ofout-of-commerce works. Howeverconsidering the variety of works and othersubject-matter in the collections of cultural
heritage institutions and the variance
between collective management practices
across Member States and sectors ofcultural production, such measures may notprovide a solution in all cases, for example,
because there is no practice of collective
management for a certain type of works orother subject matter. In such particularinstances, it is therefore necessary to allow
cultural heritage institutions to make outof-commerce works held in their permanentcollection available online under an
exception to copyright and related rights.
While it is essential to harmonise the scopeof the new mandatory exception in order toallow cross-border uses of out-of-commerce
works, Member States should neverthelessbe allowed to use or continue to use
extended collective licencing arrangements
concluded with cultural heritage
institutions at national level for categories
of works that are permanently in thecollections of cultural heritage institutions
The lack of agreement on the conditions of
the licence should not be interpreted as alack of availability of licensing-based
solutions. Any uses under this exception
should be subject to the same opt out andpublicity requirements as uses authorisedby a licensing mechanism. In order toensure that the exception only applies whencertain conditions are fulfilled and toprovide legal certainty, Member Statesshould determine, in consultation withrightholders, collective management
organisations and cultural heritageorganisations, and at appropriate intervalsof time, for which sectors and which types
of works appropriate licence-based
solutions are not available, in which case26
! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 24
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(23) Member States should, within theframework provided for in this Directive,
have flexibility in choosing the specific typeof mechanism allowing for licences for outof-commerce works to extend to the rights ofrightholders that are not represented by thecollective management organisation, in
accordance to their legal traditions, practices
or circumstances. Such mechanisms can
include extended collective licensing andpresumptions of representation.

(23) Member States should, within theframework provided for in this Directive,
have flexibility in choosing the specific typeof mechanism allowing for licences for outof-commerce works to extend to the rights ofrightholders that are not represented by therelevant collective management
organisation, in accordance with their legal
traditions, practices or circumstances. Suchmechanisms can include extended collective
licensing and presumptions of representation.

Amendment 25
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment27! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(24) For the purpose of those licensing
mechanisms, a rigorous and well-functioning
collective management system is important.
That system includes in particular rules ofgood governance, transparency andreporting, as well as the regular, diligent andaccurate distribution and payment ofamounts due to individual rightholders, as
provided for by Directive 2014/26/EU.
Additional appropriate safeguards should beavailable for all rightholders, who should begiven the opportunity to exclude theapplication of such mechanisms to theirworks or other subject-matter. Conditions
attached to those mechanisms should notaffect their practical relevance for cultural
heritage institutions.

(24) For the purpose of those licensing
mechanisms, a rigorous and well-functioning
collective management system is importantand should be encouraged by the Member
States. That system includes in particular
rules of good governance, transparency andreporting, as well as the regular, diligent andaccurate distribution and payment ofamounts due to individual rightholders, as
provided for by Directive 2014/26/EU.
Additional appropriate safeguards should beavailable for all rightholders, who should begiven the opportunity to exclude theapplication of such licensing mechanisms orof such exceptions to their works or othersubject-matter. Conditions attached to thosemechanisms should not affect their practicalrelevance for cultural heritage institutions.

Amendment 26
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment28! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(25) Considering the variety of works andother subject-matter in the collections ofcultural heritage institutions, it is importantthat the licensing mechanisms introduced bythis Directive are available and can be usedin practice for different types of works andother subject-matter, including photographs,
sound recordings and audiovisual works. In
order to reflect the specificities of different
categories of works and other subject-matteras regards modes of publication anddistribution and to facilitate the usability of
those mechanisms, specific requirements
and procedures may have to be establishedby Member States for the practicalapplication of those licensing mechanisms. It
is appropriate that Member States consult
rightholders, users and collective
management organisations when doing so.

(25) Considering the variety of works andother subject-matter in the collections ofcultural heritage institutions, it is importantthat the licensing mechanisms introduced bythis Directive are available and can be usedin practice for different types of works andother subject-matter, including photographs,
sound recordings and audiovisual works. In
order to reflect the specificities of different
categories of works and other subject-matteras regards modes of publication anddistribution and to facilitate the usability ofthe solutions on the use of out-of-commerce
works introduced by this Directive, specificrequirements and procedures may have to beestablished by Member States for thepractical application of those licensing
mechanisms. It is appropriate that Member
States consult rightholders, cultural heritage
institutions and collective management
organisations when doing so.

Amendment 27
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

29! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(26) For reasons of international comity,
the licensing mechanisms for the digitisationand dissemination of out-of-commerce
works provided for in this Directive should
not apply to works or other subject-matterthat are first published or, in the absence of
publication, first broadcast in a third country
or, in the case of cinematographic oraudiovisual works, to works the producer ofwhich has his headquarters or habitualresidence in a third country. Thosemechanisms should also not apply to works
or other subject-matter of third country
nationals except when they are firstpublished or, in the absence of publication,
first broadcast in the territory of a Member
State or, in the case of cinematographic oraudiovisual works, to works of which the
producer's headquarters or habitual residence
is in a Member State.

(26) For reasons of international comity,
the licensing mechanisms and the exception
for the digitisation and dissemination of outof-commerce works provided for in thisDirective should not apply to works or othersubject-matter that are first published or, in
the absence of publication, first broadcast ina third country or, in the case ofcinematographic or audiovisual works, toworks the producer of which has his
headquarters or habitual residence in a third
country. Those mechanisms should also not
apply to works or other subject-matter ofthird country nationals except when they are
first published or, in the absence of
publication, first broadcast in the territory ofa Member State or, in the case ofcinematographic or audiovisual works, toworks of which the producer's headquartersor habitual residence is in a Member State.

Amendment 28
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(27) As mass digitisation projects canentail significant investments by cultural
heritage institutions, any licences granted
under the mechanisms provided for in thisDirective should not prevent them fromgenerating reasonable revenues in order tocover the costs of the licence and the costs ofdigitising and disseminating the works andother subject-matter covered by the licence.

(27) As mass digitisation projects canentail significant investments by cultural
heritage institutions, any licences granted
under the mechanisms provided for in thisDirective should not prevent them fromcovering the costs of the licence and thecosts of digitising and disseminating theworks and other subject-matter covered by
the licence.

Amendment 29
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28

PE601.094v02-00

EN30! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(28) Information regarding the future andongoing use of out-of-commerce works andother subject-matter by cultural heritage
institutions on the basis of the licensing
mechanisms provided for in this Directive
and the arrangements in place for all
rightholders to exclude the application oflicences to their works or other subjectmatter should be adequately publicised. Thisis particularly important when uses takeplace across borders in the internal market. It
is therefore appropriate to make provision forthe creation of a single publicly accessible
online portal for the Union to make suchinformation available to the public for areasonable period of time before the crossborder use takes place. Under Regulation(EU) No 386/2012 of the European
Parliament and of the Council , the European
Union Intellectual Property Office isentrusted with certain tasks and activities,
financed by making use of its own budgetarymeasures, aiming at facilitating andsupporting the activities of national
authorities, the private sector and Union
institutions in the fight against, including theprevention of, infringement of intellectual
property rights. It is therefore appropriate torely on that Office to establish and manage
the European portal making such information
available.

(28) Information regarding the future andongoing use of out-of-commerce works andother subject-matter by cultural heritage
institutions on the basis of the licensing
mechanisms or of the exception provided forin this Directive and the arrangements inplace for all rightholders to exclude theapplication of licences or of the exception totheir works or other subject-matter should be
adequately publicised. This is particularly
important when uses take place acrossborders in the internal market. It is therefore
appropriate to make provision for thecreation of a single publicly accessible online
portal for the Union to make suchinformation available to the public for areasonable period of time before the crossborder use takes place. Under Regulation(EU) No 386/2012 of the European
Parliament and of the Council, the European
Union Intellectual Property Office isentrusted with certain tasks and activities,
financed by making use of its own budgetarymeasures, aiming at facilitating andsupporting the activities of national
authorities, the private sector and Union
institutions in the fight against, including theprevention of, infringement of intellectual
property rights. It is therefore appropriate torely on that Office to establish and manage
the European portal making such information
available.

Amendment 30
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

31! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(28a) In order to ensure that the licensing
mechanisms established for out-ofcommerce works are relevant and function
properly, that rightholders are adequately
protected under those mechanisms, thatlicences are properly publicised and thatlegal clarity is ensured with regard to therepresentativeness of collective
management organisations and thecategorisation of works, Member Statesshould foster sector-specific stakeholder
dialogue.

Amendment 31
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

32! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(30) To facilitate the licensing of rights inaudiovisual works to video-on-demand
platforms, this Directive requires Member
States to set up a negotiation mechanism
allowing parties willing to conclude anagreement to rely on the assistance of an
impartial body. The body should meet withthe parties and help with the negotiations byproviding professional and external advice.
Against that background, Member Statesshould decide on the conditions of thefunctioning of the negotiation mechanism,
including the timing and duration of theassistance to negotiations and the bearing of
the costs. Member States should ensure thatadministrative and financial burdens remain
proportionate to guarantee the efficiency ofthe negotiation forum.

(30) To facilitate the licensing of rights inaudiovisual works to video-on-demand
platforms, Member States should set up anegotiation mechanism, managed by anexisting or newly established national body,allowing parties willing to conclude anagreement to rely on the assistance of an
impartial body. The participation in thisnegotiation mechanism and the subsequentconclusion of agreements should bevoluntary. Where a negotiation involves
parties from different Member States, thoseparties should agree beforehand on thecompetent Member State should they decideto rely on the negotiation mechanism. The
body should meet with the parties and help
with the negotiations by providing
professional, impartial and external advice.
Against that background, Member Statesshould decide on the conditions of thefunctioning of the negotiation mechanism,
including the timing and duration of theassistance to negotiations and the division of
any costs arising, and the composition ofsuch bodies. Member States should ensurethat administrative and financial burdens
remain proportionate to guarantee theefficiency of the negotiation forum.

Amendment 32
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

33! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(30a) The preservation of the Union’s
heritage is of the utmost importance andshould be strengthened for the benefit of
future generations. This should be achieved
notably through the protection of published
heritage. To this end, a Union legal deposit
should be created in order to ensure thatpublications concerning the Union, such as
Union law, Union history and integration,
Union policy and Union democracy,
institutional and parliamentary affairs, andpolitics, and, thereby, the Union’s
intellectual record and future published
heritage, are collected systematically. Not
only should such heritage be preserved
through the creation of a Union archive forpublications dealing with Union-related
matters, but it should also be madeavailable to Union citizens and future
generations. The European Parliament
Library, as the Library of the only Union
institution directly representing Union
citizens, should be designated as the Union
depository library. In order not to create anexcessive burden on publishers, printers
and importers, only electronic publications,such as e-books, e-journals and emagazines should be deposited in theEuropean Parliament Library, whichshould make available for readers
publications covered by the Union legal
deposit at the European Parliament Libraryfor the purpose of research or study andunder the control of the European
Parliament Library. Such publications
should not be made available online
externally.

Amendment 33
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31

PE601.094v02-00

EN

34! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(31) A free and pluralist press is essential
to ensure quality journalism and citizens'
access to information. It provides afundamental contribution to public debate
and the proper functioning of a democraticsociety. 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 ofpress publications as rightholders, licensing
and enforcement in the digital environmentis often complex and inefficient.

(31) A free and pluralist press is essential
to ensure quality journalism and citizens'
access to information. It provides afundamental contribution to public debate
and the proper functioning of a democraticsociety. The increasing imbalance between
powerful platforms and press publishers,
which can also be news agencies, hasalready led to a remarkable regression of
the media landscape on a regional level. In
the transition from print to digital, publishers
and news agencies of press publications arefacing problems in licensing the online useof their publications and recouping theirinvestments. In the absence of recognition of
publishers of press publications asrightholders, licensing and enforcement in
the digital environment is often complex andinefficient.

Amendment 34
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

35! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(32) The organisational and financial
contribution of publishers in producing press
publications needs to be recognised andfurther encouraged to ensure thesustainability of the publishing industry. It istherefore necessary to provide at Union levela harmonised legal protection for press
publications in respect of digital uses. Suchprotection should be effectively guaranteed
through the introduction, in Union law, ofrights related to copyright for the
reproduction and making available to the
public of press publications in respect ofdigital uses.

(32) The organisational and financial
contribution of publishers in producing press
publications needs to be recognised andfurther encouraged to ensure thesustainability of the publishing industry andthereby to guarantee the availablility of
reliable information. It is therefore
necessary for Member States to provide atUnion level legal protection for press
publications in the Union for digital uses.
Such protection should be effectively
guaranteed through the introduction, inUnion law, of rights related to copyright for
the reproduction and making available to the
public of press publications in respect ofdigital uses in order to obtain fair andproportionate remuneration for such uses.
Private uses should be excluded from thisreference. In addition, the listing in asearch engine should not be considered asfair and proportionate remuneration.

Amendment 35
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

36! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(33) For the purposes of this Directive, itis necessary to define the concept of press
publication in a way that embraces only
journalistic publications, published by aservice 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 magazinesof 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 topress publications under this Directive. This
protection does not extend to acts ofhyperlinking which do not constitutecommunication to the public.

(33) For the purposes of this Directive, itis necessary to define the concept of press
publication in a way that embraces only
journalistic publications, published by aservice 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 magazinesof 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 topress publications under this Directive. This
protection does not extend to acts ofhyperlinking.

Amendment 36
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(34) The rights granted to the publishersof press publications under this Directive
should have the same scope as the rights ofreproduction 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 theexception on quotation for purposes such as
criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive.

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

RR\1157669EN.docx

37! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 37
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

38! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(35) The protection granted to publishersof press publications under this Directive
should not affect the rights of the authors andother rightholders in the works and othersubject-matter incorporated therein,
including as regards the extent to whichauthors and other rightholders can exploit
their works or other subject-matter
independently from the press publication inwhich they are incorporated. Therefore,publishers of press publications should not
be able to invoke the protection granted tothem against authors and other rightholders.
This is without prejudice to contractual
arrangements concluded between the
publishers of press publications, on the one
side, and authors and other rightholders, on
the other side.

RR\1157669EN.docx(35) The protection granted to publishersof press publications under this Directive
should not affect the rights of the authors andother rightholders in the works and othersubject-matter incorporated therein,
including as regards the extent to whichauthors and other rightholders can exploit
their works or other subject-matter
independently from the press publication inwhich they are incorporated. Therefore,publishers of press publications should not
be able to invoke the protection granted tothem against authors and other rightholders.
This is without prejudice to contractual
arrangements concluded between the
publishers of press publications, on the one
side, and authors and other rightholders, on
the other side. Notwithstanding the fact that
authors of the works incorporated in a press
publication receive an appropriate reward
for the use of their works on the basis of theterms for licensing of their work to thepress publisher, authors whose work isincorporated in a press publication should
be entitled to an appropriate share of the
new additional revenues press publishers
receive for certain types of secondary use of
their press publications by informationsociety service providers in respect of therights provided for in Article 11(1) of thisDirective. The amount of the compensation
attributed to the authors should take into
account the specific industry licensing
standards regarding works incorporated ina press publication which are accepted as
appropriate in the respective Member State;
and the compensation attributed to authors
should not affect the licensing terms agreed
between the author and the press publisher
for the use of the author’s article by thepress publisher.

39! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 38
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

40! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(36) Publishers, including those of press
publications, books or scientific publications,
often operate on the basis of the transfer ofauthors' rights by means of contractual
agreements or statutory provisions. In thiscontext, publishers make an investment witha view to the exploitation of the works
contained in their publications and may insome instances be deprived of revenues
where such works are used under exceptions
or limitations such as the ones for private
copying and reprography. In a number ofMember States compensation for uses underthose exceptions is shared between authors
and publishers. In order to take account of
this situation and improve legal certainty for
all concerned parties, Member States shouldbe allowed to determine that, when an
author has transferred or licensed his rights
to a publisher or otherwise contributes withhis works to a publication and there aresystems in place to compensate for the harmcaused by an exception or limitation,
publishers are entitled to claim a share ofsuch compensation, whereas the burden on
the publisher to substantiate his claim
should not exceed what is required under
the system in place.

(36) Publishers, including those of press
publications, books or scientific publications
and music publications, operate on the basisof contractual agreements with authors. In
this context, publishers make an investment
and acquire rights, in some fields including
rights to claim a share of compensation
within joint collective management
organisations of authors and publishers,with a view to the exploitation of the works
and may therefore also find themselves
being deprived of revenues where suchworks are used under exceptions orlimitations such as the ones for private
copying and reprography. In a large numberof Member States compensation for uses
under those exceptions is shared between
authors and publishers. In order to takeaccount of this situation and to improve legal
certainty for all concerned parties, Member
States should be allowed to provide anequivalent compensation sharing system ifsuch a system was in operation in that
Member State before 12 November 2015.
The share between authors and publishersof such compensation could be set in theinternal distribution rules of the collective
management organisation acting jointly onbehalf of authors and publishers, or set by
Members States in law or regulation, in
accordance with the equivalent system thatwas in operation in that Member State
before 12 November 2015. This provision is
without prejudice to the arrangements in
the Member States concerning public
lending rights, the management of rights
not based on exceptions or limitations tocopyright, such as extended collective
licensing schemes, or concerning
remuneration rights on the basis ofnational law.

Amendment 39
Proposal for a directive
RR\1157669EN.docx

41! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENRecital 36 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(36 a) Cultural and creative industries(CCIs) play a key role in reindustrialising
Europe, are a driver for growth and are in a
strategic position to trigger innovative spillovers in other industrial sectors.
Furthermore CCIs are a driving force forinnovation and development of ICT in
Europe. Cultural and creative industries in
Europe provide more than 12 million fulltime jobs, which amounts to 7,5 % of theUnion's work force, creating approximately
EUR 509 billion in value added to GDP (5,3% of the EU's total GVA). The protection of
copyright and related rights are at the coreof the CCI's revenue.

Amendment 40
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

42! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(37) Over the last years, the functioning of
the online content marketplace has gained incomplexity. Online services providing accessto copyright protected content uploaded bytheir users without the involvement of rightholders have flourished and have become
main sources of access to content online.
This affects rightholders' possibilities todetermine whether, and under which
conditions, their work and other subjectmatter are used as well as their possibilities
to get an appropriate remuneration for it.

(37) Over the last years, the functioning of
the online content market has gained incomplexity. Online services providing accessto copyright protected content uploaded bytheir users without the involvement of rightholders have flourished and have become
main sources of access to copyrightprotected content online. Online services aremeans of providing wider access to culturaland creative works and offer great
opportunities for cultural and creative
industries to develop new business models.
However, although they allow for diversity
and ease of access to content, they also
generate challenges when copyrightprotected content is uploaded without priorauthorisation from rightholders. Thisaffects rightholders' possibilities to determine
whether, and under which conditions, theirwork and other subject-matter are used aswell as their possibilities to get anappropriate remuneration for it, since someuser uploaded content services do not enter
into licensing agreements on the basis thatthey claim to be covered by the “safeharbor” exemption set out in Directive
2000/31/EC.

Amendment 41
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

43! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(37a) Certain information society services,as part of their normal use, are designed togive access to the public to copyrightprotected content or other subject-matter
uploaded by their users. The definition of
an online content sharing service provider
under this Directive shall cover informationsociety service providers one of the main
purposes of which is to store and giveaccess to the public or to stream copyrightprotected content uploaded / made available
by its users and that optimise content,
including amongst others promoting
displaying, tagging, curating, sequencing
the uploaded works or other subject-matter,irrespective of the means used therefor, andtherefore act in an active way. The
definition of online content sharing service
providers under this Directive does notcover service providers that act in a noncommercial purpose capacity such as online
encyclopaedia, and providers of online
services where the content is uploaded withthe authorisation of all rightholders
concerned, such as educational or scientificrepositories. Providers of cloud services forindividual use which do not provide directaccess to the public, open source softwaredeveloping platforms, and online market
places whose main activity is online retail ofphysical goods, should not be considered
online content sharing service providers
within the meaning of this Directive.

Amendment 42
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38

Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

44! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(38) Where information society service
providers store and provide access to the
public to copyright protected works or othersubject-matter uploaded by their users,
thereby going beyond the mere provision ofphysical facilities and performing an act ofcommunication to the public, they are
obliged to conclude licensing agreementswith rightholders, unless they are eligible
for the liability exemption provided in
Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of theEuropean Parliament and of the Council34.

(38) Online content sharing service
providers perform an act of communication
to the public and therefore are responsible
for their content. As a consequence, theyshould conclude fair and appropriate
licensing agreements with rightholders.
Therefore they cannot benefit from theliability exemption provided for in Article 14
of Directive 2000/31/EC.

The rightholder should not be obliged toconclude licensing agreements.
In respect of Article 14, it is necessary toverify whether the service provider plays anactive role, including by optimising thepresentation of the uploaded works or
subject-matter or promoting them,irrespective of the nature of the means used
therefor.

In respect of Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/
EC, it is necessary to verify whether theservice 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 therefore.
Where licensing agreements are concluded,
they should also cover, to the same extent
and scope, the liability of users when they
are acting in a non-commercial capacity.

In order to ensure the functioning of any
licensing agreement, information society
service providers storing and providing
access to the public to large amounts ofcopyright protected works or other subjectmatter uploaded by their users should takeappropriate and proportionate measures toensure protection of works or other subjectmatter, 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/EC.

RR\1157669EN.docx

In order to ensure the functioning of any
licensing agreement, online content sharing
service providers should take appropriate andproportionate measures to ensure theprotection of works or other subject-matter
uploaded by their users, such as
implementing effective technologies. Thisobligation should also apply when theinformation society service providers are
eligible for the liability exemption provided
in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC.

45! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENIn the absence of agreements with therightholders it is also reasonable to expectfrom online content sharing service
providers that they take appropriate andproportionate measures leading to the nonavailability on those services of copyright or
related-right infringing works or othersubject matter. Such service providers areimportant content distributors, thereby
impacting on the exploitation of copyrightprotected content. Such service providers
should take appropriate and proportionate
measures to ensure the non-availability ofworks or other subject matter as identified
by rightholders. These measures should
however not lead to the non-availability of
non-infringing works or other subject
matter uploaded by users.

Amendment 43
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39

Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment46! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(39) Collaboration between informationsociety service providers storing andproviding access to the public to large
amounts of copyright protected works orother subject-matter uploaded by their users
and rightholders is essential for thefunctioning of technologies, such as content
recognition technologies. In such cases,
rightholders should provide the necessary
data to allow the services to identify theircontent and the services should betransparent towards rightholders with regard
to the deployed technologies, to allow theassessment of their appropriateness. The
services should in particular provide
rightholders with information on the type oftechnologies used, the way they areoperated and their success rate for therecognition of rightholders' content. Thosetechnologies should also allow rightholders
to get information from the informationsociety service providers on the use of theircontent covered by an agreement.

RR\1157669EN.docx(39) Cooperation between online content
sharing service providers and rightholders isessential for the functioning of the measures.
In particular, rightholders should provide
the relevant information to online content
sharing service providers to allow them toidentify their content when applying themeasures. The service providers should betransparent towards rightholders with regard
to the deployed measures, to allow theassessment of their appropriateness. Whenassessing the proportionality andeffectiveness of the measures implemented,
due consideration should be given totechnological constraints and limitations aswell as to the amount or the type of works
or other subject matter uploaded by theusers of the services. In accordance with
Article 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC, whereapplicable, the implementation of measuresby service providers should not consist in a
general monitoring obligation and should
be limited to ensuring the non-availabilityof unauthorised uses on their services of
specific and duly notified copyrightprotected works or other subject-matter.
When implementing such measures, theservice providers should also strike abalance between the rights of users andthose of the rightholders under the Charterof Fundamental Rights of the European
Union. The measures applied should not
require the identification of individual usersthat upload content and should not involve
the processing of data relating to individual
users, in accordance with Regulation (EU)2016/6791a and Directive 2002/58/EC1b.
Since the measures deployed by online
content sharing service providers inapplication of this Directive could have anegative or disproportionate effect onlegitimate content that is uploaded ordisplayed by users, in particular where thecontent concerned is covered by an
exception or limitation, online content
sharing service providers should be
required to offer a complaints mechanism

47! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN__________
1a Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of theEuropean Parliament and of the Council of
27 April 2016 on the protection of natural
persons with regard to the processing of
personal data and on the free movement ofsuch data, and repealing Directive 95/46/
EC (General Data Protection Regulation)(OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).
1b Directive 2002/58/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 12 July
2002 concerning the processing of personal
data and the protection of privacy in theelectronic communications sector (Directive
on privacy and electronic communications)(OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37).

Amendment 44
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(39a) Member States should ensure thatan intermediate mechanism exists enabling
service providers and rightholders to findan amicable solution to any dispute arisingfrom the terms of their cooperationagreements. To that end, Member Statesshould appoint an impartial body with all
the relevant competence and experience
necessary to assist the parties in the
resolution of their dispute.

Amendment 45
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 b (new)Text proposed by the Commission
PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment48! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(39b) The content recognition
technologies market is well developed
already and expected to grow in a databased economy. The existence oftechnologies of this kind and competition
among suppliers thereof should therefore
create a market that is fair for all
undertakings, irrespective of their size,
ensuring that SME access thereto isaffordable and simple. However, theabsence of clear legal obligations to use
these technologies enables dominantmarket operators in particular to refuse to
use those tools which are appropriate forthe purposes of licensing and managementof rights.

Amendment 46
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 c (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

49! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(39c) As a principle rightholders should
always receive fair and appropriate
remuneration. Authors and performers who
have concluded contracts withintermediaries, such as labels andproducers, should receive fair andappropriate remuneration from them, either
through individual agreements and/ orcollective bargaining agreements, collective
management agreements or rules having asimilar effect, for example joint
remuneration rules. This remuneration
should be mentioned explicitly in thecontracts according to each mode of
exploitation, including online exploitation.
Members States should look into thespecificities of each sector and should beallowed to provide that remuneration isdeemed fair and appropriate if it isdetermined in accordance with thecollective bargaining or joint remunerationagreement.

Amendment 47
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40

Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

50! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(40) Certain rightholders such as authors
and performers need information to assess
the economic value of their rights which areharmonised under Union law. This isespecially the case where such rightholders
grant a licence or a transfer of rights in returnfor remuneration. As authors and performers
tend to be in a weaker contractual position
when they grant licences or transfer theirrights, they need information to assess thecontinued economic value of their rights,
compared to the remuneration received fortheir licence or transfer, but they often face alack of transparency. Therefore, the sharingof adequate information by their contractual
counterparts or their successors in title isimportant for the transparency and balance inthe system that governs the remuneration of
authors and performers.

(40) Certain rightholders such as authors
and performers need information to assess
the economic value of their rights which areharmonised under Union law. This isespecially the case where such rightholders
grant a licence or a transfer of rights in returnfor remuneration. As authors and performers
tend to be in a weaker contractual position
when they grant licences or transfer theirrights, they need information to assess thecontinued economic value of their rights,
compared to the remuneration received fortheir licence or transfer, but they often face alack of transparency. Therefore, the sharingof comprehensive and relevant informationby their contractual counterparts or theirsuccessors in title is important for thetransparency and balance in the system thatgoverns the remuneration of authors andperformers. The information that authors
and performers are entitled to expect should
be proportionate and cover all modes of
exploitation, direct and indirect revenue
generated, including revenues frommerchandising, and the remuneration due.
The information on the exploitation should
also include information about the identityof any on the sub-licensee or subtransferee. The transparency obligation
should nevertheless apply only where
copyright relevant rights are concerned.

Amendment 48
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42

Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

51! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(42) Certain contracts for the exploitationof rights harmonised at Union level are oflong duration, offering few possibilities for
authors and performers to renegotiate themwith their contractual counterparts or theirsuccessors in title. Therefore, without
prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in
Member States, there should be a
remuneration adjustment mechanism forcases where the remuneration originallyagreed under a licence or a transfer of rights
is disproportionately low compared to therelevant revenues and the benefits derived
from the exploitation of the work or the
fixation of the performance, including inlight of the transparency ensured by thisDirective. The assessment of the situation
should take account of the specificcircumstances of each case as well as of thespecificities and practices of the different
content sectors. Where the parties do notagree on the adjustment of the remuneration,
the author or performer should be entitled tobring a claim before a court or othercompetent authority.

(42) Certain contracts for the exploitationof rights harmonised at Union level are oflong duration, offering few possibilities for
authors and performers to renegotiate themwith their contractual counterparts or theirsuccessors in title. Therefore, without
prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in
Member States, there should be a
remuneration adjustment mechanism forcases where the remuneration originallyagreed under a licence or a transfer of rights
is disproportionately low compared to therelevant direct and indirect revenues and thebenefits derived from the exploitation of thework or the fixation of the performance,
including in light of the transparency ensured
by this Directive. The assessment of thesituation should take account of the specificcircumstances of each case, the specificities
and practices of the different content sectors
as well as of the nature and thecontribution to the work of the author or
performer. Such a contract adjustment
request could also be made by theorganisation representing the author or
performer on his behalf, unless the request
would be detrimental to the interests of theauthor or performer. Where the parties do
not agree on the adjustment of the
remuneration, the author or performer or arepresentative organisation appointed bythem should on request by the author or
performer be entitled to bring a claim before
a court or other competent authority.

Amendment 49
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43

Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

52! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(43) Authors and performers are often
reluctant to enforce their rights against theircontractual partners before a court or
tribunal. Member States should therefore
provide for an alternative dispute resolution
procedure that addresses claims related to
obligations of transparency and the contract
adjustment mechanism.

(43) Authors and performers are often
reluctant to enforce their rights against theircontractual partners before a court or
tribunal. Member States should therefore
provide for an alternative dispute resolution
procedure that addresses claims related to
obligations of transparency and the contract
adjustment mechanism. Representative
organisations of authors and performers,
including collective management
organisations and trade unions, should be
able to initiate such procedures at therequest of authors and performers. Details
about who initiated the procedure should
remain undisclosed.

Amendment 50
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

53! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(43a) When authors and performers licenseor transfer their rights, they expect theirwork or performance to be exploited.
However, it happens that works or
performances that have been licensed ortransferred are not exploited at all. Whenthese rights have been transferred on an
exclusive basis, authors and performers
cannot turn to another partner to exploit
their work. In such a case, and after areasonable time period has lapsed, authors
and performers should have a right ofrevocation allowing them to transfer or
license their right to another person.
Revocation should also be possible when
the transferee or licensee has not compliedwith his or her reporting/transparency
obligation provided for in Article 14 of thisDirective. The revocation should only beconsidered after all the steps of alternative
dispute resolution have been completed,particularly with regard to reporting. As
exploitation of works can vary dependingon the sectors, specific provisions could betaken at national level in order to take into
account the specificities of the sectors such as the audiovisual sector - or of theworks and the anticipated exploitation
periods, notably providing for time limits
for the right of revocation. In order toprevent abuses and take into account that acertain amount of time is needed before awork is actually exploited, authors andperformers should be able to exercise theright of revocation only after a certain
period of time following the conclusion of
the license or of the transfer agreement.
National law should regulate the exercise of
the right of revocation in the case of works
involving a plurality of authors or
performers, taking into account the relative
importance of the individual contributions.

PE601.094v02-00

EN54! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 51
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43 b (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(43b) To support the effective application
across Member States of the relevant
provisions of this Directive, the Commission
should, in cooperation with Member States,
encourage the exchange of best practices
and promote dialogue at Union level.

Amendment 52
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(46) Any processing of personal data
under this Directive should respectfundamental rights, including the right torespect for private and family life and theright to protection of personal data under
Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter ofFundamental Rights of the European Unionand must be in compliance with Directive
95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council35 and Directive 2002/58/EC of
the European Parliament and of theCouncil36 .

(46) Any processing of personal data
under this Directive should respectfundamental rights, including the right torespect for private and family life and theright to protection of personal data under
Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter ofFundamental Rights of the European Unionand must be in compliance with Regulation(EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC.
The provisions of the General Data
Protection Regulation, including the "rightto be forgotten" should be respected.

Amendment 53
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

55! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(46 a) It is important to stress theimportance of anonymity, when handlingpersonal data for commercial purposes.
Additionally, the "by default" not sharing
option with regards to personal data while
using online platform interfaces should bepromoted.

Amendment 54
Proposal for a directive
Article 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 1

Article 1

Subject matter and scope

Subject matter and scope

1.
This Directive lays down rules which
aim at further harmonising the Union law
applicable to copyright and related rights inthe framework of the internal market, taking
into account in particular digital and crossborder uses of protected content. It also lays
down rules on exceptions and limitations, on
the facilitation of licences as well as rules
aiming at ensuring a well-functioning
marketplace for the exploitation of works
and other subject-matter.

1.
This Directive lays down rules which
aim at further harmonising the Union law
applicable to copyright and related rights inthe framework of the internal market, taking
into account in particular digital and crossborder uses of protected content. It also lays
down rules on exceptions and limitations, on
the facilitation of licences as well as rules
aiming at ensuring a well-functioning
marketplace for the exploitation of works
and other subject-matter.

2.
Except in the cases referred to in
Article 6, this Directive shall leave intact andshall in no way affect existing rules laid
down in the Directives currently in force inthis area, in particular Directives 96/9/EC,
2001/29/EC, 2006/115/EC, 2009/24/EC,
2012/28/EU and 2014/26/EU.

2.
Except in the cases referred to in
Article 6, this Directive shall leave intact andshall in no way affect existing rules laid
down in the Directives currently in force inthis area, in particular Directives 96/9/EC,
2000/31/EC, 2001/29/EC, 2006/115/EC,
2009/24/EC, 2012/28/EU and 2014/26/EU.

Amendment 55
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission
PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment56! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(1)‘research organisation’ means auniversity, a research institute or any otherorganisation the primary goal of which is toconduct scientific research or to conduct
scientific research and provide educational
services:(1)‘research organisation’ means auniversity, including its libraries, a research
institute or any other organisation the
primary goal of which is to conduct scientificresearch or to conduct scientific research andprovide educational services:

Amendment 56
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(a)on a non-for-profit basis or byreinvesting all the profits in its scientificresearch; or(a)on a not-for-profit basis or byreinvesting all the profits in its scientificresearch; orAmendment 57
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendmentin such a way that the access to the results
generated by the scientific research cannot beenjoyed on a preferential basis by anundertaking exercising a decisive influence
upon such organisation;in such a way that the access to the results
generated by the scientific research cannot beenjoyed on a preferential basis by anundertaking exercising a significant
influence upon such organisation;

Amendment 58
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

57! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

(2)
‘text and data mining’ means any
automated analytical technique aiming toanalyse text and data in digital form in orderto generate information such as patterns,
trends and correlations;(2)'text and data mining' means any
automated analytical technique whichanalyses works and other subject matter indigital form in order to generate information,
including, but not limited to, patterns, trends
and correlations.

Amendment 59
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(4)‘press publication’ means a fixationof a collection of literary works of ajournalistic nature, which may also comprise
other works or subject-matter and constitutes
an individual item within a periodical or
regularly-updated publication under a single
title, such as a newspaper or a general or
special interest magazine, having the purposeof providing information related to news orother topics and published in any media
under the initiative, editorial responsibility
and control of a service provider.

(4) ‘press publication’ means a fixation by
publishers or news agencies of a collectionof literary works of a journalistic nature,
which may also comprise other works or
subject-matter and constitutes an individual
item within a periodical or regularly-updated
publication under a single title, such as anewspaper or a general or special interest
magazine, having the purpose of providing
information related to news or other topics
and published in any media under the
initiative, editorial responsibility and control
of a service provider. Periodicals which are
published for scientific or academic
purposes, such as scientific journals, shallnot be covered by this definition;

Amendment 60
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a(new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(4a) ‘out of commerce work’ means:

PE601.094v02-00

EN

58! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(a) an entire work or other subject matter inany version or manifestation that is nolonger available to the public in a Member
State through customary channels ofcommerce;(b) a work or other subject matter that has
never been in commerce in a Member State,
unless, from the circumstances of that case,
it is apparent that its author objected tomaking it available to the public;
Amendment 61
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 b (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(4b) ‘online content sharing service
provider’ means a provider of an
information society service one of the main
purposes of which is to store and giveaccess to the public to copyright protected
works or other protected subject-matter
uploaded by its users, which the service
optimises. Services acting in a noncommercial purpose capacity such as online
encyclopaedia, and providers of online
services where the content is uploaded withthe authorisation of all rightholders
concerned, such as educational or scientificrepositories, should not be considered
online content sharing service providers
within the meaning of this Directive.
Providers of cloud services for individual
use which do not provide direct access tothe public, open source software developing
platforms, and online market places whose
main activity is online retail of physicalgoods, should not be considered online
content sharing service providers within themeaning of this Directive;

RR\1157669EN.docx

59! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 62
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 c (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(4c) ‘information society service’ means aservice within the meaning of point (b) of
Article 1(1) of Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of
the European Parliament and of theCouncil1a;___________
1a Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of theEuropean Parliament and of the Council of
9 September 2015 laying down a procedure
for the provision of information in the fieldof technical regulations and of rules on
Information Society services (OJ L 241,17.9.2015, p. 1).

Amendment 63
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 d (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(4d) ‘automated image referencing service’means any online service which reproduces
or makes available to the public forindexing and referencing purposes graphic
or art works or photographic works
collected by automated means via a thirdparty online service.

Amendment 64
Proposal for a directive
Article 3

PE601.094v02-00

EN

60! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 3

Article 3

Text and data mining

Text and data mining

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and Article 11(1)of this Directive for reproductions andextractions made by research organisations
in order to carry out text and data mining ofworks or other subject-matter to which they
have lawful access for the purposes ofscientific research.

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and Article 11(1)of this Directive for reproductions andextractions of works or other subject-matter
to which research organisations havelawful access and made in order to carryout text and data mining for the purposes ofscientific research by such organisations.
Member States shall provide foreducational establishments and cultural
heritage institutions conducting scientificresearch within the meaning of point (1)(a)or (1)(b) of Article 2, in such a way that theaccess to the results generated by thescientific research cannot be enjoyed on apreferential basis by an undertaking
exercising a decisive influence upon suchorganisations, to also be able to benefit
from the exception provided for in this
Article.
1a.
Reproductions and extractions madefor text and data mining purposes shall be
stored in a secure manner, for example bytrusted bodies appointed for this purpose.

2.
Any contractual provision contrary to 2.
Any contractual provision contrary to
the exception provided for in paragraph 1
the exception provided for in paragraph 1
shall be unenforceable.
shall be unenforceable.
3.
Rightholders shall be allowed toapply measures to ensure the security andintegrity of the networks and databases
where the works or other subject-matter are
hosted. Such measures shall not go beyond
what is necessary to achieve that objective.

RR\1157669EN.docx

3.
Rightholders shall be allowed toapply measures to ensure the security andintegrity of the networks and databases
where the works or other subject-matter are
hosted. Such measures shall not go beyond
what is necessary to achieve that objective.

61! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN4.
Member States shall encouragerightholders and research organisations todefine commonly-agreed best practices
concerning the application of the measuresreferred to in paragraph 3.

4
Member States may continue toprovide text and data mining exceptions inaccordance with point (a) of Article 5(3) of
Directive 2001/29/EC.

Amendment 65
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Article 3a
Optional exception or limitation for text
and data mining
1.
Without prejudice to Article 3 of thisDirective, Member States may provide foran exception or a limitation to the rights
provided for in Article 2 of Directive
2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of
Directive 96/9/EC and Article 11(1) of thisDirective for reproductions and extractionsof lawfully accessible works and othersubject-matter that form a part of theprocess of text and data mining, provided
that the use of works and other subject
matter referred to therein has not been
expressly reserved by their rightholders,
including by machine readable means.
2.
Reproductions and extractions madepursuant to paragraph 1 shall not be used
for purposes other than text and data
mining.
3.
Member States may continue toprovide text and data mining exceptions inaccordance with Art. 5 (3) (a) of Directive
2001/29/EC.

PE601.094v02-00

EN62! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 66
Proposal for a directive
Article 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 4

Article 4

Use of works and other subject-matter indigital and cross-border teaching activities

Use of works and other subject-matter indigital and cross-border teaching activities

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception or limitation to the rights provided
for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/
EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/
EC, Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC
and Article 11(1) of this Directive in order toallow for the digital use of works and othersubject-matter for the sole purpose ofillustration for teaching, to the extent
justified by the non-commercial purpose to
be achieved, provided that the use:

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception or limitation to the rights provided
for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/
EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/
EC, Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC
and Article 11(1) of this Directive in order toallow for the digital use of works and othersubject-matter for the sole purpose ofillustration for teaching, to the extent
justified by the non-commercial purpose to
be achieved, provided that the use:(a) takes place on the premises of an
educational establishment or through asecure electronic network accessible only by
the educational establishment's pupils or
students and teaching staff;(a) takes place on the premises of an
educational establishment, or in any othervenue in which the teaching activity takes
place under the responsibility of theeducational establishment, or through asecure electronic environment accessible
only by the educational establishment's
pupils or students and teaching staff;(b) is accompanied by the indication of thesource, including the author's name, unless
this turns out to be impossible.

(b) is accompanied by the indication of thesource, including the author's name, unless
this turns out to be impossible for reasons ofpracticability.

RR\1157669EN.docx

63! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

2.
Member States may provide that the
exception adopted pursuant to paragraph 1
does not apply generally or as regards
specific types of works or other subjectmatter, to the extent that adequate licences
authorising the acts described in paragraph 1
are easily available in the market.

2.
Member States may provide that the
exception adopted pursuant to paragraph 1
does not apply generally or as regards
specific types of works or other subjectmatter, such as material which is primarily
intended for the educational market or
sheet music, to the extent that adequate
licencing agreements authorising the acts
described in paragraph 1 and tailored to theneeds and specificities of educational
establishments are easily available in themarket.

Member States availing themselves of theprovision of the first subparagraph shall takethe necessary measures to ensure appropriate
availability and visibility of the licences
authorising the acts described in paragraph 1
for educational establishments.

Member States availing themselves of theprovision of the first subparagraph shall takethe necessary measures to ensure appropriate
availability and visibility of the licences
authorising the acts described in paragraph 1
for educational establishments.

3.
The use of works and other subjectmatter for the sole purpose of illustration forteaching through secure electronic networks
undertaken in compliance with theprovisions of national law adopted pursuant
to this Article shall be deemed to occur
solely in the Member State where theeducational establishment is established.

3.
The use of works and other subjectmatter for the sole purpose of illustration forteaching through secure electronic
environments undertaken in compliancewith the provisions of national law adopted
pursuant to this Article shall be deemed tooccur solely in the Member State where theeducational establishment is established.

4.
Member States may provide for faircompensation for the harm incurred by therightholders due to the use of their works orother subject-matter pursuant to paragraph 1.

4.
Member States may provide for faircompensation for the harm incurred by therightholders due to the use of their works orother subject-matter pursuant to paragraph 1.
4a.
Without prejudice to paragraph 2,
any contractual provision contrary to the
exception or limitation adopted pursuant toparagraph 1 shall be unenforceable.
Member States shall ensure thatrightholders have the right to grant royaltyfree licences authorising the acts describedin paragraph 1, generally or as regards
specific types of works or other subjectmatter that they may choose.

PE601.094v02-00

EN64! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 67
Proposal for a directive
Article 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 5

Article 5

Preservation of cultural heritage

Preservation of cultural heritage

Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1)(a) of
Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of
this Directive, permitting cultural heritage
institutions, to make copies of any works orother subject-matter that are permanently intheir collections, in any format or medium,for the sole purpose of the preservation ofsuch works or other subject-matter and to theextent necessary for such preservation.

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1)(a) of
Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of
this Directive, permitting cultural heritage
institutions to make copies of any works orother subject-matter that are permanently intheir collections, in any format or medium,for the purposes of preservation of suchworks or other subject-matter and to theextent necessary for such preservation.
1a.
Member States shall ensure that any
material resulting from an act ofreproduction of material in the publicdomain shall not be subject to copyright or
related rights, provided that such
reproduction is a faithful reproduction for
purposes of preservation of the original
material.
1b.
Any contractual provision contrary
to the exception provided for in paragraph1 shall be unenforceable.

Amendment 68
Proposal for a directive
Article 6
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 6

Article 6

RR\1157669EN.docx

65! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENCommon provisions

Common provisions

Article 5(5) and the first, third and fifth
subparagraphs of Article 6(4) of Directive
2001/29/EC shall apply to the exceptions andthe limitation provided for under this Title.

1.
Accessing content covered by an
exception provided for in this Directive
shall not confer on users any entitlement to
use it pursuant to another exception.
2.
Article 5(5) and the first, third,
fourth and fifth subparagraphs of Article
6(4) of Directive 2001/29/EC shall apply tothe exceptions and the limitation provided
for under this Title.

Amendment 69
Proposal for a directive
Article 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 7

Article 7

Use of out-of-commerce works by cultural
heritage institutions

Use of out-of-commerce works by cultural
heritage institutions

1.
Member States shall provide thatwhen a collective management organisation,
on behalf of its members, concludes a nonexclusive licence for non-commercial
purposes with a cultural heritage institution
for the digitisation, distribution,communication to the public or making
available of out-of-commerce works or othersubject-matter permanently in the collectionof the institution, such a non-exclusive
licence may be extended or presumed toapply to rightholders of the same category as
those covered by the licence who are notrepresented by the collective management
organisation, provided that:1.
Member States shall provide thatwhen a collective management organisation,
on behalf of its members, concludes a nonexclusive licence for non-commercial
purposes with a cultural heritage institution
for the digitisation, distribution,communication to the public or making
available of out-of-commerce works or othersubject-matter permanently in the collectionof the institution, such a non-exclusive
licence may be extended or presumed toapply to rightholders of the same category as
those covered by the licence who are notrepresented by the collective management
organisation, provided that:

PE601.094v02-00

EN

66! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(a)the collective management
organisation is, on the basis of mandates
from rightholders, broadly representative ofrightholders in the category of works or othersubject-matter and of the rights which are thesubject of the licence;(a)the collective management
organisation is, on the basis of mandates
from rightholders, broadly representative ofrightholders in the category of works or othersubject-matter and of the rights which are thesubject of the licence;(b)equal treatment is guaranteed to allrightholders in relation to the terms of thelicence;(b)equal treatment is guaranteed to allrightholders in relation to the terms of thelicence;(c)
all rightholders may at any time
object to their works or other subject-matterbeing deemed to be out of commerce andexclude the application of the licence to theirworks or other subject-matter.

(c)
all rightholders may at any time
object to their works or other subject-matterbeing deemed to be out of commerce andexclude the application of the licence to theirworks or other subject-matter.
1a.
Member States shall provide for an
exception or limitation to the rights
provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive
2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of
Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1) of Directive
2009/24/EC, and Article 11(1) of thisDirective, permitting cultural heritage
institutions to make copies available onlineof out-of-commerce works that are locatedpermanently in their collections for not-forprofit purposes, provided that:(a)the name of the author or any otheridentifiable rightholder is indicated, unless
this turns out to be impossible;(b)
all rightholders may at any time
object to their works or other subject-matterbeing deemed to be out of commerce andexclude the application of the exception totheir works or other subject-matter.

RR\1157669EN.docx

67! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

1b.
Member States shall provide that the
exception adopted pursuant to paragraph
1a does not apply in sectors or for types ofworks where appropriate licensing-based
solutions, including but not limited tosolutions provided for in paragraph 1, areavailable. Member States shall, in
consultation with authors, otherrightholders, collective management
organisations and cultural heritage
institutions, determine the availability ofextended collective licensing-based
solutions for specific sectors or types ofworks.
2.
A work or other subject-matter shallbe deemed to be out of commerce when thewhole work or other subject-matter, in all
its translations, versions andmanifestations, is not available to the publicthrough customary channels of commerceand cannot be reasonably expected to
become so.

2.
Member States may provide a cut-off
date in relation to determining whether awork previously commercialised is deemed
to be out of commerce.

Member States shall, in consultation withrightholders, collective management
organisations and cultural heritage
institutions, ensure that the requirements
used to determine whether works and othersubject-matter can be licensed in accordancewith paragraph 1 do not extend beyond whatis necessary and reasonable and do notpreclude the possibility to determine the outof-commerce status of a collection as awhole, when it is reasonable to presume that
all works or other subject-matter in thecollection are out of commerce.

Member States shall, in consultation withrightholders, collective management
organisations and cultural heritage
institutions, ensure that the requirements
used to determine whether works and othersubject-matter can be licensed in accordancewith paragraph 1 or used in accordance withparagraph 1a do not extend beyond what isnecessary and reasonable and do notpreclude the possibility to determine the outof-commerce status of a collection as awhole, when it is reasonable to presume that
all works or other subject-matter in thecollection are out of commerce.

3.
Member States shall provide thatappropriate publicity measures are taken
regarding:3.
Member States shall provide thatappropriate publicity measures are taken
regarding:(a)the deeming of works or othersubject-matter as out of commerce;(a)the deeming of works or othersubject-matter as out of commerce;(b)
the licence, and in particular its
application to unrepresented rightholders;(b)
any licence, and in particular its
application to unrepresented rightholders;

PE601.094v02-00

EN68! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(c)the possibility of rightholders to(c)the possibility of rightholders to
object, referred to in point (c) of paragraph 1; object, referred to in point (c) of paragraph 1
and point (b) of paragraph 1a;
including during a reasonable period of time
before the works or other subject-matter are
digitised, distributed, communicated to the
public or made available.

including during a period of at least six
months before the works or other subjectmatter are digitised, distributed,
communicated to the public or madeavailable.

4.
Member States shall ensure that thelicences referred to in paragraph 1 are soughtfrom a collective management organisationthat is representative for the Member State
where:

4.
Member States shall ensure that thelicences referred to in paragraph 1 are soughtfrom a collective management organisationthat is representative for the Member State
where:(a)the works or phonograms were firstpublished or, in the absence of publication,
where they were first broadcast, except forcinematographic and audiovisual works;(a)the works or phonograms were firstpublished or, in the absence of publication,
where they were first broadcast, except forcinematographic and audiovisual works;(b)
the producers of the works have their
headquarters or habitual residence, forcinematographic and audiovisual works; or(b)
the producers of the works have their
headquarters or habitual residence, forcinematographic and audiovisual works; or(c)the cultural heritage institution isestablished, when a Member State or a third
country could not be determined, after
reasonable efforts, according to points (a)and (b).

(c)
the cultural heritage institution isestablished, when a Member State or a third
country could not be determined, after
reasonable efforts, according to points (a)and (b).

5.
Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall not apply
to the works or other subject-matter of third
country nationals except where points (a) and(b) of paragraph 4 apply.

5.
Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall not apply
to the works or other subject-matter of third
country nationals except where points (a) and(b) of paragraph 4 apply.

Amendment 70
Proposal for a directive
Article 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 8

Article 8

Cross-border uses

Cross-border uses

RR\1157669EN.docx

69! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN1.
Works or other subject-mattercovered by a licence granted in accordancewith Article 7 may be used by the cultural
heritage institution in accordance with theterms of the licence in all Member States.

1.
Out-of-commerce works or othersubject-matter covered by Article 7 may be
used by the cultural heritage institution inaccordance with that Article in all Member
States.

2.
Member States shall ensure that
information that allows the identification of
the works or other subject-matter covered bya licence granted in accordance with Article
7 and information about the possibility ofrightholders to object referred to in Article
7(1)(c) are made publicly accessible in asingle online portal for at least six months
before the works or other subject-matter are
digitised, distributed, communicated to the
public or made available in Member Statesother than the one where the licence isgranted, and for the whole duration of thelicence.

2.
Member States shall ensure that
information that allows the identification of
the works or other subject-matter covered by
Article 7 and information about thepossibility of rightholders to object referred
to in point (c) of Article 7(1) and point (b) of
Article 7(1a) are made permanently, easily
and effectively accessible in a public single
online portal for at least six months before
the works or other subject-matter are
digitised, distributed, communicated to the
public or made available in Member Statesother than the one where the licence isgranted, or in the cases covered by Art 7(1a)where the cultural heritage institution isestablished and for the whole duration of thelicence.

3.
The portal referred to in paragraph 2
shall be established and managed by theEuropean Union Intellectual Property Officein accordance with Regulation (EU) No
386/2012.

3.
The portal referred to in paragraph 2
shall be established and managed by theEuropean Union Intellectual Property Officein accordance with Regulation (EU) No
386/2012.

Amendment 71
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

70! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Member States shall ensure a regulardialogue between representative users' andrightholders' organisations, and any otherrelevant stakeholder organisations, to, on asector-specific basis, foster the relevance andusability of the licensing mechanisms
referred to in Article 7(1), ensure theeffectiveness of the safeguards forrightholders referred to in this Chapter,notably as regards publicity measures, and,
where applicable, assist in the establishmentof the requirements referred to in the second
subparagraph of Article 7(2).

Member States shall ensure a regulardialogue between representative users' andrightholders' organisations, and any otherrelevant stakeholder organisations, to, on asector-specific basis, foster the relevance andusability of the licensing mechanisms
referred to in Article 7(1) and the exception
referred to in Article 7(1a), ensure theeffectiveness of the safeguards forrightholders referred to in this Chapter,notably as regards publicity measures, and,
where applicable, assist in the establishmentof the requirements referred to in the second
subparagraph of Article 7(2).

Amendment 72
Proposal for a directive
Article 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 10

Article 10

Negotiation mechanism

Negotiation mechanism

Member States shall ensure that whereparties wishing to conclude an agreement forthe purpose of making available audiovisual
works on video-on-demand platforms facedifficulties relating to the licensing of rights,
they may rely on the assistance of an
impartial body with relevant experience.
That body shall provide assistance withnegotiation and help reach agreements.

Member States shall ensure that whereparties wishing to conclude an agreement forthe purpose of making available audiovisual
works on video-on-demand platforms facedifficulties relating to the licensing ofaudiovisual rights, they may rely on theassistance of an impartial body with relevant
experience. The impartial body created ordesignated by the Member State for the
purpose of this Article shall provide
assistance to the parties with negotiation andhelp them to reach agreement.

No later than [date mentioned in Article
21(1)] Member States shall notify to theCommission the body referred to inparagraph 1.

No later than [date mentioned in Article
21(1)] Member States shall inform theCommission of the body they create ordesignate pursuant to the first paragraph.

RR\1157669EN.docx

71! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENTo encourage the availability of audiovisual
works on video-on-demand platforms,
Member States shall foster dialogue
between representative organisations ofauthors, producers, video-on-demand
platforms and other relevant stakeholders.

Amendment 73
Proposal for a directive
Title III – Chapter 2 a (new) – Article 10 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
CHAPTER 2a
Access to Union publications
Article 10 aUnion Legal Deposit1.
Any electronic publication dealing
with Union-related matters such as Union
law, Union history and integration, Union
policy and Union democracy, institutional
and parliamentary affairs, and politics, thatis made available to the public in the Union
shall be subject to a Union Legal Deposit.
2.
The European Parliament Libraryshall be entitled to delivery, free of charge,of one copy of every publication referred toin paragraph 1.
3.
The obligation set out in paragraph1 shall apply to publishers, printers andimporters of publications for the works they
publish, print or import in the Union.

PE601.094v02-00

EN72! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

4.
From the day of the delivery to theEuropean Parliament Library, thepublications referred to in paragraph 1
shall become part of the European
Parliament Library permanent collection.
They shall be made available to users at theEuropean Parliament Library’s premises
exclusively for the purpose of research or
study by accredited researchers and under
the control of the European Parliament
Library.
5.
The Commission shall adopt acts tospecify the modalities relating to thedelivery to the European Parliament
Library of publications referred to inparagraph 1.

Amendment 74
Proposal for a directive
Article 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 11

Article 11

Protection of press publications concerning
digital uses

Protection of press publications concerning
digital uses

1.
Member States shall provide
publishers of press publications with therights provided for in Article 2 and Article
3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the digitaluse of their press publications.

1.
Member States shall provide
publishers of press publications with therights provided for in Article 2 and Article
3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC so that they
may obtain fair and proportionate
remuneration for the digital use of theirpress publications by information society
service providers.
1a.
The rights referred to in paragraph1 shall not prevent legitimate private andnon-commercial use of press publications
by individual users.

RR\1157669EN.docx

73! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN2.
The rights referred to in paragraph 1
shall leave intact and shall in no way affectany rights provided for in Union law toauthors and other rightholders, in respect of
the works and other subject-matterincorporated in a press publication. Suchrights may not be invoked against thoseauthors and other rightholders and, inparticular, may not deprive them of theirright to exploit their works and other subjectmatter independently from the press
publication in which they are incorporated.

2.
The rights referred to in paragraph1shall leave intact and shall in no way affectany rights provided for in Union law toauthors and other rightholders, in respect of
the works and other subject-matterincorporated in a press publication. Suchrights may not be invoked against thoseauthors and other rightholders and, inparticular, may not deprive them of theirright to exploit their works and other subjectmatter independently from the press
publication in which they are incorporated.
2a.
The rights referred to in paragraph1 shall not extend to acts of hyperlinking.

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.

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 becalculated from the first day of January of
the year following the date of publication.

4.
The rights referred to in paragraph 1
shall expire 20 years after the publication of
the press publication. This term shall becalculated from the first day of January of
the year following the date of publication.
The right referred to in paragraph 1 shallnot apply with retroactive effect.
4a.
Member States shall ensure that
authors, receive an appropriate share of theadditional revenues press publishers receive
for the use of a press publication by
information society service providers.

Amendment 75
Proposal for a directive
Article 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 12

Article 12

Claims to fair compensation

Claims to fair compensation

PE601.094v02-00

EN74! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Member States may provide that where an
author has transferred or licensed a right to a
publisher, such a transfer or a licence
constitutes a sufficient legal basis for the
publisher to claim a share of thecompensation for the uses of the work madeunder an exception or limitation to thetransferred or licensed right.

Member States with compensation sharing
systems between authors and publishers for
exceptions and limitations may provide that
where an author has transferred or licensed aright to a publisher, such a transfer or alicence constitutes a sufficient legal basis forthe publisher to claim a share of thecompensation for the uses of the work madeunder an exception or limitation to thetransferred or licensed right, provided thatan equivalent compensation sharing system
was in operation in that Member State
before 12 November 2015.
The first paragraph shall be without
prejudice to the arrangements in Member
States concerning public lending rights, themanagement of rights not based on
exceptions or limitations to copyright, suchas extended collective licensing schemes, orconcerning remuneration rights on thebasis of national law.

Amendment 76
Proposal for a directive
Title IV – Chapter 1 a (new) – Article 12 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
CHAPTER 1 a
Protection of sport event organizers
Article 12 a
Protection of sport event organizers
Member States shall provide sport event
organizers with the rights provided for in
Article 2 and Article 3 (2) of Directive
2001/29/EC and Article 7 of Directive
2006/115/EC.
Justification

Article 165(1) TFEU states that the Union is to contribute to the promotion of European
sporting issues. The protection of intellectual property of sport event organisers has alreadyRR\1157669EN.docx

75! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENbeen envisaged in recital 52 to Directive 2010/13/EU and was supported by the European
Parliament in several reports on sport. The Court held in Joined cases C-403/08 andC-429/08, FAPL, EU:C:2011:631, that sporting events have a unique and original character
worthy of protection comparable to the protection of works. To date five Member States have
granted a neighbouring right to sport event organisers.
Amendment 77
Proposal for a directive
Article 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 13

Article 13

Use of protected content by informationsociety service providers storing and giving
access to large amounts of works and othersubject-matter uploaded by their users

Use of protected content by online content
sharing service providers-1.
Without prejudice to Article 3(1) and(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC, online content
sharing service providers perform an act ofcommunication to the public and shallconclude fair and appropriate licensing
agreements with rightholders, unless therightholder does not wish to grant a license
or licenses are not available. Licensing
agreements concluded by the online content
sharing service providers with rightholders
shall cover the liability for works uploadedby the users of their services in line withterms and conditions set out in the licensing
agreement, provided that those users do notact for commercial purposes or are not therightholder or his representative.

PE601.094v02-00

EN76! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

1.
Information society service
providers that store and provide to the
public access to large amounts of works orother subject-matter uploaded by their users
shall, in cooperation with rightholders, takemeasures to ensure the functioning ofagreements concluded with rightholders forthe use of their works or other subject-matteror to prevent the availability on theirservices of works or other subject-matter
identified by rightholders through thecooperation with the service providers.
Those measures, such as the use of effective
content recognition technologies, shall beappropriate and proportionate. The service
providers shall provide rightholders withadequate information on the functioning
and the deployment of the measures, as wellas, when relevant, adequate reporting on
the recognition and use of the works andother subject-matter.

1.
Online content sharing service
providers referred to in paragraph -1 shall,in cooperation with rightholders, takeappropriate and proportionate measures toensure the functioning of licensing
agreements where concluded withrightholders for the use of their works orother subject-matter on those services.

In the absence of licensing agreements withrightholders online content sharing service
providers shall take, in cooperation withrightholders, appropriate and proportionate
measures leading to the non-availability on
those services of works or other subject
matter infringing copyright or relatedrights, while non-infringing works andother subject matter shall remain available.
1a.
Member States shall ensure that theonline content sharing service providers
referred to in paragraph -1 shall apply themeasures referred to in paragraph 1 basedon the relevant information provided byrightholders.
The online content sharing service
providers shall be transparent towards
rightholders and shall inform rightholdersof the measures employed, theirimplementation, as well as when relevant,shall periodically report on the use of theworks and other subject-matter.

RR\1157669EN.docx

77! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

1b.
Members States shall ensure that theimplementation of such measures shall be
proportionate and strike a balance between
the fundamental rights of users andrightholders and shall in accordance with
Article 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC, whereapplicable, not impose a general obligation
on online content sharing service providers
to monitor the information which theytransmit or store.
2.
Member States shall ensure that theservice providers referred to in paragraph 1
put in place complaints and redress
mechanisms that are available to users incase of disputes over the application of themeasures referred to in paragraph 1.

2.
To prevent misuses or limitations in
the exercise of exceptions and limitations tocopyright, Member States shall ensure thatthe service providers referred to in paragraph
1 put in place effective and expeditious
complaints and redress mechanisms that areavailable to users in case of disputes over theapplication of the measures referred to inparagraph 1. Any complaint filed undersuch mechanisms shall be processed
without undue delay. The rightholders shallreasonably justify their decisions to avoid
arbitrary dismissal of complaints.
Moreover, in accordance with Regulation(UE) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC,
the measures referred to in paragraph 1
shall not require the identification ofindividual users and the processing of theirpersonal data.
Member States shall also ensure that, in thecontext of the application of the measuresreferred to in paragraph 1, users haveaccess to a court or other relevant judicial
authority to assert the use of an exception
or limitation to copyright.

PE601.094v02-00

EN78! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

3.
Member States shall facilitate, whereappropriate, the cooperation between theinformation society service providers andrightholders through stakeholder dialogues todefine best practices, such as appropriate
and proportionate content recognition
technologies, taking into account, among
others, the nature of the services, theavailability of the technologies and theireffectiveness in light of technologicaldevelopments.

3.
Member States shall facilitate, whereappropriate, the cooperation between the
online content sharing service providers,
users and rightholders through stakeholder
dialogues to define best practices for the
implementation of the measures referred toin paragraph 1 in a manner that is
proportionate and efficient, taking into
account, among others, the nature of theservices, the availability of technologies andtheir effectiveness in light of technologicaldevelopments.

Amendment 78
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Article 13a
Member States shall provide that disputes
between successors in title and informationsociety services regarding the application of
Article 13(1) may be subject to analternative dispute resolution system.
Member States shall establish or designate
an impartial body with the necessary
expertise, with the aim of helping theparties to settle their disputes under thissystem.
The Member States shall inform theCommission of the establishment of thisbody no later than (date mentioned in
Article 21(1)).

Amendment 79
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 b (new)Text proposed by the Commission
RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment
79! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENArticle 13b
Use of protected content by informationsociety services providing automated image
referencing
Member States shall ensure that
information society service providers that
automatically reproduce or refer tosignificant amounts of copyright-protectedvisual works and make them available tothe public for the purpose of indexing andreferencing conclude fair and balanced
licensing agreements with any requestingrightholders in order to ensure their fair
remuneration. Such remuneration may be
managed by the collective management
organisation of the rightholders concerned.

Amendment 80
Proposal for a directive
Chapter 3 –Article 13 c (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Article 13c
Principle of fair and proportionate
remuneration
1.
Member States shall ensure that
authors and performers receive fair andproportionate remuneration for the
exploitation of their works and othersubject matter, including for their online
exploitation. This may be achieved in eachsector through a combination ofagreements, including collective bargaining
agreements, and statutory remuneration
mechanisms.
2.
Paragraph 1 shall not apply wherean author or performer grants a nonexclusive usage right for the benefit of allusers free of charge.

PE601.094v02-00

EN80! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

3.
Member States shall take account of
the specificities of each sector inencouraging the proportionate
remuneration for rights granted by authors
and performers.
4.
Contracts shall specify the
remuneration applicable to each mode of
exploitation.

Amendment 81
Proposal for a directive
Article 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 14

Article 14

Transparency obligation

Transparency obligation

1.
Member States shall ensure that
authors and performers receive on a regularbasis and taking into account the specificitiesof each sector, timely, adequate andsufficient information on the exploitation of
their works and performances from those towhom they have licensed or transferred theirrights, notably as regards modes of
exploitation, revenues generated andremuneration due.

1.
Member States shall ensure that
authors and performers receive on a regularbasis, not less than once a year, and taking
into account the specificities of each sector
and the relative importance of eachindividual contribution, timely, accurate,
relevant and comprehensive information on
the exploitation of their works andperformances from those to whom they havelicensed or transferred their rights, notably as
regards modes of exploitation, direct andindirect revenues generated, andremuneration due.
1a.
Member States shall ensure that
where the licensee or transferee of rights ofauthors and performers subsequently
licenses those rights to another party, suchparty shall share all information referred toin paragraph 1 with the licensee ortransferee.

RR\1157669EN.docx

81! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENThe main licensee or transferee shall pass
all the information referred to in the firstsubparagraph on to the author or
performer. That information shall beunchanged, except in the case ofcommercially sensitive information as
defined by Union or national law, which,without prejudice to Articles 15 and 16a,
may be subject to a non-disclosureagreement, for the purpose of preserving
fair competition. Where the main licensee
or transferee does not provide theinformation as referred to in thissubparagraph in a timely manner, theauthor or performer shall be entitled torequest that information directly from the
sub-licensee.
2.
The obligation in paragraph 1 shallbe proportionate and effective and shallensure an appropriate 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, provided that the
obligation remains effective and ensures anappropriate level of transparency.

2.
The obligation in paragraph 1 shallbe proportionate and effective and shallensure a high level of transparency in every
sector. However, in those cases where theadministrative burden resulting from theobligation would be disproportionate in viewof the revenues generated by the exploitationof the work or performance, Member States
may adjust the obligation in paragraph 1,
provided that the obligation remains
effective and ensures a high level oftransparency.

3.
Member States may decide that the
obligation in paragraph 1 does not apply
when the contribution of the author or
performer is not significant having regard
to the overall work or performance.
4.
Paragraph 1 shall not be applicable toentities subject to the transparency
obligations established by Directive 2014/26/
EU.

PE601.094v02-00

EN

4.
Paragraph 1 shall not be applicable toentities subject to the transparency
obligations established by Directive 2014/26/
EU or to collective bargaining agreements,
where those obligations or agreements
provide for transparency requirements
comparable to those referred to inparagraph 2.

82! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 82
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall ensure that authors andperformers are entitled to request additional,
appropriate remuneration from the party withwhom they entered into a contract for the
exploitation of the rights when the
remuneration originally agreed isdisproportionately low compared to thesubsequent relevant revenues and benefits
derived from the exploitation of the works or
performances.

Member States shall ensure, in the absenceof collective bargaining agreements
providing for a comparable mechanism,that authors and performers or any
representative organisation acting on theirbehalf are entitled to claim additional,
appropriate and fair remuneration from theparty with whom they entered into a contract
for the exploitation of the rights when the
remuneration originally agreed isdisproportionately low compared to thesubsequent relevant direct or indirect
revenues and benefits derived from the
exploitation of the works or performances.

Amendment 83
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall provide that disputes
concerning the transparency obligation under
Article 14 and the contract adjustment
mechanism under Article 15 may besubmitted to a voluntary, alternative dispute
resolution procedure.

Member States shall provide that disputes
concerning the transparency obligation under
Article 14 and the contract adjustment
mechanism under Article 15 may besubmitted to a voluntary, alternative dispute
resolution procedure. Member States shallensure that representative organisations ofauthors and performers may initiate suchprocedures at the request of one or moreauthors and performers.

RR\1157669EN.docx

83! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 84
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Article 16 a
Right of revocation
1.
Member States shall ensure that
where an author or a performer has
licensed or transferred her or his rights
concerning a work or other protectedsubject-matter on an exclusive basis, theauthor or performer has a right ofrevocation where there is an absence of
exploitation of the work or other protectedsubject matter or where there is acontinuous lack of regular reporting inaccordance with Article 14. Member States
may provide for specific provisions taking
into account the specificities of different
sectors and works and anticipatedexploitation period, notably provide for time
limits for the right of revocation.

PE601.094v02-00

EN84! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

2.
The right of revocation provided forin paragraph 1 may be exercised only aftera reasonable time from the conclusion of
the licence or transfer agreement, and only
upon written notification setting anappropriate deadline by which the
exploitation of the licensed or transferred
rights is to take place. After the expirationof that deadline, the author or performer
may choose to terminate the exclusivity of
the contract instead of revoking the rights.
Where a work or other subject-matter
contains the contribution of a plurality ofauthors or performers, the exercise of theindividual right of revocation of such
authors or performers shall be regulated bynational law, laying down the rules on theright of revocation for collective works,
taking into account the relative importanceof the individual contributions.
3.
Paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply
if the non-exercise of the rights is
predominantly due to circumstances which
the author or the performer can bereasonably expected to remedy.
4.
Contractual or other arrangements
derogating from the right of revocation
shall be lawful only if concluded by meansof an agreement which is based on acollective bargaining agreement.

Amendment 85
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Article 17 a

RR\1157669EN.docx

85! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENMember States may adopt or maintain inforce broader provisions, compatible withthe exceptions and limitations existing inUnion law, for uses covered by the
exceptions or the limitation provided for inthis Directive.

Amendment 86
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.
The provisions of Article 11 shalldeletedalso apply to press publications published
before [the date mentioned in Article 21(1)].

PE601.094v02-00

EN86! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

14.6.2017
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE INTERNAL MARKET AND CONSUMERPROTECTION (*)

for the Committee on Legal Affairs
on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright in
the Digital Single Market(COM(2016)0593 – C80383/2016 – 2016/0280(COD))
Rapporteur (*): Catherine Stihler(*)

Associated committee – Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure

SHORT JUSTIFICATION
Although different directives and the existing EU legal framework in the area of copyright
law have contributed to a better functioning of the internal market and stimulated innovation,
creativity, investment and the production of new content in the past years, the ‘digital
revolution’ and the fast technological developments which have resulted have createdenormous challenges in this field.
Ongoing market evolutions have produced, in some cases, radical changes in the way thatdifferent copyright protected works are created, produced, distributed and exploited. The
creation of different business models and emerging demands required the current copyrightframework to adopt appropriate responses to these challenges, making it future proof and fit
for new market realities as well as citizens’ needs.
In this sense, the Rapporteur welcomes the European Commission’s Proposal for a Directiveof the European Parliament and of the Council on Copyright in the Digital Single Market,
which intends to provide new rules to address these needs, such as to adopt certain exceptions
and limitations to digital and cross-border environments, simplify licensing practices, ensure
wider access to content for consumers and safeguarding better transparency of authors' andperformers' contracts and remuneration.
However, the Rapporteur believes the text of the proposal can be improved on a number of
aspects and complimented with more specific or more ambitious suggestions on others.
Therefore, her proposal for a draft opinion introduces a number of targeted amendments in an
attempt to improve, clarify and expand the Commission’s proposed text.
RR\1157669EN.docx

87! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENExceptions and limitations in the field of research, education and preservation ofcultural heritage
The Rapporteur welcomes the Commission’s intention to address new challenges in this area,
but believes that a more ambitious approach should have been taken. Particularly, withregards to the exception on text and data mining (TDM) provided for in Article 3 of the
Directive, the Rapporteur believes that limiting the proposed EU exception to a narrow
definition of research organisations is counterproductive, and therefore introduces a simple
rule, which does not discriminate between users or purposes and ensures a strictly limited andtransparent usage of technological protection measures where appropriate.
Also, in the field of the use of works and other subject matter in teaching activities (Article 4),
the Rapporteur believes that the exception should benefit not only all formal educational
establishments in primary, secondary, vocational and higher education, but also otherorganisations such as libraries and other cultural heritage institutions, providing non-formal orinformal education. The Rapporteur believes that the best solution is to have a single andmandatory exception for all types of teaching, both digital and non-digital, formal andinformal.
Regarding the exception to preservation of cultural heritage covered in Article 5, theRapporteur proposes an ambitious expansion of the scope of this Article, introducing several
new elements. First, the draft opinion proposes a modification of the exception to permit
cultural heritage institutions and educational establishments to reproduce works and othersubject-matter permanently in their collections for the purposes of carrying out their public
interest mission in preservation, research, education, culture and teaching.
Furthermore, three new exceptions are proposed with the purpose of favouring thedevelopment of the European Research Area and encouraging scientific research and the use
and access to knowledge and cultural heritage. A new exception on document delivery bycultural heritage institutions or educational establishments and another on access for the
purposes of research or private study on the premises of cultural heritage institutions or
educational establishments are introduced with this objective. Furthermore, an exception on
public lending of literary works is also introduced with the objective of ensuring that all
citizens of the European Union have access to a full selection of books and other resources.
Out of commerce works
The Rapporteur introduces an exception under Article 7 which will allow cultural heritage
institutions to distribute, communicate to the public or make available out-of-commerce
works, or other subject-matter permanently in the collection of the institution for noncommercial purposes, taking due account of remuneration schemes to compensate for any
unreasonable prejudice to the legitimate interests of rights holders. In all cases, creators andrights holders should have the right to object to such making available, and have their works
taken offline.
Protection of press publications concerning digital uses
The Rapporteur believes that the introduction of a press publishers right under Article 11
PE601.094v02-00

EN88! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

lacks sufficient justification. It is true that publishers may face challenges when enforcing
licensed copyrights, but this issue should be addressed via an enforcement regulation. Simple
changes made to Article 5 of the Enforcement Directive 2004/48/EC, making it also
applicable to press publishers, will provide the necessary and appropriate means to solve thismatter. The Rapporteur believes that there is no need to create a new right as publishers havethe full right to opt-out of the ecosystem any time using simple technical means. The
Rapporteur is also concerned as to what effect the creation of this new right could have on themarket, it is very likely that the addition of this right will add another layer of complexity tolicensing deals. There is also no guarantee provided that any rise in publisher remuneration
would flow through to authors. There are potentially more effective ways of promoting highquality journalism and publishing via tax incentives instead of adding an additional layer of
copyright legislation.
Certain uses of protected content by online services
Regarding Article 13 (and corresponding recitals 37, 38 and 39) the Rapporteur believes thatthe current wording is incompatible with the limited liability regime provided for in Directive
2000/31/EC (Electronic Commerce Directive), a piece of legislation that has proven to beenormously beneficial for the internal market in the digital sphere. The Rapporteur firmly
supports the notion that the value gap has to be addressed and emphasises that creators andrights holders are to receive a fair and balanced compensation for the exploitation of theirworks from online service providers. However, this should be achieved without negative
impacts on the digital economy or internet freedoms of consumers. The current wording of
Article 13 fails to achieve this. Stringent requirements outlined in the Article could act as abarrier to market entry for new and emerging businesses. It is also technologically specificand the market may react by simply changing technical processes or designing new businessmodels that defy this outlined mode of categorisation. The use of filtering potentially harms
the interests of users, as there are many legitimate uses of copyright content that filtering
technologies are often not advanced enough to accommodate.
AMENDMENTS
The Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection calls on the Committee on
Legal Affairs, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:
Amendment 1
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

89! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

(2)
The directives which have been
adopted in the area of copyright and related
rights provide for a high level of protection
for rightholders and create a framework
wherein the exploitation of works and otherprotected subject-matter can take place. This
harmonised legal framework contributes to
the good functioning of the internal market;
it stimulates innovation, creativity,
investment and production of new content,also in the digital environment. The
protection provided by this legal framework
also contributes to the Union's objective ofrespecting and promoting cultural diversity
while at the same time bringing the European
common cultural heritage to the fore. Article
167(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of
the European Union requires the Union totake cultural aspects into account in its
action.

(2)
The directives which have been
adopted in the area of copyright and related
rights provide for a high level of protection
for rightholders and create a framework
wherein the exploitation of works and otherprotected subject-matter can take place. This
harmonised legal framework contributes to
the good functioning of the truly integrated
internal market; it stimulates innovation,
creativity, investment and production of newcontent, also in the digital environment. The
protection provided by this legal framework
also contributes to the Union's objective ofrespecting and promoting cultural diversity
while at the same time bringing the European
common cultural heritage to the fore. Article
167(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of
the European Union requires the Union totake cultural aspects into account in its
action.

Amendment 2
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment90! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(3)Rapid technological developments
continue to transform the way works andother subject-matter are created, produced,
distributed and exploited. New businessmodels and new actors continue to emerge.
The objectives and the principles laid downby the Union copyright framework remainsound. However, legal uncertainty remains,for both rightholders and users, as regards
certain uses, including cross-border uses, ofworks and other subject-matter in the digital
environment. As set out in theCommunication of the Commission entitled‘Towards a modern, more European
copyright framework’26 , in some areas it isnecessary to adapt and supplement thecurrent Union copyright framework. This
Directive provides for rules to adapt certain
exceptions and limitations to digital andcross-border environments, as well as
measures to facilitate certain licensing
practices as regards the dissemination of outof-commerce works and the online
availability of audiovisual works on videoon-demand platforms with a view toensuring wider access to content. In order toachieve a well-functioning marketplace forcopyright, there should also be rules onrights in publications, on the use of works
and other subject-matter by online service
providers storing and giving access to user
uploaded content and on the transparency ofauthors' and performers' contracts.

(3)
Rapid technological developments
continue to transform the way works andother subject-matter are created, produced,
distributed and exploited, and relevant
legislation needs to be future proof so as to
not restrict technological development. New
business models and new actors continue toemerge. The objectives and the principles
laid down by the Union copyright framework
remain sound. However, legal uncertainty
remains, for both rightholders and users, asregards certain uses, including cross-borderuses, of works and other subject-matter inthe digital environment. As set out in theCommunication of the Commission entitled'Towards a modern, more European
copyright framework'26, in some areas it isnecessary to adapt and supplement thecurrent Union copyright framework. This
Directive provides for rules to adapt certain
exceptions and limitations to digital andcross-border environments, as well as
measures to facilitate certain licensing
practices as regards the dissemination of outof-commerce works and the online
availability of audiovisual works on videoon-demand platforms with a view toensuring wider access to content. In order toachieve a well-functioning and fairmarketplace for copyright, there should also
be rules on the use of works and othersubject-matter on online service providers
and on the transparency of authors' andperformers' contracts and of the accounting
deriving from the exploitation of protected
works according to those contracts.

____________________________________

26 COM(2015) 626 final.

26 COM(2015) 626 final.

Amendment 3
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
RR\1157669EN.docx

91! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENText proposed by the Commission

Amendment(4)This Directive is based upon, andcomplements, the rules laid down in the
Directives currently in force in this area, inparticular Directive 96/9/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council27 , Directive
2001/29/EC of the European Parliament andof the Council28 , Directive 2006/115/EC of
the European Parliament and of theCouncil29 , Directive 2009/24/EC of theEuropean Parliament and of the Council30 ,Directive 2012/28/EU of the European
Parliament and of the Council31 andDirective 2014/26/EU of the European
Parliament and of the Council32 .

(4)This Directive is based upon, andcomplements, the rules laid down in the
Directives currently in force in this area, inparticular Directive 96/9/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council27 , Directive
2000/31/EC of the European Parliamentand of the Council27a, Directive 2001/29/EC
of the European Parliament and of theCouncil28 , Directive 2006/115/EC of theEuropean Parliament and of the Council29 ,Directive 2009/24/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council30 , Directive
2012/28/EU of the European Parliament andof the Council31 and Directive 2014/26/EUof the European Parliament and of theCouncil32 .

__________________________________

27 Directive 96/9/EC of the European

27 Directive 96/9/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 11 March
Parliament and of the Council of 11 March
1996 on the legal protection of databases (OJ 1996 on the legal protection of databases (OJ
L 77, 27.3.1996, p. 20–28).
L 77, 27.3.1996, p. 20–28).
27a Directive 2000/31/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 8 June
2000 on certain legal aspects of informationsociety services, in particular electroniccommerce, in the Internal Market(Directive on electronic commerce) (OJ L
178, 17.7.2000, p. 1).
28 Directive 2001/29/EC of the European

28 Directive 2001/29/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 22 May
2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspectsof copyright and related rights in theinformation society (OJ L 167, 22.6.2001, p.
10–19).

Parliament and of the Council of 22 May
2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspectsof copyright and related rights in theinformation society (OJ L 167, 22.6.2001, p.
10–19).

29 Directive 2006/115/EC of the European

29 Directive 2006/115/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 12
December 2006 on rental right and lending
right and on certain rights related tocopyright in the field of intellectual property(OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 28–35).

Parliament and of the Council of 12
December 2006 on rental right and lending
right and on certain rights related tocopyright in the field of intellectual property(OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 28–35).

PE601.094v02-00

EN92! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

30 Directive 2009/24/EC of the European

30 Directive 2009/24/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 23 April
2009 on the legal protection of computer
programs (OJ L 111, 5.5.2009, p. 16–22).

Parliament and of the Council of 23 April
2009 on the legal protection of computer
programs (OJ L 111, 5.5.2009, p. 16–22).

31 Directive 2012/28/EU of the European

31 Directive 2012/28/EU of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 25 October
2012 on certain permitted uses of orphan
works (OJ L 299, 27.10.2012, p. 5–12).

Parliament and of the Council of 25 October
2012 on certain permitted uses of orphan
works (OJ L 299, 27.10.2012, p. 5–12).

32 Directive 2014/26/EU of the European

32 Directive 2014/26/EU of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 26 February
2014 on collective management of copyrightand related rights and multi-territorial
licensing of rights in musical works foronline use in the internal market (OJ L 84,
20.3.2014, p. 72–98).

Parliament and of the Council of 26 February
2014 on collective management of copyrightand related rights and multi-territorial
licensing of rights in musical works foronline use in the internal market (OJ L 84,
20.3.2014, p. 72–98).

Amendment 4
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(6)
The exceptions and the limitation set
out in this Directive seek to achieve a fairbalance between the rights and interests ofauthors and other rightholders on the one
hand, and of users on the other. They can beapplied only in certain special cases which
do not conflict with the normal exploitationof the works or other subject-matter and do
not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate
interests of the rightholders.

(6)
The exceptions and limitations set
out in this Directive seek to achieve a fairbalance between the rights and interests ofauthors and other rightholders on the one
hand, and of users on the other. They can beapplied only in certain special cases which
do not conflict with the normal exploitationof the works or other subject-matter and do
not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate
interests of the rightholders. They concern,in particular, access to education,knowledge and cultural heritage and, assuch, are in the public interest.

Amendment 5
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8

RR\1157669EN.docx

93! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENText proposed by the Commission

Amendment(8)
New technologies enable theautomated computational analysis of
information in digital form, such as text,
sounds, images or data, generally known astext and data mining. Those technologies
allow researchers to process large amounts
of information to gain new knowledge anddiscover new trends. Whilst text and data
mining technologies are prevalent across thedigital economy, there is widespreadacknowledgment that text and data mining
can in particular benefit the researchcommunity and in so doing encourage
innovation. However, in the Union, researchorganisations such as universities andresearch institutes are confronted with legal
uncertainty as to the extent to which they can
perform text and data mining of content. In
certain instances, text and data mining may
involve acts protected by copyright and/or by
the sui generis database right, notably the
reproduction of works or other subjectmatter and/or the extraction of contents froma database. Where there is no exception orlimitation which applies, an authorisation toundertake such acts would be required fromrightholders. Text and data mining may also
be carried out in relation to mere facts ordata which are not protected by copyrightand in such instances no authorisation
would be required.

(8)
New technologies enable theautomated computational analysis of
information in digital form, such as text,
sounds, images or any other type of data,
generally known as text and data mining.
Those technologies allow the processing oflarge amounts of digitally stored information
to gain new knowledge and discover new
trends. Whilst text and data mining
technologies are prevalent across the digital
economy, there is widespreadacknowledgment that text and data mining
can in particular benefit the researchcommunity and in so doing encourage
innovation. However, in the Union,
individuals, public and private entities who
have legal access to content are confronted
with legal uncertainty as to the extent towhich they can perform text and data miningof content. In certain instances, text and data
mining may involve acts protected bycopyright and/or by the sui generis databaseright, notably the reproduction of works orother subject-matter and/or the extraction ofcontents from a database. Where there is no
exception or limitation which applies, anauthorisation to undertake such acts would
be required from rightholders. No
authorisation would be required in cases
where text or data mining is carried out inrelation to mere facts or data which are notprotected by copyright . The right to read isin effect the same as the right to mine.

Amendment 6
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

94! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(9)Union law already provides certain
exceptions and limitations covering uses forscientific research purposes which may apply
to acts of text and data mining. However,those exceptions and limitations are optionaland not fully adapted to the use oftechnologies in scientific research.
Moreover, where researchers have lawfulaccess to content, for example throughsubscriptions to publications or open accesslicences, the terms of the licences may
exclude text and data mining. As research isincreasingly carried out with the assistanceof digital technology, there is a risk that theUnion's competitive position as a researcharea will suffer unless steps are taken toaddress the legal uncertainty for text anddata mining.

(9)
Union law already provides certain
exceptions and limitations covering uses forscientific research purposes which may apply
to acts of text and data mining. However,those exceptions and limitations are optionaland not fully adapted to the use of text anddata mining technologies which are relevant
far beyond the area of scientific research.
Moreover, where access to content has been
lawfully obtained, for example throughsubscriptions to publications or open accesslicences, the terms of the licences may
exclude text and data mining. As research isincreasingly carried out with the assistanceof digital technology, there is a risk that theUnion's competitive position as a researcharea and its action lines envisaged in theEuropean Open Science Agenda will suffer
unless steps are taken to address the legal
uncertainty regarding text and data mining
for all potential users. It is necessary that
Union law acknowledge that text and data
mining is increasingly used beyond formal
research organisations and for purposes
other than scientific research which
nevertheless contribute to innovation,technology transfer and the public interest.

Amendment 7
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment95! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(10) This legal uncertainty should be
addressed by providing for a mandatory
exception to the right of reproduction andalso to the right to prevent extraction from a
database. The new exception should be
without prejudice to the existing mandatory
exception on temporary acts of reproduction
laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive
2001/29, which should continue to apply totext and data mining techniques which do not
involve the making of copies going beyond
the scope of that exception. Researchorganisations should also benefit from theexception when they engage into publicprivate partnerships.

(10) This legal uncertainty should be
addressed by providing for a mandatory
exception to the right of reproduction andalso to the right to prevent extraction from a
database. An additional mandatory
exception should give researchorganisations access to information in aformat that enables it to be text and data
mined. Research organisations should also
benefit from the exception when they
engage in public-private partnerships,
provided that they reinvest their profits inresearch. The new exceptions should be
without prejudice to the existing mandatory
exception on temporary acts of reproduction
laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive
2001/29, which should continue to apply totext and data mining techniques which do not
involve the making of copies going beyond
the scope of that exception.

Amendment 8
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment

96! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(11) Research organisations across theUnion encompass a wide variety of entities
the primary goal of which is to conduct
scientific research or to do so together withthe provision of educational services. Due tothe diversity of such entities, it is importantto have a common understanding of thebeneficiaries of the exception. Despite
different legal forms and structures, researchorganisations across Member States
generally have in common that they act
either on a not for profit basis or in thecontext of a public-interest mission
recognised by the State. Such a publicinterest mission may, for example, be
reflected through public funding or throughprovisions in national laws or public
contracts. At the same time, organisations
upon which commercial undertakings have adecisive influence allowing them to exercise
control because of structural situations suchas their quality of shareholders or members,
which may result in preferential access to theresults of the research, should not be
considered research organisations for the
purposes of this Directive.

(11) Research organisations across theUnion encompass a wide variety of entities
which carry out research, including the
public sector and cultural heritage
institutions, the primary goal of which is toconduct scientific research or to do sotogether with the provision of educational
services. Due to the diversity of such entities,
it is important to have a common
understanding of the beneficiaries of the
exception. Despite different legal forms andstructures, research organisations acrossMember States generally have in common
that they act either on a not for profit basis orin the context of a public-interest mission
recognised by the State. Such a publicinterest mission may, for example, be
reflected through public funding or throughprovisions in national laws or public
contracts. At the same time, organisations
upon which commercial undertakings have adecisive influence allowing them to exercise
control because of structural situations suchas their quality of shareholders or members,
which may result in preferential access to theresults of the research, should not be
considered research organisations for the
purposes of this Directive.

Amendment 9
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

97! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(12) In view of a potentially high numberof access requests to and downloads of theirworks or other subject-matter, rightholders
should be allowed to apply measures where
there is risk that the security and integrity ofthe system or databases where the works orother subject-matter are hosted would be
jeopardised. Those measures should notexceed what is necessary to pursue theobjective of ensuring the security andintegrity of the system and should notundermine the effective application of the
exception.

(12) In view of a potentially high numberof access requests to and downloads of theirworks or other subject-matter, rightholders
should be allowed to apply measures where
there is risk that the security of the system or
databases where the works or other subjectmatter are hosted would be jeopardised.
Those measures should not exceed what isnecessary, proportionate and effective topursue the objective of ensuring the securityof the system and should not undermine theeffective application of the exception or
impede the reproducibility of research
results.

Amendment 10
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(13a) The process of text and data mining
includes downloading of protected works
and other subject matter on a significant
scale. Therefore the storage and copy ofcontent should be strictly limited to what isnecessary to verify results. Any copies
stored should be deleted after a reasonable
period of time, in order to avoid other uses
not covered by the exception.

Amendment 11
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment98! /!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(14) Article 5(3)(a) of Directive 2001/29/
EC allows Member States to introduce an
exception or limitation to the rights ofreproduction, communication to the public
and making available to the public for thesole purpose of, among others, illustration
for teaching. In addition, Articles 6(2)(b) and9(b) of Directive 96/9/EC permit the use of adatabase and the extraction or re-utilizationof a substantial part of its contents for the
purpose of illustration for teaching. The
scope of those exceptions or limitations as
they apply to digital uses is unclear. In
addition, there is a lack of clarity as towhether those exceptions or limitations
would apply where teaching is provided
online and thereby at a distance. Moreover,the existing framework does not provide fora cross-border effect. This situation may
hamper the development of digitallysupported teaching activities and distancelearning. Therefore, the introduction of a
new mandatory exception or limitation isnecessary to ensure that educational
establishments benefit from full legal
certainty when using works or other subjectmatter in digital teaching activities,
including online and across borders.

(14) Article 5(3)(a) of Directive 2001/29/
EC allows Member States to introduce an
exception or limitation to the rights ofreproduction, communication to the public
and making available to the public for thesole purpose of, among others, illustration
for teaching. In addition, Articles 6(2)(b) and9(b) of Directive 96/9/EC permit the use of adatabase and the extraction or re-utilizationof a substantial part of its contents for the
purpose of illustration for teaching. In
addition, there is a lack of clarity as towhether those exceptions or limitations
would apply where teaching is provided
online and thereby at a distance. Moreover,the existing framework does not provide fora cross-border effect. This situation may
hamper the development of digitallysupported teaching activities and distancelearning. Therefore, the introduction of a
new mandatory exception or limitation isnecessary to ensure full legal certainty whenusing works or other subject-matter in allteaching activities, including online andacross borders.

Amendment 12
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment99! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(15) While distance learning and crossborder education programmes are mostly
developed at higher education level, digital
tools and resources are increasingly used at
all education levels, in particular to improveand enrich the learning experience. The
exception or limitation provided for in thisDirective should therefore benefit all
educational establishments in primary,secondary, vocational and higher education
to the extent they pursue their educational
activity for a non-commercial purpose. The
organisational structure and the means offunding of an educational establishment are
not the decisive factors to determine the noncommercial nature of the activity.

(15) While distance learning, e-learningand cross-border education programmes aremostly 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 inthis Directive should therefore benefit all
educational activities and establishments
including those related to primary,secondary, vocational and higher education,
as well as organisations involved inteaching activities, including in the context
of non-formal or informal education
recognised by a Member State, to the extent
they pursue their educational activity for a
non-commercial purpose. In line with theCouncil conclusions of 12 May 2009 on a
strategic framework for European
cooperation in education and training'ET2020', the contribution of informal andnon-formal education, alongside formal
education, should be recognised anddeveloped in order to deliver the Union's
objectives. The organisational structure andthe means of funding of an educational
establishment are not the decisive factors todetermine the non-commercial nature of theactivity.

Amendment 13
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!100/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(16) The exception or limitation should
cover digital uses of works and othersubject-matter such as the use of parts or
extracts of works to support, enrich orcomplement the teaching, including therelated learning activities. The use of theworks or other subject-matter under the
exception or limitation should be only in thecontext of teaching and learning activities
carried out under the responsibility ofeducational establishments, including
during examinations, and be limited to whatis necessary for the purpose of suchactivities. The exception or limitation should
cover both uses through digital means in theclassroom and online uses through theeducational establishment's secure electronic
network, the access to which should beprotected, notably by authentication
procedures. The exception or limitation
should be understood as covering thespecific accessibility needs of persons with adisability in the context of illustration forteaching.

(16) The exception or limitation should
cover all uses of works and other subjectmatter, digital or otherwise, such as the useof parts or extracts of works to support,enrich or complement the teaching, including
the related learning activities. The notion of"illustration for teaching" is usually
understood as the use of a work to give
examples and to explain or support a
course. The use of the works or othersubject-matter under the exception orlimitation should be only in the context ofteaching and learning activities, including
during examinations, and be limited to whatis necessary for the purpose of suchactivities. The exception or limitation should
cover both offline uses such as uses in theclassroom or in organisations, such as
libraries and other cultural heritage
institutions involved in teaching activities
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 understoodas covering the specific accessibility needs of
persons with a disability in the context ofillustration for teaching.

Amendment 14
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!101/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(17) Different arrangements, based on theimplementation of the exception provided forin Directive 2001/29/EC or on licensing
agreements covering further uses, are inplace in a number of Member States in orderto facilitate educational uses of works andother subject-matter. Such arrangements
have usually been developed taking accountof the needs of educational establishments
and different levels of education. Whereas itis essential to harmonise the scope of the
new mandatory exception or limitation in
relation to digital uses and cross-borderteaching activities, the modalities of
implementation may differ from a Member
State to another, to the extent they do nothamper the effective application of the
exception or limitation or cross-border uses.
This should allow Member States to build on
the existing arrangements concluded atnational level. In particular, Member States
could decide to subject the application of the
exception or limitation, fully or partially, tothe availability of adequate licences,
covering at least the same uses as thoseallowed under the exception. Thismechanism would, for example, allow giving
precedence to licences for materials which
are primarily intended for the educational
market. In order to avoid that suchmechanism results in legal uncertainty or
administrative burden for educational
establishments, Member States adopting thisapproach should take concrete measures toensure that licensing schemes allowing
digital uses of works or other subject-matterfor the purpose of illustration for teachingare easily available and that educational
establishments are aware of the existence ofsuch licensing schemes.

PE601.094v02-00

EN(17) Different arrangements, based on theimplementation of the exception provided forin Directive 2001/29/EC or on extended
collective licensing agreements, are in place
in a number of Member States in order tofacilitate educational uses of at least shortparts or extracts of works and other subjectmatter. Such arrangements have usually beendeveloped taking account of the constraints
set by the closed list of voluntary exceptions
at Union level, the needs of educational
establishments and different levels of
education. Whereas it is essential toharmonise the scope of the new mandatory
exception or limitation in offline and online
uses and particularly cross-border teachingactivities, the modalities of implementation
may differ from a Member State to another,to the extent they do not hamper the effective
application of the exception or limitation or
cross-border uses. This should allow
Member States to build on the existingarrangements concluded at national level. In
particular, Member States could decide to
subject the application of the exception orlimitation, fully or partially, to theavailability of adequate licences, covering atleast the same uses as those allowed underthe exception. Any other compensation
mechanisms should be limited to cases
where there is a risk of unreasonableprejudice to the legitimate interests ofrightholders. In those cases Member Statesshould be able to require compensation for
the uses carried out under this exception.
This mechanism would, for example, allow
giving precedence to licences for materials
which are primarily intended for theeducational market. In order to avoid thatsuch mechanism results in legal uncertainty
or administrative burden for educational
establishments, Member States adopting thisapproach should take concrete measures toensure that licensing schemes allowing
digital uses of works or other subject-matterfor the purpose of illustration for teachingare easily available and affordable, covering!102/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 15
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!103/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(18) An act of preservation may require a
reproduction of a work or other subjectmatter in the collection of a cultural heritage
institution and consequently theauthorisation of the relevant rightholders.
Cultural heritage institutions are engaged in
the preservation of their collections for
future generations. Digital technologies offer
new ways to preserve the heritage containedin those collections but they also create newchallenges. In view of these new challenges,
it is necessary to adapt the current legal
framework by providing a mandatory
exception to the right of reproduction inorder to allow those acts of preservation.

(18) An act of preservation may require a
reproduction of a work or other subjectmatter in the collection of a cultural heritage
institution and consequently theauthorisation of the relevant rightholders.
Cultural heritage institutions are engaged in
the preservation of cultural heritage for
future generations. Digital technologies offer
new ways to preserve the heritage containedin the collections of cultural heritage
institutions, but they also create newchallenges. One such challenge is thesystematic collection and preservation ofworks which are not originally published bytraditional analogue means, but originate
in a digital form (so-called born-digital
works). Whereas publishers in Member
States are typically obliged to provide areference copy of each published work tocertain cultural heritage institutions forarchiving purposes, such obligations often
do not apply to born-digital works. In theabsence of the provision of reference copies
by the authors or publishers of born-digital
works, cultural heritage institutions shouldbe allowed to make reproductions of borndigital works at their own initiativewhenever they are openly available on theinternet, in order to add them to theirpermanent collections. Cultural heritage
institutions also engage in making internal
reproductions for many varying purposes
including insurance, rights clearance, andloans. In view of these possible newchallenges, it is necessary to adapt thecurrent legal framework by providing amandatory exception to the right ofreproduction.

Amendment 16
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21

PE601.094v02-00

EN!104/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(21) For the purposes of this Directive,
works and other subject-matter should beconsidered to be permanently in thecollection of a cultural heritage institution
when copies are owned or permanently heldby the cultural heritage institution, forexample as a result of a transfer of ownershipor licence agreements.

(21) For the purposes of this Directive,
works and other subject-matter should beconsidered to be permanently in thecollection of a cultural heritage institution
when copies are owned, held on long-termloan or are permanently held by the cultural
heritage institution or educational
establishment, for example as a result of atransfer of ownership or licence agreements.

Amendment 17
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!105/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(31) A free and pluralist press is essential
to ensure quality journalism and citizens'
access to information. It provides afundamental contribution to public debate
and the proper functioning of a democraticsociety. 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 ofpress publications as rightholders, licensing
and enforcement in the digital environmentis often complex and inefficient.

(31) A free and pluralist press is essential
to ensure quality journalism and citizens'
access to information. It provides afundamental contribution to public debate
and the proper functioning of a democraticsociety. In the transition from print to digital,
publishers of press publications haveinvested heavily in digitalizing their content
and yet are facing problems in licensing theonline use of their publications andrecouping their investments. This is mainly
as some news aggregators and searchengines use press publisher's content
without contracting licence agreements andwithout remunerating them fairly. Digitalplatforms such as new aggregators andsearch engines have developed theiractivities based on the investment by press
publishers in the creation of content
without contributing to its development.
This poses a severe threat to theemployment and fair remuneration ofjournalists and the future of media
pluralism. In the absence of recognition of
publishers of press publications asrightholders, licensing and enforcement in
the digital environment is often complex andinefficient.

Amendment 18
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!106/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(32) The organisational and financial
contribution of publishers in producing press
publications needs to be recognised andfurther encouraged to ensure thesustainability of the publishing industry. It istherefore necessary to provide at Union levela harmonised legal protection for press
publications in respect of digital uses. Suchprotection should be effectively guaranteed
through the introduction, in Union law, ofrights related to copyright for the
reproduction and making available to the
public of press publications in respect ofdigital uses.

(32) The organisational and financial
contribution of publishers in producing press
publications needs to be recognised andfurther encouraged to ensure thesustainability of the publishing industry. It istherefore necessary to provide at Union levela harmonised legal protection for press
publications in respect of digital uses. Suchprotection should be effectively guaranteed
through the introduction, in Union law, ofrights related to copyright for the
reproduction and making available to the
public of press publications in respect ofprint and digital uses.

Justification
As publishers invest in both print and digital forms of publications, their right should reflect
this reality as it is already the case for other content producers under the current Directive
2001/29/EC.

Amendment 19
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!107/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(33) For the purposes of this Directive, itis necessary to define the concept of press
publication in a way that embraces only
journalistic publications, published by aservice 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 magazinesof 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 topress publications under this Directive. This
protection does not extend to acts ofhyperlinking which do not constitutecommunication to the public.

(33) For the purposes of this Directive, itis necessary to define the concept of press
publication in a way that embraces only
journalistic publications, published by aservice 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 magazinesof 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 topress publications under this Directive. This
protection does not extend to acts of acomputation referencing or indexing systemsuch as hyperlinking.

Amendment 20
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(34) The rights granted to the publishersof press publications under this Directive
should have the same scope as the rights ofreproduction 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 theexception on quotation for purposes such as
criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive.

(34) The rights granted to the publishersof press publications under this Directive
should have the same scope as the rights ofreproduction and making available to the
public provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC
and the rights of rental, lending anddistribution provided for in Directive
2006/115/EC. They should also be subject tothe same provisions on exceptions andlimitations 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.

Amendment 21
PE601.094v02-00

EN!108/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(36) Publishers, including those of press
publications, books or scientific publications,
often operate on the basis of the transfer ofauthors' rights by means of contractual
agreements or statutory provisions. In thiscontext, publishers make an investment witha view to the exploitation of the works
contained in their publications and may insome instances be deprived of revenues
where such works are used under exceptions
or limitations such as the ones for private
copying and reprography. In a number ofMember States compensation for uses underthose exceptions is shared between authors
and publishers. In order to take account of
this situation and improve legal certainty for
all concerned parties, Member States shouldbe allowed to determine that, when an author
has transferred or licensed his rights to a
publisher or otherwise contributes with hisworks to a publication and there are systems
in place to compensate for the harm causedby an exception or limitation, publishers areentitled to claim a share of suchcompensation, whereas the burden on the
publisher to substantiate his claim should notexceed what is required under the system inplace.

(36) Publishers, including those of press
publications, books or scientific publications,
often operate on the basis of the transfer ofauthors' rights by means of contractual
agreements or statutory provisions. In thiscontext, publishers make an investment witha view to the exploitation of the works
contained in their publications and may insome instances be deprived of revenues
where such works are used under exceptions
or limitations such as the ones for private
copying and reprography. In a number ofMember States compensation for uses underthose exceptions is shared between authors
and publishers. In order to take account of
this situation and improve legal certainty for
all concerned parties, Member States should
determine that, when an author has
transferred or licensed his rights to a
publisher or otherwise contributes with hisworks to a publication and there are systems
in place to compensate for the harm causedby an exception or limitation, publishers areentitled to claim a share of suchcompensation, whereas the burden on the
publisher to substantiate his claim should notexceed what is required under the system inplace.

Amendment 22
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!109/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(37) Over the last years, the functioningof the online content marketplace has
gained in complexity. Online services
providing access to copyright protected
content uploaded by their users without the
involvement of right holders have flourishedand have become main sources of access tocontent online. This affects rightholders'possibilities to determine whether, andunder which conditions, their work andother subject-matter are used as well as
their possibilities to get an appropriate
remuneration for it.

(37) Evolution of digital technologies has
led to the emergence of new businessmodels and reinforced the role of theInternet as the main marketplace for the
distribution of copyright protected content.
Over the years, online services enabling
their users to upload works and make themaccessible to the public have flourished andhave become important sources of access tocontent online, allowing for diversity andease of access to content but also
generating challenges when copyrightprotected content is uploaded without priorauthorisation from rightholders.

Amendment 23
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!110/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(37a) Today more creative content is being
consumed than ever before. That is
facilitated by online platforms andaggregation services. They are a means ofproviding wider access to cultural andcreative works and offer great opportunities
for cultural and creative industries todevelop new business models. At the sametime, artists and authors have struggled tosee comparable increases in revenues fromthis increase in consumption. One of thereasons for this could be the lack of clarity
regarding the status of these online services
under e-commerce law. Consideration is to
be made of how this process can function
with more legal certainty and respect for allaffected parties including artists and users
and it is important to ensure transparency
and a fair level playing field. The
Commission should develop guidance on
the implementation of the intermediaryliability framework in order to allow online
platforms to comply with their
responsibilities and the rules on liability
and in order to enhance legal certainty andincrease user confidence.

Amendment 24
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment

111! /!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENWhere information society service providers
store and provide access to the public tocopyright protected works or other subjectmatter uploaded by their users, thereby
going beyond the mere provision of physicalfacilities and performing an act ofcommunication to the public, they are
obliged to conclude licensing agreementswith rightholders, unless they are eligible forthe liability exemption provided in Article
14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council34 .

Where information society service providers
offer users content storage services andprovide the public with access to content
and where such activity constitutes an act ofcommunication to the public and is not of amerely technical, automatic and passive
nature, they should be obliged to conclude
licensing agreements with rightholders as
regards copyright protected works or othersubject-matter, unless they are eligible forthe liability exemptions provided in
Directive 2000/31/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council34 .

____________________________________

34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European

34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000
on certain legal aspects of informationsociety services, in particular electroniccommerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178,
17.7.2000, p. 1–16).

Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000
on certain legal aspects of informationsociety services, in particular electroniccommerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178,
17.7.2000, p. 1–16).

Amendment 25
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

In respect of Article 14, it is necessary todeletedverify whether the service provider plays anactive role, including by optimising thepresentation of the uploaded works or
subject-matter or promoting them,irrespective of the nature of the means used
therefor.

Amendment 26
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission
PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!112/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

In order to ensure the functioning of any
licensing agreement, information society
service providers storing and providing
access to the public to large amounts ofcopyright protected works or other subjectmatter uploaded by their users should takeappropriate and proportionate measures toensure protection of works or other subjectmatter, 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/EC.

In order to ensure the functioning of any
licensing agreement, information society
service providers actively and directly
involved in allowing users to upload,
making works available and promoting
works to the public should take appropriate
and proportionate measures to ensure
protection of works or other subject-matter.
Such measures should respect the Charterof Fundamental Rights of the European
Union and should not impose a generalobligation on information society service
providers to monitor the information which
they transmit or store as referred to in
Article 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC.

Amendment 27
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(38a) For the implementation of suchmeasures, the cooperation between
information society service providers andrightholders is essential. Rightholders
should accurately identify to informationsociety service providers the works or othersubject-matter in respect of which theyclaim to have the copyright. Rightholders
should retain responsibility for claims madeby third parties over the use of works which
they would have identified as being theirown in the implementation of any
agreement reached with the informationsociety service provider.

Amendment 28
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Text proposed by the Commission
RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!113/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(39) Collaboration between information deletedsociety service providers storing andproviding access to the public to large
amounts of copyright protected works orother subject-matter uploaded by their users
and rightholders is essential for thefunctioning of technologies, such as
content recognition technologies. In suchcases, rightholders should provide thenecessary data to allow the services to
identify their content and the services
should be transparent towards rightholders
with regard to the deployed technologies, toallow the assessment of theirappropriateness. The services should inparticular provide rightholders withinformation on the type of technologies
used, the way they are operated and theirsuccess rate for the recognition ofrightholders' 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 29
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!114/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(40) Certain rightholders such as authors
and performers need information to assess
the economic value of their rights which areharmonised under Union law. This isespecially the case where such rightholders
grant a licence or a transfer of rights in returnfor remuneration. As authors and performers
tend to be in a weaker contractual position
when they grant licences or transfer theirrights, they need information to assess thecontinued economic value of their rights,
compared to the remuneration received fortheir licence or transfer, but they often face alack of transparency. Therefore, the sharingof adequate information by their contractual
counterparts or their successors in title isimportant for the transparency and balance inthe system that governs the remuneration of
authors and performers.

(40) Certain rightholders such as authors
and performers need information to assess
the economic value of their rights which areharmonised under Union law. This isespecially the case where such rightholders
grant a licence or a transfer of rights in returnfor remuneration. As authors and performers
are in a weaker contractual position when
they grant licences or transfer their rights,
they need accurate information to assess thecontinued economic value of their rights,
compared to the remuneration received fortheir licence or transfer, but they often face alack of transparency. Therefore, the regularsharing of adequate information by theirdirect contractual counterparts or theirsuccessors in title is important for thetransparency and balance in the system thatgoverns the remuneration of authors andperformers. The reporting and transparency
obligation should follow the work across all
form of exploitation and across borders.

Amendment 30
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!115/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(41) When implementing transparency(41) When implementing transparency
obligations, the specificities of different
obligations, the specificities of different
content sectors and of the rights of thecontent sectors and of the rights of theauthors and performers in each sector should authors and performers in each sector, as
be considered. Member States should consult well as the significance of the contribution
all relevant stakeholders as that should help by authors and performers to the overall
determine sector-specific requirements.
work or performance should be considered.
Collective bargaining should be considered
Member States should consult all relevant
as an option to reach an agreement between stakeholders as that should help determine
the relevant stakeholders regarding
sector-specific requirements and standardtransparency. To enable the adaptation ofreporting statements and procedures.
current reporting practices to theCollective bargaining should be consideredtransparency obligations, a transitional
as an option to reach an agreement between
period should be provided for. The
the relevant stakeholders regardingtransparency obligations do not need to apply transparency. To enable the adaptation of
to agreements concluded with collective
current reporting practices to the
management organisations as those aretransparency obligations, a transitionalalready subject to transparency obligations
period should be provided for. The
under Directive 2014/26/EU.
transparency obligations do not need toapply to agreements concluded withcollective management organisations to theextent that fully equivalent transparency
obligations exist under Directive 2014/26/
EU.

Amendment 31
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!116/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(42) Certain contracts for the exploitationof rights harmonised at Union level are oflong duration, offering few possibilities for
authors and performers to renegotiate themwith their contractual counterparts or theirsuccessors in title. Therefore, without
prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in
Member States, there should be a
remuneration adjustment mechanism forcases where the remuneration originallyagreed under a licence or a transfer of rights
is disproportionately low compared to therelevant revenues and the benefits derived
from the exploitation of the work or the
fixation of the performance, including inlight of the transparency ensured by thisDirective. The assessment of the situation
should take account of the specificcircumstances of each case as well as of thespecificities and practices of the different
content sectors. Where the parties do notagree on the adjustment of the remuneration,
the author or performer should be entitled tobring a claim before a court or othercompetent authority.

(42) Most contracts for the exploitation ofrights harmonised at Union level are of long
duration, offering very few possibilities for
authors and performers to renegotiate themwith their contractual counterparts or theirsuccessors in title. Therefore, without
prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in
Member States, there should be a
remuneration adjustment mechanism forcases of unexpected success where theremuneration originally agreed under alicence or a transfer of rights is
disproportionately low compared to therelevant net direct and indirect revenues andthe 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 thesituation should take account of the specificcircumstances of each case as well as of thespecificities and practices of the different
content sectors. When assessing thedisproportionality, the appropriate
circumstances of each case, including thenature and significance of the contributionof the author or performer to the overall
work or performance, should be taken into
account. Where the parties do not agree on
the adjustment of the remuneration, theauthor or performer should be entitled tobring a claim before a court or othercompetent authority.

Amendment 32
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!117/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(43) Authors and performers are often
reluctant to enforce their rights against theircontractual partners before a court or
tribunal. Member States should therefore
provide for an alternative dispute resolution
procedure that addresses claims related to
obligations of transparency and the contract
adjustment mechanism.

(43) Authors and performers are often
reluctant or unable to enforce their rights
against their contractual partners before acourt or tribunal. Member States should
therefore provide for an efficient alternative
dispute resolution procedure that addresses
claims related to obligations of transparency
and the contract adjustment mechanism. It
should also be possible to agree upon thedispute settlement resolution in collective
agreements.

Amendment 33
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.
Except in the cases referred to in
Article 6, this Directive shall leave intact andshall in no way affect existing rules laid
down in the Directives currently in force inthis area, in particular Directives 96/9/EC,
2001/29/EC, 2006/115/EC, 2009/24/EC,
2012/28/EU and 2014/26/EU.

2.
Except in the cases referred to in
Article 6, this Directive shall leave intact andshall in no way affect existing rules laid
down in the Directives currently in force inthis area, in particular Directives 96/9/EC,
2000/31/EC, 2001/29/EC, 2006/115/EC,
2009/24/EC, 2012/28/EU and 2014/26/EU.

Amendment 34
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(1a) 'educational establishment' means aschool, college, university, or any otherorganisation the primary goal of which is toprovide educational services:(a)on a not-for-profit basis or byreinvesting all the profits in such provision;or

PE601.094v02-00

EN!118/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(b)pursuant to a public interest mission
recognised by a Member State.

Amendment 35
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – pragraph 1 – point 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(2)‘text and data mining’ means any
automated analytical technique aiming toanalyse text and data in digital form in orderto generate information such as patterns,
trends and correlations;(2)‘text and data mining’ means any
automated analytical or computational
technique aiming to analyse text and data orother subject matter in digital form in orderto generate information, including but notlimited to patterns, trends and correlations;

Amendment 36
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(3)‘cultural heritage institution’ means apublicly accessible library or museum, anarchive or a film or audio heritage
institution;(3)‘cultural heritage institution’ means apublicly accessible library or museum orgallery, an educational establishment, anarchive or a film or audio heritage
institution, or a public service broadcaster;

Amendment 37
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!119/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(3a) ‘user generated content’ means animage, a set of moving images or withoutsound, a phonogram, text, software, data, or
a combination of the above, which is
uploaded to an online service by its users;

Amendment 38
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(4)‘press publication’ means a fixation deletedof a collection of literary works of ajournalistic nature, which may also
comprise other works or subject-matter andconstitutes an individual item within aperiodical or regularly-updated publication
under a single title, such as a newspaper ora general or special interest magazine,
having the purpose of providing
information related to news or other topics
and published in any media under the
initiative, editorial responsibility andcontrol of a service provider.

Amendment 39
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(4a) 'out of commerce work' means awork or other subject-matter that is notavailable to the public through customarychannels of commerce. Out of commerce
works include both works that havepreviously been available commercially andworks that have never been commerciallyavailable.

PE601.094v02-00

EN!120/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 40
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and Article 11(1)of this Directive for reproductions andextractions made by research organisations
in order to carry out text and data mining ofworks or other subject-matter to which they
have lawful access for the purposes ofscientific research.

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1) of
Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of
this Directive for reproductions andextractions made by research organisations
and cultural heritage institutions in order tocarry out text and data mining of works orother subject-matter to which they haveacquired or lawfully obtained access for the
purposes of scientific research.

Amendment 41
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment2.
Any contractual provision contrary to 2.
Any contractual provision or
the exception provided for in paragraph 1
technical protection contrary to theshall be unenforceable.
exception provided for in paragraph 1 shallbe unenforceable.

Amendment 42
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!121/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN3.
Rightholders shall be allowed toapply measures to ensure the security andintegrity of the networks and databases
where the works or other subject-matter are
hosted. Such measures shall not go beyond
what is necessary to achieve that objective.

3.
Rightholders shall be allowed toapply targeted, proportionate, reasonable
and non-discriminatory measures to ensure
the security and integrity of the networks anddatabases where the works or other subjectmatter are hosted. Such measures shall bereasonable and efficient, not go beyond
what is necessary to achieve that objective,
or unnecessarily hamper text and data
mining.

Amendment 43
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4.
Member States shall encouragerightholders and research organisations todefine commonly-agreed best practices
concerning the application of the measuresreferred to in paragraph 3.

4.
The Commission, in cooperation
with Member States, shall encouragerightholders and research organisations todefine commonly-agreed best practices
concerning the application of the measuresreferred to in paragraph 3.

Amendment 44
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Use of works and other subject-matter indigital and cross-border teaching activities

Use of works and other subject-matter inteaching and educational activities

Amendment 45
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
PE601.094v02-00

EN!122/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception or limitation to the rights provided
for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/
EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/
EC, Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC
and Article 11(1) of this Directive in order toallow for the digital use of works and othersubject-matter for the sole purpose ofillustration for teaching, to the extent
justified by the non-commercial purpose to
be achieved, provided that the use:

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception or limitation to the rights provided
for in Articles 2 and 3 and 4 of Directive
2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of
Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1) of Directive
2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of thisDirective in order to allow for the digital use
of works and other subject-matter for thesole purpose of illustration for teaching,educational purposes or scientific research,
to the extent justified by the non-commercial
purpose to be achieved, provided that theuse:

Amendment 46
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(a)takes place on the premises of an
educational establishment or through asecure electronic network accessible only by
the educational establishment's pupils or
students and teaching staff;(a)takes place on the premises of an
educational establishment or other venues,
such as cultural heritage institutions,involved in teaching activities, or through asecure electronic network accessible only by
the educational establishment's pupils or
students and teaching staff, or registeredmembers of the cultural heritage institution
involved in non-formal or informal
education;

Amendment 47
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission
RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!123/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

1a.
Any contractual provision contrary
to the exception set out in paragraph 1 shallbe unenforceable.

Amendment 48
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.
Member States may provide that the
exception adopted pursuant to paragraph 1
does not apply generally or as regards
specific types of works or other subjectmatter, to the extent that adequate licences
authorising the acts described in paragraph 1
are easily available in the market.

2.
Member States may provide that the
exception adopted pursuant to paragraph 1
does not apply generally or as regards
specific types of works or other subjectmatter, to the extent that equivalent extended
collective licencing agreements authorising
the acts described in paragraph 1 areaffordable and easily available in themarket.

Member States availing themselves of theprovision of the first subparagraph shall takethe necessary measures to ensure appropriate
availability and visibility of the licences
authorising the acts described in paragraph 1
for educational establishments.

Member States availing themselves of theprovision of the first subparagraph shall takethe necessary measures to ensure appropriate
availability, accessibility and visibility of thelicences authorising the acts described inparagraph 1 for educational establishments
and cultural heritage institutions.
No sooner than ... [three years after the dateof entry into force of this Directive], and in
consultation with all stakeholders, theCommission shall report on the availabilityof such licenses, with a view to proposing
improvements if needed.

Amendment 49
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission
PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!124/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

3.
The use of works and other subjectmatter for the sole purpose of illustration forteaching through secure electronic networks
undertaken in compliance with theprovisions of national law adopted pursuant
to this Article shall be deemed to occur
solely in the Member State where theeducational establishment is established.

3.
The use of works and other subjectmatter for the sole purpose of illustration forteaching through secure electronic networks
undertaken in compliance with theprovisions of national law adopted pursuant
to this Article shall be deemed to occur
solely in the Member State from where theeducational establishment is established orfrom where the educational activity
originates.

Amendment 50
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4.
Member States may provide for faircompensation for the harm incurred by therightholders due to the use of their works orother subject-matter pursuant to paragraph 1.

4.
Member States may provide for faircompensation for any unreasonable actions
contrary to the legitimate interests ofrightholders in relation to the use of theirworks or other subject-matter pursuant toparagraph 1.

Amendment 51
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
4a.
Member States shall ensure that therightholders have the right to grant royaltyfree licences authorising the acts describedin paragraph 1, generally or as regards
specific types of works of other subjectmatter that they may choose.

Amendment 52
RR\1157669EN.docx!125/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENProposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1)(a) of
Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of
this Directive, permitting cultural heritage
institutions, to make copies of any works orother subject-matter that are permanently intheir collections, in any format or medium,for the sole purpose of the preservation ofsuch works or other subject-matter and to
the extent necessary for such preservation.

Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1)(a) of
Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of
this Directive, permitting cultural heritage
institutions or educational establishments,
to make copies of any works or othersubject-matter that are permanently in theircollections, in any format or medium, to theextent necessary for such reproduction, forthe purpose of, individually or
collaboratively with others, carrying out
their public interest mission in preservation,
research, culture, education and teaching.

Amendment 53
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Member States shall recognise that once awork is in the public domain, that is to say
copyright and related rights in a work have
expired or never existed, faithful
reproductions in full or in part of that work,
regardless of the mode of reproduction andincluding digitisation, shall equally not be
subject to copyright or related rights.

Amendment 54
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 a (new)PE601.094v02-00

EN!126/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Article 5 a
Freedom of panorama
Member States shall provide for an
exception or limitation to the rights
provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive
2001/29/EC and point (a) of Article 5 andArticle 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, permitting
the reproduction and use of works, such asworks of architecture or sculpture, made to
be located permanently in public places.
Any contractual provision contrary to the
exception provided for in this Article shallbe unenforceable.

Amendment 55
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 b (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Article 5b
User-generated content exception
1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception or limitation to the rights
provided for in Articles 2, 3 and 4 of
Directive 2001/29/EC, point (a) of Article 5
and Article 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, point(a) of Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC
and Article 13 of this Directive in order toallow for the digital use of quotations or
extracts of works and other subject-mattercomprised within user-generated content
for purposes such as criticism, review,entertainment, illustration, caricature,parody or pastiche provided that thequotations or extracts:(a)relate to works or other subjectmatter that have already been lawfully
made available to the public;

RR\1157669EN.docx!127/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

(b)
are accompanied by the indicationof the source, including the author's name,unless this turns out to be impossible; and(c)are used in accordance with fair
practice and in a manner that does notextend beyond the specific purpose forwhich they are being used.
2.
Any contractual provision contrary
to the exception provided for in thisparagraph 1 shall be unenforceable.

Amendment 56
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 5(5) and the first, third and fifth
subparagraphs of Article 6(4) of Directive
2001/29/EC shall apply to the exceptions
and the limitation provided for under thisTitle.

Access to content permitted by an exception
or limitation shall not give the beneficiaryof the exception or limitation the right touse the content concerned in the context
provided for by another exception orlimitation.
Article 5(5) and the first, third, fourth andfifth subparagraphs of Article 6(4) of
Directive 2001/29/EC shall apply to the
exceptions and limitations provided forunder this title.

Amendment 57
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!128/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

1.
Member States shall provide thatwhen a collective management organisation,
on behalf of its members, concludes a nonexclusive licence for non-commercial
purposes with a cultural heritage institution
for the digitisation, distribution,communication to the public or making
available of out-of-commerce works or othersubject-matter permanently in the collectionof the institution, such a non-exclusive
licence may be extended or presumed toapply to rightholders of the same category as
those covered by the licence who are notrepresented by the collective management
organisation, provided that:

RR\1157669EN.docx

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception or limitation to the rights
provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive
2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of
Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1) of Directive
2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of thisDirective in order to allow cultural heritage
institutions to distribute, communicate to
the public or make available out-ofcommerce works or other subject-matter
permanently in the collection of theinstitution for non-commercial purposes.
Member States shall bring into force thelaws, regulations and administrative
provisions necessary to comply with thisparagraph before 22 December 2020. When
applying the exception or limitation
Member States shall take due account of
remuneration schemes to compensate forany unreasonable actions contrary to thelegitimate interests of rightholders, andensure that all rightholders may at any time
object to the use of any of their works orother subject-matter that are deemed to beout of commerce and be able to exclude theuse of their works or other subject-matter.
Acts which would otherwise be permitted
under paragraph 1 shall not be permitted if
valid extended collective licencing solutions
are available authorising the acts inquestion and the cultural heritage
institution responsible for those acts knew
or ought to have been aware of that fact.
Member States shall provide that when acollective management organisation, on
behalf of its members, concludes a nonexclusive licence for non-commercial
purposes with a cultural heritage institution
for the digitisation, distribution,communication to the public or making
available of out-of-commerce works or othersubject-matter permanently in the collectionof the institution, such a non-exclusive
licence may be extended or presumed toapply to rightholders of the same category as
those covered by the licence who are notrepresented by the collective management!129/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment

58

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.
A work or other subject-matter shallbe deemed to be out of commerce when thewhole work or other subject-matter, in all its
translations, versions and manifestations, is
not available to the public throughcustomary channels of commerce andcannot be reasonably expected to becomeso.

2.
A work or other subject-matter shallbe deemed to be out of commerce when thewhole work or other subject-matter, is notavailable through customary channels in any
form suitable for the work permanently inthe collection of a cultural heritage
institution. Out of commerce works include
both works that have previously been
available commercially and works that havenever been commercially available.

Member States shall, in consultation withrightholders, collective management
organisations and cultural heritage
institutions, ensure that the requirements
used to determine whether works and othersubject-matter can be licensed inaccordance with paragraph 1 do not extend
beyond what is necessary and reasonable anddo not preclude the possibility to determine
the out-of-commerce status of a collection asa whole, when it is reasonable to presume
that all works or other subject-matter in thecollection are out of commerce.

Member States shall, in consultation withrightholders, collective management
organisations and cultural heritage
institutions, ensure that the requirements
used to determine whether works and othersubject-matter are out of commerce do notextend beyond what is necessary andreasonable and proportionate do notpreclude the possibility to determine the outof-commerce status of a collection as awhole, when it is reasonable to presume that
all works or other subject-matter in thecollection are out of commerce.

Amendment 59
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission(b)
the licence, and in particular its
application to unrepresented rightholders;
PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment(b)
any licence, and in particular its
application to unrepresented rightholders;!130/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 60
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(c)the possibility of rightholders to
object, referred to in point (c) of paragraph1;(c)the possibility of rightholders to
object, referred to in paragraph 2 and point(c) of paragraph 4;

Amendment 61
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(a)the works or phonograms were firstpublished or, in the absence of publication,
where they were first broadcast, except forcinematographic and audiovisual works;(a)the majority of works or phonograms
were first published or, in the absence of
publication, where they were first created or
broadcast, except for cinematographic andaudiovisual works;

Amendment 62
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(c)the cultural heritage institution isestablished, when a Member State or a third
country could not be determined, after
reasonable efforts, according to points (a)and (b).

(c)
the cultural heritage institution isestablished, when a Member State or a third
country could not be determined, after
proven efforts, according to points (a) and(b).

RR\1157669EN.docx!131/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 63
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5.
Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall not
apply to the works or other subject-matterof third country nationals except wherepoints (a) and (b) of paragraph 4 apply.

deletedAmendment 64
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.
Works or other subject-mattercovered by a licence granted in accordancewith Article 7 may be used by the cultural
heritage institution in accordance with theterms of the licence in all Member States.

1.
Works or other subject-matter used inaccordance with Article 7 may be used by thecultural heritage institutions in all Member
States.

Amendment 65
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!132/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

2.
Member States shall ensure that
information that allows the identification of
the works or other subject-matter covered bya licence granted in accordance with Article
7 and information about the possibility ofrightholders to object referred to in Article
7(1)(c) are made publicly accessible in asingle online portal for at least six months
before the works or other subject-matter are
digitised, distributed, communicated to the
public or made available in Member Statesother than the one where the licence isgranted, and for the whole duration of thelicence.

2.
Member States shall ensure that
information that allows the identification of
the works or other subject-matter used inaccordance with Article 7 and information
about the possibility of rightholders to objectreferred to in Article 7(2) and (4)(c) aremade publicly accessible in a single online
portal for at least six months before theworks or other subject-matter are digitised,distributed, communicated to the public ormade available in all Member States.

Amendment 66
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall ensure a regulardialogue between representative users' andrightholders' organisations, and any otherrelevant stakeholder organisations, to, on asector-specific basis, foster the relevance andusability of the licensing mechanisms
referred to in Article 7(1), ensure theeffectiveness of the safeguards forrightholders referred to in this Chapter,notably as regards publicity measures, and,
where applicable, assist in the establishmentof the requirements referred to in the second
subparagraph of Article 7(2).

Member States shall ensure a regulardialogue between representative users' andrightholders' organisations, and any otherrelevant stakeholder organisations, to, on asector-specific basis, foster the relevance andusability of the mechanisms referred to in
Article 7, including resolving issues where
cultural heritage institutions’ activities inline with Articles 7 and 8 are not being
reasonably enabled, to ensure theeffectiveness of the safeguards forrightholders referred to in this Chapter,notably as regards publicity measures, and,
where applicable, to assist in theestablishment of the requirements referred toin the second subparagraph of Article 7(6).

Amendment 67
Proposal for a directive
RR\1157669EN.docx!133/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENTitle IV – Chapter 2 – title
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Certain uses of protected content by online
services

Certain uses of protected content online

Amendment 68
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – title
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Use of protected content by informationsociety service providers storing and giving
access to large amounts of works and othersubject-matter uploaded by their users

Use of protected content by informationsociety service providers storing and giving
access to large amounts of works and othersubject-matter

Amendment 69
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!134/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

1.
Information society service providers
that store and provide to the public access tolarge amounts of works or other subjectmatter uploaded by their users shall, in
cooperation with rightholders, takemeasures to ensure the functioning ofagreements concluded with rightholders forthe use of their works or other subjectmatter or to prevent the availability on theirservices of works or other subject-matter
identified by rightholders through thecooperation with the service providers.
Those measures, such as the use of effective
content recognition technologies, shall beappropriate and proportionate. The service
providers shall provide rightholders withadequate information on the functioning
and the deployment of the measures, as wellas, when relevant, adequate reporting on
the recognition and use of the works andother subject-matter.

1.
Where information society service
providers offer users content storage
services and provide the public with accessto content and where such activity is not
eligible for the liability exemptions provided
for in Directive 2000/31/EC, they shall takeappropriate and proportionate measures toensure the functioning of licensing
agreements concluded with rightholders. The
implementation of such agreements shallrespect the fundamental rights of users andshall not impose a general obligation on
information society service providers tomonitor the information which theytransmit or store, in accordance with Article
15 of Directive 2000/31/EC.

Amendment 70
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
1a.
For the purpose of ensuring thefunctioning of licensing agreements, as
referred to in paragraph 1, informationsociety service providers and rightholders
shall cooperate with each other.
Rightholders shall accurately identify to
information society service providers theworks or other subject-matter in respect ofwhich they have the copyright. The
information society service providers shallinform rightholders of the measures
employed and the accuracy of theirfunctioning as well as, when relevant,periodically report on the use of the works
and other subject-matter.

RR\1157669EN.docx!135/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 71
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.
Member States shall ensure that theservice providers referred to in paragraph 1
put in place complaints and redress
mechanisms that are available to users incase of disputes over the application of themeasures referred to in paragraph 1.

2.
Member States shall ensure that theservice providers referred to in paragraph 1
in cooperation with rightholders put inplace complaints mechanisms that areavailable to users in case of disputes over the
implementation of the licensing agreements
referred to in paragraph 1.

Amendment 72
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
2a.
Member States shall ensure thatusers have access to a court or anothercompetent authority for the purpose of
asserting their right of use under an
exception or limitation and to appeal any
restrictive measures agreed upon pursuant
to paragraph 3.

Amendment 73
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!136/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

3.
Member States shall facilitate, whereappropriate, the cooperation between theinformation society service providers andrightholders through stakeholder dialogues todefine best practices, such as appropriate
and proportionate content recognition
technologies, taking into account, among
others, the nature of the services, theavailability of the technologies and theireffectiveness in light of technologicaldevelopments.

3.
Member States shall facilitate, whereappropriate, the cooperation between theinformation society service providers
referred to in paragraph 1, user
representatives and rightholders throughstakeholder dialogues to define best practices
for the implementation of paragraph 1. The
measures undertaken shall be appropriate
and proportionate and shall take into
account, among others, the nature of theservices, the availability of the technologies
and their effectiveness in light oftechnological developments.

Amendment 74
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.
Member States shall ensure that
authors and performers receive on a regularbasis and taking into account the specificitiesof each sector, timely, adequate andsufficient information on the exploitation of
their works and performances from those towhom they have licensed or transferred theirrights, notably as regards modes of
exploitation, revenues generated andremuneration due.

1.
Member States shall ensure that
authors and performers receive on a regularbasis and no less than once a year andtaking into account the specificities of eachsector, in an open readable format,
accurate, timely, adequate and sufficientcomprehensive information on the
exploitation and promotion of their works
and performances from those to whom they
have licensed or transferred their rights,
including subsequent transferees or
licensees, notably as regards modes ofpromotion, exploitation, revenues generated
and remuneration due.

Amendment 75
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission
RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!137/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN2.
The obligation in paragraph 1 shallbe proportionate and effective and shallensure an appropriate 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, provided that the
obligation remains effective and ensures anappropriate level of transparency.

2.
The obligation in paragraph 1 shallbe proportionate and effective and shallensure a high level of transparency in every
sector. However, in those cases where theadministrative burden resulting from theobligation would be disproportionate in viewof the revenues generated by the exploitationof the work or performance, Member States
may adjust the obligation in paragraph 1, on
condition that the level of disproportionality
is duly justified, provided that the obligation
remains effective and ensures an appropriate
level of transparency. Member States shallensure that sector-specific standard
reporting statements and procedures aredeveloped through stakeholder dialogues.

Amendment 76
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.
Member States may decide that the
obligation in paragraph 1 does not apply
when the contribution of the author or
performer is not significant having regard
to the overall work or performance.

deletedAmendment 77
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!138/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Member States shall ensure that authors andperformers are entitled to request additional,
appropriate remuneration from the party withwhom they entered into a contract for the
exploitation of the rights when the
remuneration originally agreed isdisproportionately low compared to thesubsequent relevant revenues and benefits
derived from the exploitation of the works or
performances.

Member States shall ensure that authors andperformers, or the representatives they
appoint, are entitled to request additional,
equitable, appropriate remuneration from theparty with whom they entered into a contract
for the exploitation of the rights, or fromtheir successor in title, when the
remuneration originally agreed isdisproportionately low compared to theunanticipated subsequent relevant revenues
and benefits derived from the exploitation of
the works or performances.

Amendment 78
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.
The provisions of Article 11 shalldeletedalso apply to press publications published
before [the date mentioned in Article 21(1)].

RR\1157669EN.docx!139/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION
Title

Copyright in the Digital Single Market

References

COM(2016)0593 – C8-0383/2016 – 2016/0280(COD)

Committee responsible
Date announced in plenary

JURI
6.10.2016

Opinion by
Date announced in plenary

IMCO
6.10.2016

Associated committees - dateannounced in plenary

19.1.2017

Rapporteur
Date appointed

Catherine Stihler
11.10.2016

Discussed in committee

13.3.2017

Date adopted

8.6.2017

Result of final vote

+:
–:
0:

Members present for the final vote

Dita Charanzová, Carlos Coelho, Anna Maria Corazza Bildt,
Daniel Dalton, Nicola Danti, Evelyne Gebhardt, Sergio Gutiérrez
Prieto, Robert Jarosław Iwaszkiewicz, Liisa Jaakonsaari, Antonio
López-Istúriz White, Morten Løkkegaard, Jiří Pospíšil, Virginie
Rozière, Christel Schaldemose, Olga Sehnalová, Igor Šoltes, IvanŠtefanec, Catherine Stihler, Róża Gräfin von Thun und
Hohenstein, Mylène Troszczynski, Anneleen Van Bossuyt

Substitutes present for the final vote

Lucy Anderson, Pascal Arimont, Lidia Joanna Geringer deOedenberg, Kaja Kallas, Julia Reda, Marc Tarabella, Lambert van
Nistelrooij, Sabine Verheyen

Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present
for the final vote

Georges Bach, Peter Jahr, Markus Pieper

PE601.094v02-00

EN

24.4.201719
7
6!140/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

+

19
PPE

Pascal Arimont, Georges Bach, Carlos Coelho, Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Peter Jahr,
Antonio López-Istúriz White, Markus Pieper, Jiří Pospíšil, Róża Gräfin von Thun und
Hohenstein, Lambert van Nistelrooij, Ivan Štefanec

S&D

Lucy Anderson, Nicola Danti, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Sergio Gutiérrez
Prieto, Liisa Jaakonsaari, Olga Sehnalová, Catherine Stihler, Marc Tarabella

-

7
ALDE

Dita Charanzová, Kaja Kallas

ECR

Daniel Dalton, Anneleen Van Bossuyt

ENF

Mylène Troszczynski

Verts/ALE

Julia Reda, Igor Šoltes

0

6
ALDE

Morten Løkkegaard

EFDD

Robert Jarosław Iwaszkiewicz

PPE

Sabine Verheyen

S&D

Evelyne Gebhardt, Virginie Rozière, Christel Schaldemose

Key to symbols:+ : in favour- : against
0 : abstention

RR\1157669EN.docx!141/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN01.8.2017
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, RESEARCH AND ENERGY

for the Committee on Legal Affairs
on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright in
the Digital Single Market(COM(2016)0593 – C80383/2016 – 2016/0280(COD))
Rapporteur: Zdzisław KrasnodębskiAMENDMENTS
The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy calls on the Committee on Legal Affairs, as
the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:
Amendment 1
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!142/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(8)New technologies enable theautomated computational analysis of
information in digital form, such as text,
sounds, images or data, generally known astext and data mining. Those technologies
allow researchers to process large amounts
of information to gain new knowledge anddiscover new trends. Whilst text and data
mining technologies are prevalent across thedigital economy, there is widespreadacknowledgment that text and data mining
can in particular benefit the researchcommunity and in so doing encourage
innovation. However, in the Union, researchorganisations such as universities andresearch institutes are confronted with legal
uncertainty as to the extent to which they can
perform text and data mining of content. In
certain instances, text and data mining may
involve acts protected by copyright and/or by
the sui generis database right, notably the
reproduction of works or other subjectmatter and/or the extraction of contents froma database. Where there is no exception orlimitation which applies, an authorisation toundertake such acts would be required fromrightholders. Text and data mining may also
be carried out in relation to mere facts ordata which are not protected by copyrightand in such instances no authorisation would
be required.

(8)
New technologies enable theautomated computational analysis of
information in digital form, such as text,
sounds, images or data, generally known astext and data mining. Those technologies
allow for processing of large amounts of
information to gain new knowledge anddiscover new trends. Whilst text and data
mining technologies are prevalent across thedigital economy, there is widespreadacknowledgment that text and data mining
can in particular benefit the researchcommunity and in so doing encourage
innovation, sustainable growth and jobs.
However, in the Union, researchorganisations such as universities andresearch institutes are confronted with legal
uncertainty as to the extent to which they can
perform text and data mining of content. In
certain instances, text and data mining may
involve acts protected by copyright and/or by
the sui generis database right, notably the
reproduction of works or other subjectmatter and/or the extraction of contents froma database. Where there is no exception orlimitation which applies, an authorisation toundertake such acts would be required fromrightholders. Text and data mining may also
be carried out in relation to mere facts ordata which are not protected by copyrightand in such instances no authorisation would
be required.

Amendment 2
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!143/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

(9)
Union law already provides certain
exceptions and limitations covering uses forscientific research purposes which may apply
to acts of text and data mining. However,those exceptions and limitations are optionaland not fully adapted to the use oftechnologies in scientific research.
Moreover, where researchers have lawfulaccess to content, for example throughsubscriptions to publications or open accesslicences, the terms of the licences may
exclude text and data mining. As research isincreasingly carried out with the assistanceof digital technology, there is a risk that theUnion's competitive position as a researcharea will suffer unless steps are taken toaddress the legal uncertainty for text and data
mining.

(9)
Union law already provides certain
exceptions and limitations covering uses forscientific research purposes which may apply
to acts of text and data mining. However,those exceptions and limitations are optionaland not fully adapted to the use oftechnologies in scientific research.
Moreover, where researchers have lawfulaccess to content, for example throughsubscriptions to publications or open accesslicences, the terms of the licences may
exclude text and data mining. As research isincreasingly carried out with the assistanceof digital technology, there is a risk that theUnion's competitive position as a researcharea and a data economy leader will suffer
unless steps are taken to address the legal
uncertainty for text and data mining.

Amendment 3
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(9 a) Union law should take into
consideration that text and data mining has
the huge potential to be used in both formal
and informal research settings and should
recognise the potential of text and data
mining to stimulate significant innovation,
growth and jobs.

Amendment 4
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!144/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(10) This legal uncertainty should be
addressed by providing for a mandatory
exception to the right of reproduction andalso to the right to prevent extraction from a
database. The new exception should be
without prejudice to the existing mandatory
exception on temporary acts of reproduction
laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive
2001/29, which should continue to apply totext and data mining techniques which do not
involve the making of copies going beyond
the scope of that exception. Researchorganisations should also benefit from theexception when they engage into publicprivate partnerships.

(10) This legal uncertainty should be
addressed by providing for a mandatory
exception to the right of reproduction andalso to the right to prevent extraction from a
database, including raw data. The new
exception should be without prejudice to theexisting mandatory exception on temporary
acts of reproduction laid down in Article 5(1)of Directive 2001/29, which should continue
to apply to text and data mining techniques
which do not involve the making of copies
going beyond the scope of that exception.
Most of the text and data mining carriedout over the open internet does not involve
permanent copies and thus differs largely
from text and data mining on scientificpublications.

Amendment 5
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!145/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(11) Research organisations across theUnion encompass a wide variety of entities
the primary goal of which is to conduct
scientific research or to do so together withthe provision of educational services. Due tothe diversity of such entities, it is importantto have a common understanding of thebeneficiaries of the exception. Despite
different legal forms and structures, researchorganisations across Member States
generally have in common that they act
either on a not for profit basis or in thecontext of a public-interest mission
recognised by the State. Such a publicinterest mission may, for example, be
reflected through public funding or throughprovisions in national laws or public
contracts. At the same time, organisations
upon which commercial undertakings have adecisive influence allowing them to exercise
control because of structural situations suchas their quality of shareholders or members,
which may result in preferential access to theresults of the research, should not be
considered research organisations for the
purposes of this Directive.

(11) Research organisations across theUnion encompass a wide variety of entities
the primary goal of which is to conduct
scientific research or to do so together withthe provision of educational services. Due tothe diversity of such entities, it is importantto have a common understanding of thebeneficiaries of the exception. Despite
different legal forms and structures, researchorganisations across Member States
generally have in common that they act
either on a not for profit basis or in thecontext of a public-interest mission
recognised by the State. Such a publicinterest mission may, for example, be
reflected through public funding or throughprovisions in national laws or public
contracts. At the same time, organisations
upon which commercial undertakings have adecisive influence allowing them to exercise
control because of structural situations suchas their quality of shareholders or members,
which may result in preferential access to theresults of the research, should not be
considered research organisations for the
purposes of this Directive. Researchorganisations should cover universities,
including start-up incubators attached touniversities, and research institutes.

Amendment 6
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!146/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(12) In view of a potentially high numberof access requests to and downloads of theirworks or other subject-matter, rightholders
should be allowed to apply measures where
there is risk that the security and integrity ofthe system or databases where the works orother subject-matter are hosted would be
jeopardised. Those measures should notexceed what is necessary to pursue theobjective of ensuring the security andintegrity of the system and should notundermine the effective application of the
exception.

(12) In view of a potentially high numberof access requests to and downloads of theirworks or other subject-matter, rightholders
should be allowed to apply measures where
there is risk that the security and integrity ofthe system or databases where the works orother subject-matter are hosted would be
jeopardised. Those measures should notexceed what is necessary to pursue theobjective of ensuring the security andintegrity of the system and should notundermine the effective application of the
exception. These measures should notprevent or exclude the ability to develop text
and data mining tools different from thoseoffered by the rightholder as long as the
security and integrity of the networks anddatabases is protected.

Amendment 7
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(13) There is no need to provide forcompensation for rightholders as regards
uses under the text and data mining
exception introduced by this Directive giventhat in view of the nature and scope of the
exception the harm should be minimal.

(13) There is no need to provide forcompensation for rightholders as regards
uses under the text and data mining
exception introduced by this Directive giventhat there would be no unreasonableprejudice to the interests of rightholders.
Use under the text and data mining
exception would also not conflict with thenormal exploitation of the works in a waythat calls for separate compensation.

Amendment 8
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Text proposed by the Commission
RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!147/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(14) Article 5(3)(a) of Directive 2001/29/
EC allows Member States to introduce an
exception or limitation to the rights ofreproduction, communication to the public
and making available to the public for thesole purpose of, among others, illustration
for teaching. In addition, Articles 6(2)(b) and9(b) of Directive 96/9/EC permit the use of adatabase and the extraction or re-utilizationof a substantial part of its contents for the
purpose of illustration for teaching. The
scope of those exceptions or limitations as
they apply to digital uses is unclear. In
addition, there is a lack of clarity as towhether those exceptions or limitations
would apply where teaching is provided
online and thereby at a distance. Moreover,the existing framework does not provide fora cross-border effect. This situation may
hamper the development of digitallysupported teaching activities and distancelearning. Therefore, the introduction of a
new mandatory exception or limitation isnecessary to ensure that educational
establishments benefit from full legal
certainty when using works or other subjectmatter in digital teaching activities,
including online and across borders.

(14) Article 5(3)(a) of Directive 2001/29/
EC allows Member States to introduce an
exception or limitation to the rights ofreproduction, communication to the public
and making available to the public for thesole purpose of illustration for teaching or
scientific research. In addition, Articles 6(2)(b) and 9(b) of Directive 96/9/EC permit theuse of a database and the extraction or reutilization of a substantial part of its contents
for the purpose of illustration for teaching.
Alongside uneven application in Member
States, the scope of those exceptions orlimitations as they apply to digital uses is
unclear. In addition, there is a lack of clarity
as to whether those exceptions or limitations
would apply where teaching is provided
online and thereby at a distance. Moreover,the existing framework does not provide fora cross-border effect. This situation may
hamper the development of digitallysupported teaching activities and distancelearning. Therefore, the introduction of a
new mandatory exception or limitation isnecessary to ensure that educational
establishments benefit from full legal
certainty when using works or other subjectmatter in all teaching activities, including
online and across borders.

Amendment 9
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!148/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(15) While distance learning and crossborder education programmes are mostly
developed at higher education level, digital
tools and resources are increasingly used at
all education levels, in particular to improveand enrich the learning experience. The
exception or limitation provided for in thisDirective should therefore benefit all
educational establishments in primary,secondary, vocational and higher education
to the extent they pursue their educational
activity for a non-commercial purpose. The
organisational structure and the means offunding of an educational establishment are
not the decisive factors to determine the noncommercial nature of the activity.

(15) While distance learning and crossborder education programmes are mostly
developed at higher education level, digital
tools and resources are increasingly used at
all education levels, in particular to improveand enrich the learning experience. The
exception or limitation provided for in thisDirective should therefore benefit all
educational establishments in primary,secondary, vocational, and higher education,and certified educational programmes
recognised by the Member State, as wellcultural heritage institutions and researchorganisations, to the extent they pursue theireducational activity for a non-commercial
purpose. The organisational structure and themeans of funding of an educational
establishment are not the decisive factors todetermine the non-commercial nature of theactivity.

Amendment 10
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!149/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(16) The exception or limitation should
cover digital uses of works and othersubject-matter such as the use of parts or
extracts of works to support, enrich orcomplement the teaching, including therelated learning activities. The use of theworks or other subject-matter under the
exception or limitation should be only in thecontext of teaching and learning activities
carried out under the responsibility ofeducational establishments, including during
examinations, and be limited to what isnecessary for the purpose of such activities.
The exception or limitation should coverboth uses through digital means in theclassroom and online uses through theeducational establishment's secure electronic
network, the access to which should beprotected, notably by authentication
procedures. The exception or limitation
should be understood as covering thespecific accessibility needs of persons with adisability in the context of illustration forteaching.

(16) The exception or limitation should
cover all uses of works and other subjectmatter such as the use of parts or extracts ofworks to support, enrich or complement theteaching, including the related learning
activities. The use of the works or othersubject-matter under the exception orlimitation should be only in the context ofteaching and learning activities carried out
under the responsibility of establishments
pursuing educational activities, including
during examinations, and be limited to whatis necessary for the purpose of suchactivities. The exception or limitation should
cover both uses through digital means in theclassroom and online uses through theeducational establishment's secure electronic
network, the access to which should beprotected, notably by authentication
procedures. The exception or limitation
should be understood as covering thespecific accessibility needs of persons with adisability in the context of illustration forteaching.

Amendment 11
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!150/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(18) An act of preservation may require a
reproduction of a work or other subjectmatter in the collection of a cultural heritage
institution and consequently theauthorisation of the relevant rightholders.
Cultural heritage institutions are engaged in
the preservation of their collections for future
generations. Digital technologies offer new
ways to preserve the heritage contained inthose collections but they also create newchallenges. In view of these new challenges,
it is necessary to adapt the current legal
framework by providing a mandatory
exception to the right of reproduction inorder to allow those acts of preservation.

(18) An act of preservation may require a
reproduction of a work or other subjectmatter in the collection of a cultural heritage
institution, research organization andeducational establishments andconsequently the authorisation of therelevant rightholders. These institutions, areengaged in the preservation of theircollections for future generations. Digitaltechnologies offer new ways to preserve theheritage contained in those collections but
they also create new challenges. In view ofthese new challenges, it is necessary to adapt
the current legal framework by providing amandatory exception to the right ofreproduction in order to allow those acts ofpreservation.

Amendment 12
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(19) Different approaches in the Member
States for acts of preservation by cultural
heritage institutions hamper cross-bordercooperation and the sharing of means ofpreservation by cultural heritage institutionsin the internal market, leading to an
inefficient use of resources.

(19) Different approaches in the Member
States for acts of preservation by cultural
heritage institutions, research organisations
and educational establishments hampercross-border cooperation and the sharing ofmeans of preservation in the internal market,
leading to an inefficient use of resources.
Member States should facilitate the crossborder sharing of best- practices, newtechnologies and preservation techniques.

Amendment 13
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission
RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!151/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(20) Member States should therefore be
required to provide for an exception topermit cultural heritage institutions to
reproduce works and other subject-matter
permanently in their collections forpreservation purposes, for example toaddress technological obsolescence or the
degradation of original supports. Such an
exception should allow for the making of
copies by the appropriate preservation tool,means or technology, in the required number
and at any point in the life of a work or othersubject-matter to the extent required in orderto produce a copy for preservation purposes
only.

(20) Member States should therefore be
required to provide for an exception topermit cultural heritage institutions, researchorganizations and educational
establishments to reproduce works and othersubject-matter permanently in theircollections for preservation purposes, forexample to address technologicalobsolescence or the degradation of original
supports. These entities should be also
allowed to make internal organizational
reproductions for varying purposes
including insurance, rights clearance, andloans. Such an exception should allow for
the making of copies by the appropriate
preservation tool, means or technology, inthe required number and at any point in thelife of a work or other subject-matter to theextent required in order to produce a copy forsuch reproduction. The reproduction
activities can be carried out in partnershipwith other institutions established in theMember States.

Amendment 14
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(21) For the purposes of this Directive,
works and other subject-matter should beconsidered to be permanently in thecollection of a cultural heritage institution
when copies are owned or permanently heldby the cultural heritage institution, forexample as a result of a transfer ofownership or licence agreements.

(21) For the purposes of this Directive,
works and other subject-matter should beconsidered to be permanently in thecollection of a cultural heritage institution,
research organization and educational
establishment when copies are owned, held
on a long-term loan or permanently held by
the entity, including transfer of ownership or
licence agreements.

Amendment 15
Proposal for a directive
PE601.094v02-00

EN!152/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Recital 23
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(23) Member States should, within theframework provided for in this Directive,
have flexibility in choosing the specific typeof mechanism allowing for licences for outof-commerce works to extend to the rights ofrightholders that are not represented by thecollective management organisation, in
accordance to their legal traditions, practices
or circumstances. Such mechanisms can
include extended collective licensing andpresumptions of representation.

(23) Member States should, within theframework provided for in this Directive,
have flexibility in choosing the specific typeof mechanism allowing for licences for outof-commerce works to extend to the rights ofrightholders that are either not represented
or not adequately represented by thecollective management organisation, in
accordance to their legal traditions, practices
or circumstances. Such mechanisms can
include extended collective licensing andpresumptions of representation.

Amendment 16
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(25) Considering the variety of works andother subject-matter in the collections ofcultural heritage institutions, it is importantthat the licensing mechanisms introduced bythis Directive are available and can be usedin practice for different types of works andother subject-matter, including photographs,
sound recordings and audiovisual works. In
order to reflect the specificities of different
categories of works and other subject-matteras regards modes of publication anddistribution and to facilitate the usability of
those mechanisms, specific requirements andprocedures may have to be established by
Member States for the practical applicationof those licensing mechanisms. It isappropriate that Member States consult
rightholders, users and collective
management organisations when doing so.

(25) Considering the variety of works andother subject-matter in the collections ofcultural heritage institutions, it is importantthat the licensing mechanisms introduced bythis Directive are available and can be usedin practice for different types of works andother subject-matter, including photographs,
sound recordings and audiovisual works. In
order to reflect the specificities of different
categories of works and other subject-matteras regards modes of publication anddistribution and to facilitate the usability of
those mechanisms, specific requirements andprocedures may have to be established by
Member States for the practical applicationof those licensing mechanisms. It isappropriate that Member States consult
rightholders, cultural institutions, users andcollective management organisations when
doing so.

RR\1157669EN.docx!153/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 17
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(33) For the purposes of this Directive, itis necessary to define the concept of press
publication in a way that embraces only
journalistic publications, published by aservice 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 magazinesof 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 topress publications under this Directive. This
protection does not extend to acts ofhyperlinking which do not constitutecommunication to the public.

(33) For the purposes of this Directive, itis necessary to define the concept of press
publication in a way that embraces only
journalistic publications, published by aservice 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 magazinesof general or special interest and news
websites. Periodical publications which are
published for scientific or academic
purposes, such as scientific journals, should
also be covered by the protection granted topress publications under this Directive. This
protection does not extend to acts ofhyperlinking which do not constitutecommunication to the public.

Amendment 18
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(33 a) The rights for press publishers
should apply without prejudice to the rights
of individuals for the reproduction,communication or providing links or
extracts of a press publication to the public
for private use or not-for-profit, noncommercial purposes.

Amendment 19
Proposal for a directive
PE601.094v02-00

EN!154/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Recital 34
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(34) The rights granted to the publishersof press publications under this Directive
should have the same scope as the rights ofreproduction 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 theexception on quotation for purposes such as
criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive.

(34) The rights granted to the publishersof press publications under this Directive
should have the same scope as the rights ofreproduction and making available to the
public provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC.
They should also be subject to the sameprovisions on exceptions and limitations as
those applicable to the rights provided for in
Directive 2001/29/EC including theexception on quotation for purposes such as
criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive. The protection granted
to press publications under this Directive
should also apply where the content is
automatically generated by, for example,
news aggregators.

Amendment 20
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!155/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(35) The protection granted to publishersof press publications under this Directive
should not affect the rights of the authors andother rightholders in the works and othersubject-matter incorporated therein,
including as regards the extent to whichauthors and other rightholders can exploit
their works or other subject-matter
independently from the press publication inwhich they are incorporated. Therefore,publishers of press publications should not
be able to invoke the protection granted tothem against authors and other rightholders.
This is without prejudice to contractual
arrangements concluded between the
publishers of press publications, on the one
side, and authors and other rightholders, on
the other side.

(35) The protection granted to publishersof press publications under this Directive
should not affect the rights of the authors andother rightholders in the works and othersubject-matter incorporated therein,
including as regards the extent to whichauthors and other rightholders can exploit
their works or other subject-matter
independently from the press publication inwhich they are incorporated. Therefore,publishers of press publications should not
be able to invoke the protection granted tothem against authors and other rightholders.
This is without prejudice to contractual
arrangements concluded between the
publishers of press publications, on the one
side, and authors and other rightholders, on
the other side. Member States should ensurethat a fair share of remuneration, derived
from the use of the press publishers right, isattributed to journalists, authors and otherrightsholders.

Amendment 21
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(36 a) Cultural and creative industries(CCIs) play a key role in reindustrialising
Europe, are a driver for growth and are in a
strategic position to trigger innovative spillovers in other industrial sectors.
Furthermore CCIs are a driving force forinnovation and development of ICT in
Europe. Cultural and creative industries in
Europe provide more than 12 million fulltime jobs, which amounts to 7.5 % of the
EU's work force, creating approximately
EUR 509 billion in value added to GDP (5.3
% of the EU's total GVA. The protection of
copyright and related rights are at the coreof the CCI's revenue.

PE601.094v02-00

EN!156/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 22
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(37) Over the last years, the functioning of
the online content marketplace has gained incomplexity. Online services providing accessto copyright protected content uploaded bytheir users without the involvement of rightholders have flourished and have become
main sources of access to content online.
This affects rightholders' possibilities todetermine whether, and under which
conditions, their work and other subjectmatter are used as well as their possibilities
to get an appropriate remuneration for it.

(37) Over the last years, the functioning of
the online content marketplace has gained incomplexity. Online services providing accessto copyright protected content uploaded bytheir users without the involvement of rightholders have flourished and have become
main sources of access to content online.
This affects rightholders' possibilities todetermine whether, and under which
conditions, their work and other subjectmatter are used as well as their possibilities
to get an appropriate remuneration for it.
Despite the fact that more creative content
is being consumed today than ever before,
on services such as user-uploaded content
platforms and content aggregation services,
the creative sectors have not seen acomparable increase in revenues from thisincrease in consumption. One of the main
reasons is being referred to as a transfer ofvalue that has emerged due to the lack ofclarity regarding the status of these online
services under copyright and e-commercelaw. An unfair market has been created,threatening the development of the Digital
Single Market and its main players: thecultural and creative industries.

Amendment 23
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!157/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(37 a) Digital platforms are means ofproviding wider access to cultural andcreative works and offer great opportunities
for cultural and creative industries todevelop new business models. Therefore,
consideration is to be made of how thisprocess can function with more legal
certainty and respect for right holders. It istherefore of utmost importance to ensuretransparency and a fair level playing field.
The protection of right holders within the
copyright and intellectual property
framework is necessary in order to ensure
recognition of values and stimulation of
innovation, creativity, investment andproduction of content.

Amendment 24
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where information society service providers
store and provide access to the public tocopyright protected works or other subjectmatter uploaded by their users, thereby going
beyond the mere provision of physicalfacilities and performing an act ofcommunication to the public, they are
obliged to conclude licensing agreementswith rightholders, unless they are eligible forthe liability exemption provided in Article 14
of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council34 .

Where information society service providers
store and provide access to the public tocopyright protected works or other subjectmatter uploaded by their users, thereby going
beyond the mere provision of physicalfacilities and performing an act ofcommunication to the public and an act ofreproduction, 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

34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000
on certain legal aspects of informationsociety services, in particular electroniccommerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178,
17.7.2000, p. 1–16).

Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000
on certain legal aspects of informationsociety services, in particular electroniccommerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178,
17.7.2000, p. 1–16).

PE601.094v02-00

EN!158/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 25
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

In respect of Article 14, it is necessary toverify whether the service provider plays anactive role, including by optimising thepresentation of the uploaded works or
subject-matter or promoting them,irrespective of the nature of the means used
therefor.

In respect of Article 14, it is necessary toverify whether the service provider plays anactive role, including by optimising thepresentation of the uploaded works or
subject-matter or promoting them,irrespective of the nature of the means used
therefore. An information society service
provider shall be obliged to acquire licenses
for copyright protected content regardlessof whether they have editorial responsibility
for that content. The licenses acquired byinformation society service providers fromrightsholders should be deemed to cover alluser generated content by their users,
including users that are acting for noncommercial purposes. This will provide
legal certainty for individual users of suchservices whilst clarifying the liability ofplatforms.

Amendment 26
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!159/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENIn order to ensure the functioning of any
licensing agreement, information society
service providers storing and providing
access to the public to large amounts ofcopyright protected works or other subjectmatter uploaded by their users should takeappropriate and proportionate measures toensure protection of works or other subjectmatter, 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/EC.

In order to ensure the functioning of any
licensing agreement, information society
service providers storing and providing
access to the public to significant amounts ofcopyright protected works or other subjectmatter uploaded by their users should takeappropriate and proportionate measures toensure protection of works or other subjectmatter. 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/EC.

Amendment 27
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!160/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(39) Collaboration between informationsociety service providers storing andproviding access to the public to large
amounts of copyright protected works orother subject-matter uploaded by their users
and rightholders is essential for thefunctioning of technologies, such as
content recognition technologies. In suchcases, rightholders should provide thenecessary data to allow the services to
identify their content and the services shouldbe transparent towards rightholders withregard to the deployed technologies, to allow
the assessment of their appropriateness. The
services should in particular provide
rightholders with information on the type oftechnologies used, the way they are operated
and their success rate for the recognition ofrightholders' 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.

(39) Collaboration between informationsociety service providers storing andproviding access to the public to significant
amounts of copyright protected works orother subject-matter uploaded by their users
and rightholders is essential for the efficient
implementation of these measures. In suchcases, rightholders should provide thenecessary data to allow the services to
identify their content and the services shouldbe transparent towards rightholders withregard to the deployed measures, to allow
the assessment of their appropriateness. The
services should in particular provide
rightholders with information on the type ofmeasures taken used, the way they areoperated and their success rate for therecognition of rightholders' content. Those
measures technologies should also allow
rightholders to get information from theinformation society service providers on theuse of their content covered by an agreement.
Appropriate safeguards should however be
put in place to ensure that measures applied
do not infringe the fundamental rights ofusers, namely their right to protection of
their personal data in accordance with
Directive 95/46/EC, Directive 2001/58/EC
and Regulation (EU) 2016/679, and theirfreedom to receive or impart information, inparticular the possibility to benefit from an
exception or limitation to copyright.

Amendment 28
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!161/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(40) Certain rightholders such as authors
and performers need information to assess
the economic value of their rights which areharmonised under Union law. This isespecially the case where such rightholders
grant a licence or a transfer of rights in returnfor remuneration. As authors and performers
tend to be in a weaker contractual position
when they grant licences or transfer theirrights, they need information to assess thecontinued economic value of their rights,
compared to the remuneration received fortheir licence or transfer, but they often face alack of transparency. Therefore, the sharingof adequate information by their contractual
counterparts or their successors in title isimportant for the transparency and balance inthe system that governs the remuneration of
authors and performers.

(40) Certain rightholders such as authors
and performers need information to assess
the economic value of their rights which areharmonised under Union law. This isespecially the case where such rightholders
grant a licence or a transfer of rights in returnfor remuneration. As authors and performers
are in a weaker contractual position when
they grant licences or transfer their rights,
they need information to assess thecontinued economic value of their rights,
compared to the remuneration received fortheir licence or transfer, but they often face alack of transparency. Therefore, the sharingof adequate information by their contractual
counterparts and subsequent transferees or
licensees, as well as their successors in title
is important for the transparency and balancein the system that governs the remunerationof authors and performers. The reporting
and transparency obligation should follow
the work across all forms of exploitation
and across borders.

Amendment 29
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!162/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(41) When implementing transparency
obligations, the specificities of different
content sectors and of the rights of theauthors and performers in each sector should
be considered. Member States should consult
all relevant stakeholders as that should help
determine sector-specific requirements.
Collective bargaining should be considered
as an option to reach an agreement between
the relevant stakeholders regardingtransparency. To enable the adaptation ofcurrent reporting practices to thetransparency obligations, a transitional
period should be provided for. The
transparency obligations do not need toapply to agreements concluded withcollective management organisations as
those are already subject to transparency
obligations under Directive 2014/26/EU.

(41) When implementing transparency
obligations, the specificities of different
content sectors and of the rights of theauthors and performers in each sector should
be considered. Member States should consult
all relevant stakeholders as that should help
determine sector-specific requirements,
standard reporting statements andprocedures. Collective bargaining should beconsidered as an option to reach an
agreement between the relevant stakeholders
regarding transparency. To enable theadaptation of current reporting practices tothe transparency obligations, a transitional
period should be provided for. The
transparency obligations do not need toapply to agreements concluded withcollective management organisations as
those are already subject to transparency
obligations under Directive 2014/26/EU, on
the condition that Member States havetransposed Directive 2014/26/EU and taken
all necessary measures to ensure that the
management of all collective management
organisations is carried out in an effective
and equitable manner. Member Statesshould also ensure that collective
management organisations act in the bestinterest of the rightsholders, ensuring theaccurate and regular distribution of
payment and production of an annual
public transparency report, in compliancewith Directive 2014/26/EU.

Amendment 30
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!163/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(46) Any processing of personal data
under this Directive should respectfundamental rights, including the right torespect for private and family life and theright to protection of personal data under
Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter ofFundamental Rights of the European Unionand must be in compliance with Directive
95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council35 and Directive 2002/58/EC of
the European Parliament and of theCouncil36 .

(46) Any processing of personal data
under this Directive should respectfundamental rights, including the right torespect for private and family life and theright to protection of personal data under
Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter ofFundamental Rights of the European Unionand must be in compliance with Directive
95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council35 and Directive 2002/58/EC of
the European Parliament and of theCouncil36 . In the future, the provisions of
the General Data Protection Regulation,
including the "right to be forgotten" should
be respected.

__________________________________

35 Directive 95/46/EC of the European

35 Directive 95/46/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 24 October
1995 on the protection of individuals withregard to the processing of personal data andon the free movement of such data (OJ L
281, 23.11.1995, p. 31–50). This Directive isrepealed with effect from 25 May 2018 andshall be replaced by Regulation (EU)2016/679 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 27 April 2016 on theprotection of natural persons with regard to
the processing of personal data and on thefree movement of such data, and repealing
Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection
Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1–88).

Parliament and of the Council of 24 October
1995 on the protection of individuals withregard to the processing of personal data andon the free movement of such data (OJ L
281, 23.11.1995, p. 31–50). This Directive isrepealed with effect from 25 May 2018 andshall be replaced by Regulation (EU)2016/679 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 27 April 2016 on theprotection of natural persons with regard to
the processing of personal data and on thefree movement of such data, and repealing
Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection
Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1–88).

36 Directive 2002/58/EC of the European

36 Directive 2002/58/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 12 July
2002 concerning the processing of personal
data and the protection of privacy in theelectronic communications sector (Directive
on privacy and electronic communications)(OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37–47), called, as
amended by Directives 2006/24/EC and2009/136/EC, the “e-Privacy Directive”.

Parliament and of the Council of 12 July
2002 concerning the processing of personal
data and the protection of privacy in theelectronic communications sector (Directive
on privacy and electronic communications)(OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37–47), called, as
amended by Directives 2006/24/EC and2009/136/EC, the “e-Privacy Directive”.

Amendment 31
Proposal for a directive
PE601.094v02-00

EN!164/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Recital 46 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(46 a) It is important to stress out theimportance of anonymity, when handlingpersonal data for commercial purposes.
Additionally, the "by default" not sharing
option with regards to personal data while
using online platform interfaces should bepromoted.

Amendment 32
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.
‘research organisation’ means auniversity, a research institute or any otherorganisation the primary goal of which is toconduct scientific research or to conduct
scientific research and provide educational
services:1.
'research organisation' means auniversity, including start-up incubators
attached to universities, a research instituteor any other organisation the primary goal ofwhich is to conduct scientific research or to
conduct scientific research and provide
educational services:

Amendment 33
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(2 a) 'start-up company' means for the
purpose of this Directive any company withfewer than 10 employees and an annual
turnover or balance sheet below €2 million
and which was established not earlier than
three years before benefiting from theexception in Art. 3, paragraph 1.

Amendment 34
RR\1157669EN.docx!165/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENProposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(4 a) "lawful access" means access tocontent acquired in a lawful manner

Amendment 35
Proposal for a directive
Article 3
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 3

Article 3

Text and data mining

Text and data mining

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and Article 11(1)of this Directive for reproductions andextractions made by research organisations
in order to carry out text and data mining ofworks or other subject-matter to which they
have lawful access for the purposes ofscientific research.

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and Article 11(1)of this Directive for reproductions andextractions made by research organisations,not-for-profit organisations and start-up
companies in order to carry out text and data
mining of works or other subject-matter towhich they have lawful access acquired forthe purposes of scientific research.

2.
Any contractual provision contrary to 2.
Any contractual provision contrary to
the exception provided for in paragraph 1
the exception provided for in paragraph 1
shall be unenforceable.
shall be unenforceable.
3.
Rightholders shall be allowed toapply measures to ensure the security andintegrity of the networks and databases
where the works or other subject-matter are
hosted. Such measures shall not go beyond
what is necessary to achieve that objective.

PE601.094v02-00

EN

3.
Rightholders shall be allowed toapply measures to ensure the security andintegrity of the networks and databases
where the works or other subject-matter are
hosted. Such measures shall not go beyond
what is necessary to achieve that objective
and should not prevent or unreasonably
restrict beneficiaries from benefiting fromthe exception provided in paragraph 1 andtheir ability to develop text and data mining
tools different from those offered byrightholders.

!166/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

4.
Member States shall encouragerightholders and research organisations todefine commonly-agreed best practices
concerning the application of the measuresreferred to in paragraph 3.
4 a.
Beneficiaries of the exception
referred to in paragraph 1 conducting text
and data mining shall apply measures
ensuring data retrieved by the text and data
mining process is kept in a secure way andis not being stored longer than necessary
for the purposes of the research. The
exception referred to in paragraph 1 does
not affect acts of text and data mining
carried out in relation to mere facts or data
which are not protected by copyright or actsof text and data mining which do not
involve any act of reproduction or
extraction. Authorisation of rightholders or
authors of databases is not required for
temporary acts of reproduction covered by
exceptions under Union law and for acts ofextraction that are necessary for the
purposes of access to and normal use of thecontents of a database by the lawful user.

Amendment 36
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!167/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception or limitation to the rights provided
for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/
EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/
EC, Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC
and Article 11(1) of this Directive in order toallow for the digital use of works and othersubject-matter for the sole purpose ofillustration for teaching, to the extent
justified by the non-commercial purpose to
be achieved, provided that the use:

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception or limitation to the rights provided
for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/
EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/
EC, Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC
and Article 11(1) of this Directive in order toallow for the digital use of works and othersubject-matter for the sole purpose ofillustration for teaching or scientificresearch, to the extent justified by the noncommercial purpose to be achieved, provided
that the use:

Amendment 37
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(a)takes place on the premises of an
educational establishment or through asecure electronic network accessible only by
the educational establishment's pupils or
students and teaching staff;(a)takes place at a learning space of an
educational establishment or a certified
educational programme recognised by theMember State, as well as cultural heritage
institution or research organisation, or
through a secure electronic network
accessible only by their registered learners
and teaching staff;

Amendment 38
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States availing themselves of theprovision of the first subparagraph shall takethe necessary measures to ensure appropriate
availability and visibility of the licences
authorising the acts described in paragraph 1
for educational establishments.

Member States availing themselves of theprovision of the first subparagraph shall takethe necessary measures to ensure appropriate
availability and visibility of the licences,through an easily accessible database,authorising the acts described in paragraph 1
for educational establishments.

PE601.094v02-00

EN!168/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 39
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.
The use of works and other subjectmatter for the sole purpose of illustration forteaching through secure electronic networks
undertaken in compliance with theprovisions of national law adopted pursuant
to this Article shall be deemed to occur
solely in the Member State where theeducational establishment is established.

3.
The use of works and other subjectmatter for the sole purpose of illustration forteaching or scientific research throughsecure electronic networks undertaken incompliance with the provisions of nationallaw adopted pursuant to this Article shall bedeemed to occur solely in the Member State
where the educational establishment,
certified educational programme, cultural
heritage institution or researchorganisation is established.

Amendment 40
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1)(a) of
Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of
this Directive, permitting cultural heritage
institutions, to make copies of any works orother subject-matter that are permanently intheir collections, in any format or medium,for the sole purpose of the preservation ofsuch works or other subject-matter and to theextent necessary for such preservation.

Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1)(a) of
Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of
this Directive, permitting cultural heritage
institutions, research organizations andeducational establishments to make copies
of any works or other subject-matter that arepermanently in their collections, in any
format or medium, for the sole purpose of
the preservation of such works or othersubject-matter and to the extent necessary forsuch preservation, as well as internalorganizational reproductions for purposes
related to the implementation of their public
interest mission.

RR\1157669EN.docx!169/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 41
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall, in consultation withrightholders, collective management
organisations and cultural heritage
institutions, ensure that the requirements
used to determine whether works and othersubject-matter can be licensed in accordancewith paragraph 1 do not extend beyond whatis necessary and reasonable and do notpreclude the possibility to determine the outof-commerce status of a collection as awhole, when it is reasonable to presume that
all works or other subject-matter in thecollection are out of commerce.

Member States shall, in consultation withrightholders, collective management
organisations and cultural heritage
institutions, ensure that the requirements
used to determine whether works and othersubject-matter can be licensed in accordancewith paragraph 1 do not extend beyond whatis necessary and reasonable and do notpreclude the possibility to determine the outof-commerce status of a collection as awhole, when it is reasonable to presume that
all works or other subject-matter in thecollection are out of commerce. In the eventthat a collective management organisation
does not exist or adequately represent therights of rightsholders, Member Statesshould provide exceptions for cultural
heritage institutions, research organisations
and educational establishments, bothformal and non-formal, to distribute,communicate to the public or makeavailable out-of-commerce-works for noncommercial purposes. Member Statesshould ensure appropriate remuneration
for any unreasonable prejudice to thelegitimate interests of the rightsholders andensure that all rightsholders may at any
time object to the use of their works.

Amendment 42
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!170/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Member States shall ensure a regulardialogue between representative users' andrightholders' organisations, and any otherrelevant stakeholder organisations, to, on asector-specific basis, foster the relevance andusability of the licensing mechanisms
referred to in Article 7(1), ensure theeffectiveness of the safeguards forrightholders referred to in this Chapter,notably as regards publicity measures, and,
where applicable, assist in the establishmentof the requirements referred to in the second
subparagraph of Article 7(2).

Member States shall ensure a regulardialogue between representative users' andrightholders' organisations, and any otherrelevant stakeholder organisations, to, on asector-specific basis, foster the relevance andusability of the licensing mechanisms
referred to in Article 7(1), including
resolving issues where cultural heritage
institutions activities in line with Article 7
and Article 8 are not being reasonably
enabled, and ensure the effectiveness of thesafeguards for rightholders referred to in this
Chapter, notably as regards publicity
measures, and, where applicable, assist in theestablishment of the requirements referred toin the second subparagraph of Article 7(2).

Amendment 43
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – title
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Protection of press publications concerning
digital uses

Protection of press publications

Justification
Print editions are worth as much protection as digital editions. For this reason it is essential
to ensure that rights are granted for both digital and non-digital use and remove any wordingthat can exclude non-digital uses.
Amendment 44
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!171/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN1.
Member States shall provide
publishers of press publications with therights provided for in Article 2 and Article
3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the digitaluse of their press publications.

1.
Member States shall provide
publishers of press publications with therights provided for in Article 2 and Article
3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the use of
their press publications.

Justification
Print editions are worth as much protection as digital editions. For this reason it is essential
to ensure that rights are granted for both digital and non-digital use and remove any wordingthat can exclude non-digital uses.
Amendment 45
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
2 a.
The rights to referred in paragraph1 shall not extend to acts of hyperlinking as
they do not constitute communication to the
public.

Amendment 46
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
4 a.
Member States should ensure that afair share of the revenue derived from theuses of the press publishers rights is
attributed to journalists.

Amendment 47
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission
PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!172/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Member States may provide that where an
author has transferred or licensed a right to a
publisher, such a transfer or a licence
constitutes a sufficient legal basis for the
publisher to claim a share of thecompensation for the uses of the work madeunder an exception or limitation to thetransferred or licensed right.

Member States may provide that where an
author has transferred or licensed a right to a
publisher, this publisher is right holder byvirtue and to the extent of such a transfer ora licence. Therefore, this transfer of licence
constitutes a sufficient legal basis for the
publisher to claim a share of thecompensation for the uses of the work madeunder an exception or statutory collective
licensing or limitation to the transferred or
licensed right.

Amendment 48
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – title
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Use of protected content by informationsociety service providers storing and giving
access to large amounts of works and othersubject-matter uploaded by their users

Use of protected content by informationsociety service providers storing and giving
access to significant amounts of works andother subject-matter uploaded by their users.

Amendment 49
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!173/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN1.
Information society service providers
that store and provide to the public access tolarge amounts of works or other subjectmatter 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 toprevent the availability on their services ofworks or other subject-matter identified byrightholders through the cooperation with theservice providers. Those measures, such as
the use of effective content recognition
technologies, shall be appropriate andproportionate. The service providers shallprovide rightholders with adequate
information on the functioning and thedeployment of the measures, as well as,
when relevant, adequate reporting on therecognition and use of the works and othersubject-matter.

1.
Information society service providers
that store and provide to the public access tosignificant amounts of copyright -protected
works or other subject-matter, uploaded bytheir users, and where that storage and thatprovision of access constitutes an essential
part of their activities, shall, in cooperation
with rightholders, take appropriate andproportionate measures to ensure thefunctioning of agreements concluded withrightholders for the use of their works orother subject-matter or to prevent theavailability on their services of works orother subject-matter identified byrightholders through the cooperation with theservice providers. At the request ofrightholders, the service providers shallprovide them with adequate information on
the functioning and the deployment of themeasures, as well as, when relevant,adequate reporting on the recognition anduse of the works and other subject-matter.

Amendment 50
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.
Member States shall ensure that theservice providers referred to in paragraph 1
put in place complaints and redress
mechanisms that are available to users incase of disputes over the application of themeasures referred to in paragraph 1.

2.
Member States shall ensure that theservice providers referred to in paragraph 1
put in place complaints and redress
mechanisms that are available to users incase of disputes over the application of themeasures referred to in that paragraph.
These mechanisms shall in particular
ensure that where the removal of thecontent referred to in paragraph 1 is notjustified, the content in question shall bereinstated online within a reasonable time.

PE601.094v02-00

EN!174/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 51
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.
Member States shall facilitate, whereappropriate, the cooperation between theinformation society service providers andrightholders through stakeholder dialogues todefine best practices, such as appropriate
and proportionate content recognition
technologies, taking into account, among
others, the nature of the services, theavailability of the technologies and theireffectiveness in light of technologicaldevelopments.

3.
The Commission together withMember States shall facilitate, whereappropriate, the cooperation between theinformation society service providers andrightholders through stakeholder dialogues todefine best practices for the measuresreferred to in paragraph 1 taking into
account, inter-alia, the nature of the services,
the availability of the technologies and theireffectiveness in light of technologicaldevelopments.

Amendment 52
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!175/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN1.
Information society service providers
that store and provide to the public access tolarge amounts of works or other subjectmatter 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 toprevent the availability on their services ofworks or other subject-matter identified byrightholders through the cooperation with theservice providers. Those measures, such as
the use of effective content recognition
technologies, shall be appropriate andproportionate. The service providers shallprovide rightholders with adequate
information on the functioning and thedeployment of the measures, as well as,
when relevant, adequate reporting on therecognition and use of the works and othersubject-matter.

PE601.094v02-00

EN

1.
Information society service providers
that store and provide to the public access tocopyright protected works or other subjectmatter uploaded by their users, thereby
going beyond the mere provision of physicalfacilities and performing an act ofcommunication to the public initiated bytheir users uploading such works or othersubject-matter, shall conclude licensing
agreements with rightholders both forcommunication to the public andreproduction rights, unless they are eligible
for the liability exemption provided in
Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC.
2. The liability exemption provided in
Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC shall not
apply to the activities of information society
service providers which make protected
works and other subject matter available tothe public and play an active role, including
by optimising the presentation of the
uploaded works or subject-matter or
promoting them.
3. The licensing agreements referred to inparagraph 1 shall be deemed to cover theacts carried out by the users of theinformation society service providers
aforementioned, provided that the users are
not acting on a professional basis.
4. Information society service providers that
store and provide to the public access tosignificant amounts of copyright protected
works or other subject-matter uploaded bytheir users shall, in cooperation withrightholders, take measures to ensure thefunctioning of agreements concluded withrightholders for the use of their works orother subject-matter or to prevent theavailability on their services of works orother subject-matter identified byrightholders through the cooperation with theservice providers. Those measures, such as
the use of effective content recognition
technologies, shall be appropriate andproportionate. The service providers shallprovide rightholders with adequate
information on the functioning and the!176/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 53
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.
Member States shall ensure that
authors and performers receive on a regularbasis and taking into account the specificitiesof each sector, timely, adequate andsufficient information on the exploitation of
their works and performances from those towhom they have licensed or transferred theirrights, notably as regards modes of
exploitation, revenues generated andremuneration due.

1.
Member States shall ensure that
authors and performers receive on a regularbasis and taking into account the specificitiesof each sector, accurate, timely, adequate
and sufficient information on the exploitationand promotion of their works, including
scientific works and performances fromthose to whom they have licensed ortransferred their rights, including
subsequent transferees or licensees, notably
as regards modes of exploitation, promotion,
revenues generated and remuneration due.

Amendment 54
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.
The obligation in paragraph 1 shallbe proportionate and effective and shallensure an appropriate 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, provided that the
obligation remains effective and ensures anappropriate level of transparency.

2.
The obligation in paragraph 1 shallbe proportionate and effective and shallensure a high level of transparency in every
sector, as well as a right of the author andperformer to audit. 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, provided that the
obligation remains effective, enforceable
and ensures an appropriate level oftransparency.

RR\1157669EN.docx!177/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 55
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
2 a.
Member States shall ensure that
sector-specific standard reportingstatements and procedures are developed
through stakeholder dialogues.

Amendment 56
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Article 14 a
Unwaivable right to fair remuneration forauthors and performers
1.
Member States shall ensure thatwhen authors and performers transfer orassign their right of making available to the
public, they retain the right to obtain a fair
remuneration derived from the exploitationof their work.
2.
The right of an author or performer
to obtain a fair remuneration for the
making available of their work is
inalienable and cannot be waived.
3.
The administration of this right tofair remuneration for the making availableof an authors or performers work shall be
entrusted to their collective management
organisations, unless other collective
agreements, including voluntary collective
management agreements, guarantee such
remuneration to authors, audio-visual
authors and performers for their making
available right.

PE601.094v02-00

EN!178/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

4.
Collective management
organisations shall collect the fair
remuneration from information society
services making works available to the
public.

Amendment 57
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall ensure that authors andperformers 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 isdisproportionately low compared to thesubsequent relevant revenues and benefits
derived from the exploitation of the works or
performances.

Member States shall ensure that authors andperformers, or representatives they appoint,
are entitled to request additional, fair
remuneration from the party with whom they
entered into a contract for the exploitation of
the rights when the remuneration originallyagreed is disproportionately low compared tothe subsequent relevant revenues andbenefits derived from the exploitation of theworks or performances.

Amendment 58
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Article 15 a
Rights reversion mechanism

RR\1157669EN.docx!179/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN1.
Member States shall ensure that
authors and performers that are in acontractual relationship with ongoingpayment obligations, may terminate thecontract by which they have licensed ortransferred their rights when there is acomplete absence of exploitation of theirworks and performances, a persistent
failure to pay the remuneration agreed or acomplete lack of reporting andtransparency.
2.
The right to terminate the contract
on the transfer of licencing of rights may be
exercised if within a year from thenotification by the performer or author ofthis intention to terminate the contract, thecontracting party fails to fulfil its
contractual obligation with regards to thepayment of the remuneration agreed. With
regards to the absence of exploitation of awork and the complete lack of reporting
and transparency the right to terminate thecontract on the transfer or licencing ofrights may be exercised if within five years
from the notification by the performer orauthor of their intention to terminate thecontract, the contracting party fails to fulfil
its contractual obligations.
3.
Member States may decide that the
obligation in paragraph 1 does not apply
when the contribution of the author or
performer is not significant having regard
to the overall work or performance.

Amendment 59
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!180/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Member States shall provide that disputes
concerning the transparency obligation under
Article 14 and the contract adjustment
mechanism under Article 15 may besubmitted to a voluntary, alternative dispute
resolution procedure.

RR\1157669EN.docx

Member States shall provide that disputes
concerning the transparency obligation under
Article 14 and the contract adjustment
mechanism under Article 15 may besubmitted to a voluntary, alternative dispute
resolution procedure. Member States shallensure that authors and performers can
submit the dispute anonymously through an
authorized person or organization.

!181/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENPE601.094v02-00

EN!182/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION
Title

Copyright in the Digital Single Market

References

COM(2016)0593 – C8-0383/2016 – 2016/0280(COD)

Committee responsible
Date announced in plenary

JURI
6.10.2016

Opinion by
Date announced in plenary

ITRE
6.10.2016

Rapporteur
Date appointed

Zdzisław Krasnodębski
1.12.2016

Discussed in committee

22.3.2017

Date adopted

11.7.2017

Result of final vote

+:
–:
0:

Members present for the final vote

Zigmantas Balčytis, Nicolas Bay, Bendt Bendtsen, Xabier Benito
Ziluaga, José Blanco López, Cristian-Silviu Buşoi, Reinhard
Bütikofer, Jerzy Buzek, Angelo Ciocca, Edward Czesak, Jakop
Dalunde, Pilar del Castillo Vera, Christian Ehler, Fredrick
Federley, Ashley Fox, Adam Gierek, Theresa Griffin, András
Gyürk, Roger Helmer, Eva Kaili, Kaja Kallas, Barbara Kappel,
Krišjānis Kariņš, Seán Kelly, Jeppe Kofod, Jaromír Kohlíček,Zdzisław Krasnodębski, Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Janusz
Lewandowski, Paloma López Bermejo, Edouard Martin, Nadine
Morano, Dan Nica, Angelika Niebler, Morten Helveg Petersen,
Miroslav Poche, Paul Rübig, Massimiliano Salini, Sven Schulze,
Neoklis Sylikiotis, Dario Tamburrano, Patrizia Toia, Evžen
Tošenovský, Claude Turmes, Vladimir Urutchev, Kathleen Van
Brempt, Henna Virkkunen, Martina Werner, Lieve Wierinck,
Hermann Winkler, Anna Záborská, Flavio Zanonato, Carlos
Zorrinho

Substitutes present for the final vote

Pascal Arimont, Pilar Ayuso, Pervenche Berès, Werner Langen,
Florent Marcellesi, Marisa Matias, Maria Spyraki

Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present
for the final vote

Czesław Hoc, Jan Huitema, Julia Reda, Yana Toom, Kazimierz
Michał Ujazdowski, Julie Ward

RR\1157669EN.docx

39
18
6

!183/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENFINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

+

39
ENF

Angelo Ciocca, Barbara Kappel

PPE

Pascal Arimont, Bendt Bendtsen, Cristian-Silviu Buşoi, Christian Ehler, András Gyürk,
Krišjānis Kariņš, Seán Kelly, Werner Langen, Janusz Lewandowski, Nadine Morano,Angelika Niebler, Luděk Niedermayer, Paul Rübig, Massimiliano Salini, Sven Schulze,
Vladimir Urutchev, Henna Virkkunen, Hermann Winkler, Anna Záborská, Pilar delCastillo Vera

S&D

Zigmantas Balčytis, Pervenche Berès, José Blanco López, Adam Gierek, Theresa
Griffin, Eva Kaili, Jeppe Kofod, Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Edouard Martin, Dan Nica,
Miroslav Poche, Patrizia Toia, Kathleen Van Brempt, Julie Ward, Martina Werner,
Flavio Zanonato, Carlos Zorrinho

-

18
ALDE

Fredrick Federley, Jan Huitema, Kaja Kallas, Morten Helveg Petersen, Yana Toom,
Lieve Wierinck

EFDD

Roger Helmer, Dario Tamburrano

ENF

Nicolas Bay

GUE/NGL

Jaromír Kohlíček, Paloma López Bermejo, Marisa Matias, Neoklis Sylikiotis

Verts/ALE

Reinhard Bütikofer, Jakop Dalunde, Florent Marcellesi, Julia Reda, Claude Turmes

0

6
ECR

Edward Czesak, Ashley Fox, Czesław Hoc, Zdzisław Krasnodębski, Evžen Tošenovský,Kazimierz Michał Ujazdowski

Key to symbols:+ : in favour- : against
0 : abstention

PE601.094v02-00

EN!184/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

4.9.2017
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON CULTURE AND EDUCATION

for the Committee on Legal Affairs
on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright in
the Digital Single Market(COM(2016)0593 – C80383/2016 – 2016/0280(COD))
Rapporteur: Marc Joulaud

SHORT JUSTIFICATION
Purpose and scope
The Commission’s proposal seeks to modernise and adapt the European copyright rules to thedigital environment, thus enhancing the emergence of a Digital Single Market. Technologicaldevelopments over the last two decades have transformed drastically both the scope of online
services and consumer behaviour online, rendering necessary an update of at least parts of theexisting rules, which date back to 2001.
The core principles of copyright, such as the need for a high level of protection and fair
remuneration of creators and performers, are still very much relevant and must be preserved,
as they have allowed the European Union to maintain a rich cultural diversity, which remains
to this day one of its most prized advantages over the rest of the world. However, thedevelopment of digital services relying on copyright-protected work has created tremendous
difficulties for rightholders to appropriately control the dissemination of, and get fair
remuneration for, their works.
At the same time, to guarantee the protection of legitimate uses of copyright-protected works,a list of voluntary exceptions and limitations was established in the InfoSoc Directive(2001/29/EC), defining in which cases the prior consent of a rightholder was not needed forthe use of his/her work. These exceptions were broadly defined, technologically neutral andoptional, in order to allow Member States to adapt them to their national specificities andcultural policies. While optional, the exceptions were, for the most part, implemented in theMember States and proved to be effective, even if the application of some exceptions in thedigital environment has raised some uncertainties.
Based on these observations, the Commission decided to preserve the existing rules, as theyRR\1157669EN.docx!185/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENare still relevant, but to address the specific problems arising from the digital revolution,
especially where there was a cross-border effect, by providing for mandatory exceptions
designed to complement those in the InfoSoc Directive.
The current proposal therefore centres on three pillars, each addressing the issues identified ina given area:
A first pillar aims to support public-interest activities, such as research, education and thepreservation of cultural heritage, in which the use of copyright-protected works are required
on an everyday basis. Mandatory exceptions are created to provide legal certainty to thebeneficiaries regarding the digital uses of works.
A second pillar is designed to help the content production sector solve its considerable
difficulties in negotiating licences, and possibly receiving fairly negotiated remuneration, for
the use of their works by online services disseminating them on a massive scale. To this end,
the Commission provides important clarifications on the liability regime of informationsociety services as defined in the E-Commerce Directive (2000/31/EC), where such services
store and provide access to large amounts of protected works uploaded by their users. In suchcircumstances, information society services should enter into licencing agreements withrightholders and set up proportional and adequate measures to protect the works concerned, incooperation with rightholders.
The third and last pillar is intended to balance the relationship between authors and theircontractual partners. The transfer or licencing of rights from authors and performers to theircontractual partners is a standard and generally accepted practice that ensures the financing ofcreation. But authors and performers do not always get access to data regarding the way theirworks are later used, promoted and generate revenues, making it difficult for them todetermine if their remuneration is in line with the actual success of the work concerned.
Transparency obligations, the possibility to adjust remuneration and a dispute resolution
mechanism were therefore put forward in the Commission proposal.
Overall position of the Rapporteur
The Rapporteur supports the direction and problem-driven approach of the Commission
proposal and considers that, while the existing copyright rules remain valid for the most part,
there is a need for specific complementary rules to address the specificities of digital uses of
copyright-protected works.
The amendments aim to clarify and specify a number of provisions of the Commission’s
proposal, as well as to strengthen some of them where reasonable and possible. At the sametime, the Rapporteur wishes to recognise the developments in consumer behaviour andprovide guarantees regarding some of the new uses and practices that have emerged alongwith the digital revolution.
To this end, the Rapporteur has tabled amendments related to four key objectives:
1. Provide legal certainty regarding the new exceptions and limitations
PE601.094v02-00

EN!186/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

The Rapporteur supports the new mandatory exceptions and limitations provided in thisDirective to support public-interest activities, such as education, research or preservation ofcultural heritage. Indeed, the potential benefits for the whole of society and the developmentof cross-border practices justifies such a harmonisation and the scope is sufficiently precise toprotect appropriately rightholders from disproportionate harm.
However, in the opinion of the Rapporteur, the current proposal does not provide full legal
clarity on the burden of the parties involved in each exception, which would jeopardise theireffectiveness and hamper their harmonised implementation. Therefore, the Rapporteur has
specified the obligations of the relevant parties involved in the exceptions, in order to reduce
the risk of harm for rightholders (Article 3), give certainty on recourse to licences or the
exception (Article 4) and to secure common practices (Article 5).
2. Clarify the responsibilities of platforms and ensure a fair cooperation withrightholders
The Rapporteur fully supports the objectives and approach of the proposal in clarifying thestatus of certain categories of information society services in a way that is consistent with,and complementary to, the E-Commerce Directive.
However, it is the Rapporteur’s opinion that the proposal does not define with enoughprecision the scope of services falling under the requirements of Article 13 of this Directive,
creating legal uncertainty. In a similar manner, the scope, nature and basis of the mutual
obligations between rightholders and those services is not clear enough in the view of the
Rapporteur.
The opinion therefore clarifies the obligations of information society services under Article 13of this Directive. Instead of focusing only on the technical characteristics of the service (ie thenotion of storage), the opinion bases the obligations of the service on whether or not it
performs an act of communication to the public.
Hence, information society services storing and/or providing access to the public tocopyright-protected works or other subject-matter, thus going beyond the mere provision ofphysical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public, are required toconclude licensing agreements with requesting rightholders. In the absence of agreements or
where services are eligible for the E-Commerce Directive liability exemption, they arenonetheless required to take measures to prevent the unlawful inclusion of copyrightprotected content. This approach should provide the necessary legal certainty for theprovision of this Directive to be effective.
To ensure better and fair cooperation between the relevant platforms and rightholders, theRapporteur proposed an alternative dispute resolution mechanism to solve any difficulty that
may arise, with the assistance of an impartial body designated by the Member States.
3. Create a new pillar to protect consumer’s legitimate practices
RR\1157669EN.docx!187/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENIt is the Rapporteur’s view that the proposal does not acknowledge the position consumers, asservice users, now occupy in the digital environment. No longer playing a mere passive role,
they have become active contributors and are now both a source and recipient of content in
the digital ecosystem. Indeed, information society services base the entire design, businessmodel and optimisation of their services around the dual role of their users. From a legal
standpoint, it is also the opinion of the Rapporteur that digital practices of users do not benefit
from legal certainty under the current copyright rules, in particular the exceptions andlimitations, and therefore require a specific approach.
The opinion therefore completes the existing quotation exception with a new exception
governing the digital non-commercial, proportionate use of quotations and extracts ofcopyright-protected works or other subject-matter by individual users. Without prejudice tothe provisions in Article 13, Member States may provide for an exception for content
uploaded by users where the content is used for criticism, review, illustration, caricature,parody or pastiche.

Finally, the Rapporteur has reinforced the complaints and redress mechanism in Article 13 toprovide a minimum level of legal certainty for users with regard to the procedures.
4. Allow authors and performers to effectively enforce their rights
The Rapporteur salutes the efforts made by the proposal to reinforce the rights of authors andperformers. In order to prevent any chilling effect that might dissuade authors and performers
from enforcing their rights, the Rapporteur has provided that disputes between authors,performers and their contractual partners may be initiated either on an individual or collective
basis.
AMENDMENTS
The Committee on Culture and Education calls on the Committee on Legal Affairs, as thecommittee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:
Amendment 1
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!188/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(3)Rapid technological developments
continue to transform the way works andother subject-matter are created, produced,
distributed and exploited. New businessmodels and new actors continue to emerge.
The objectives and the principles laid downby the Union copyright framework remainsound. However, legal uncertainty remains,for both rightholders and users, as regards
certain uses, including cross-border uses, ofworks and other subject-matter in the digital
environment. As set out in theCommunication of the Commission entitled‘Towards a modern, more European
copyright framework’26 , in some areas it isnecessary to adapt and supplement thecurrent Union copyright framework. This
Directive provides for rules to adapt certain
exceptions and limitations to digital andcross-border environments, as well as
measures to facilitate certain licensing
practices as regards the dissemination of outof-commerce works and the online
availability of audiovisual works on videoon-demand platforms with a view toensuring wider access to content. In order toachieve a well-functioning marketplace forcopyright, there should also be rules onrights in publications, on the use of works
and other subject-matter by online service
providers storing and giving access to user
uploaded content and on the transparency ofauthors' and performers' contracts.

(3)
Rapid technological developments
continue to transform the way works andother subject-matter are created, produced,
distributed and exploited. It is essential that
relevant legislation be future-proof so as
not to restrict such technologicaldevelopments. New business models andnew actors continue to emerge. The
objectives and the principles laid down by
the Union copyright framework remainsound. However, legal uncertainty remains,for both rightholders and users, as regards
certain uses, including cross-border uses, ofworks and other subject-matter in the digital
environment. As set out in theCommunication of the Commission entitled‘Towards a modern, more European
copyright framework’26 , in some areas it isnecessary to adapt and supplement thecurrent Union copyright framework. In thisever-changing digital environment, theCommission should investigate all possible
measures to prevent the illegal use of
copyright-protected visual and audiovisualcontent for commercial purposes, throughembedding or framing techniques. In
addition, this Directive provides for rules toadapt certain exceptions and limitations todigital and cross-border environments, aswell as measures to facilitate certain
licensing practices as regards thedissemination of out-of-commerce works
and the online availability of audiovisual
works on video-on-demand platforms with aview to ensuring wider access to content. In
order to achieve a well-functioning
marketplace for copyright, there should also
be rules on rights in publications, on the useof works and other subject-matter by online
service providers storing and giving accessto user uploaded content and on thetransparency of authors' and performers'
contracts.

__________________________________

26 COM(2015) 626 final.

26 COM(2015) 626 final.

RR\1157669EN.docx!189/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 2
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(3a) Despite the fact that more creative
content is being consumed today than everbefore via services such as platforms foruser-uploaded content and content
aggregation services, the creative sectors
have not seen a comparable rise inrevenues. Consequently, a so-called 'value
gap' has developed, whereby platform
services retain the value of cultural andcreative works, which is diverted fromcreators. The transfer of value has createdan inefficient and unfair market, andthreatens the long-term health of theUnion's cultural and creative sectors andthe success of the Digital Single Market.
Thus, liability exemptions should only apply
to genuinely neutral and passive online
service providers, and not to services thatplay an active role in distributing,promoting and monetising content at theexpense of creators.

Amendment 3
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!190/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(5)In the fields of research, educationand preservation of cultural heritage, digitaltechnologies permit new types of uses thatare not clearly covered by the current Union
rules on exceptions and limitations. In
addition, the optional nature of exceptions
and limitations provided for in Directives
2001/29/EC, 96/9/EC and 2009/24/EC in
these fields may negatively impact thefunctioning of the internal market. This isparticularly relevant as regards cross-borderuses, which are becoming increasingly
important in the digital environment.
Therefore, the existing exceptions andlimitations in Union law that are relevant forscientific research, teaching and preservationof cultural heritage should be reassessed in
the light of those new uses. Mandatory
exceptions or limitations for uses of text anddata mining technologies in the field of
scientific research, illustration for teaching in
the digital environment and for preservationof cultural heritage should be introduced. For
uses not covered by the exceptions or thelimitation provided for in this Directive, theexceptions and limitations existing in Union
law should continue to apply. Directives
96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC should be adapted.

(5)
In the fields of research, educationand preservation of cultural heritage, digitaltechnologies permit new types of uses thatare not clearly covered by the current Union
rules on exceptions and limitations. In
addition, the optional nature of exceptions
and limitations provided for in Directives
2001/29/EC, 96/9/EC and 2009/24/EC in
these fields may negatively impact thefunctioning of the internal market. This isparticularly relevant as regards cross-borderuses, which are becoming increasingly
important in the digital environment.
Therefore, the existing exceptions andlimitations in Union law that are relevant forscientific research, teaching, distance andblended learning and preservation ofcultural heritage should be reassessed in thelight of those new uses. Mandatory
exceptions or limitations for uses of text anddata mining technologies in the field of
scientific research, illustration for teaching in
the digital environment and for preservationof cultural heritage should be introduced. For
uses not covered by the exceptions or thelimitation provided for in this Directive, theexceptions and limitations existing in Union
law should continue to apply. Directives
96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC should be adapted
accordingly. The term 'scientific research'used in this Directive is to be understood as
referring both to the natural sciences andthe human sciences.

Amendment 4
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!191/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

(9)
Union law already provides certain
exceptions and limitations covering uses forscientific research purposes which may apply
to acts of text and data mining. However,those exceptions and limitations are optionaland not fully adapted to the use oftechnologies in scientific research.
Moreover, where researchers have lawfulaccess to content, for example throughsubscriptions to publications or open accesslicences, the terms of the licences may
exclude text and data mining. As research isincreasingly carried out with the assistanceof digital technology, there is a risk that theUnion's competitive position as a researcharea will suffer unless steps are taken toaddress the legal uncertainty for text and data
mining.

(9)
Union law already provides certain
exceptions and limitations covering uses forscientific research purposes which may apply
to acts of text and data mining. However,those exceptions and limitations are optionaland not fully adapted to the use oftechnologies in scientific research.
Moreover, where researchers have acquired
lawful access to content, for example
through subscriptions to publications or open
access licences, the terms of the licences may
exclude text and data mining. As research isincreasingly carried out with the assistanceof digital technology, there is a risk that theUnion's competitive position as a researcharea will suffer unless steps are taken toaddress the legal uncertainty for text and data
mining.

Amendment 5
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!192/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(10) This legal uncertainty should be
addressed by providing for a mandatory
exception to the right of reproduction andalso to the right to prevent extraction from a
database. The new exception should be
without prejudice to the existing mandatory
exception on temporary acts of reproduction
laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive
2001/29, which should continue to apply totext and data mining techniques which do not
involve the making of copies going beyond
the scope of that exception. Researchorganisations should also benefit from theexception when they engage into publicprivate partnerships.

(10) This legal uncertainty should be
addressed by providing for a mandatory
exception to the right of reproduction andalso to the right to prevent extraction from a
database. The new exception should be
without prejudice to the existing mandatory
exception on temporary acts of reproduction
laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive
2001/29, which should continue to apply totext and data mining techniques which do not
involve the making of copies going beyond
the scope of that exception. To prevent
unjustified dissemination of the content
necessary for text and data mining,
research organisations should be allowed tostore and preserve in a secure manner the
reproductions of works or other subject
matter obtained pursuant to the new
exception, for the time needed to performthe research. Reproductions of works orother subject-matter made for the purposeof text and data mining should be deleted
once all the activities necessary for the
research have been carried out. Researchorganisations should also benefit from theexception when they enter into publicprivate partnerships, provided that the text
and data mining acts performed relate
directly to the purpose of the researchcarried out in the partnership concerned. In
the context of public-private partnerships, itis necessary that the copyright-protected
works or other subject-matter usedpursuant to the exception be lawfullyacquired beforehand by the private sector
partner.

Amendment 6
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!193/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(12) In view of a potentially high numberof access requests to and downloads of theirworks or other subject-matter, rightholders
should be allowed to apply measures where
there is risk that the security and integrity ofthe system or databases where the works orother subject-matter are hosted would be
jeopardised. Those measures should notexceed what is necessary to pursue theobjective of ensuring the security andintegrity of the system and should notundermine the effective application of the
exception.

(12) In view of a potentially high numberof access requests to and downloads of theirworks or other subject-matter, rightholders
should be allowed to apply measures, suchas identification confirmation, where there
is risk that the security and integrity of thesystem or databases where the works or othersubject-matter are hosted might bejeopardised. Those measures should be
proportionate, should not exceed what isnecessary to pursue the objective of ensuring
the security and integrity of the system andshould not undermine the effective
application of the exception.

Amendment 7
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(13) There is no need to provide fordeletedcompensation for rightholders as regards
uses under the text and data mining
exception introduced by this Directive giventhat in view of the nature and scope of the
exception the harm should be minimal.
Amendment 8
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!194/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(14) Article 5(3)(a) of Directive 2001/29/
EC allows Member States to introduce an
exception or limitation to the rights ofreproduction, communication to the public
and making available to the public for thesole purpose of, among others, illustration
for teaching. In addition, Articles 6(2)(b) and9(b) of Directive 96/9/EC permit the use of adatabase and the extraction or re-utilizationof a substantial part of its contents for the
purpose of illustration for teaching. The
scope of those exceptions or limitations as
they apply to digital uses is unclear. In
addition, there is a lack of clarity as towhether those exceptions or limitations
would apply where teaching is provided
online and thereby at a distance. Moreover,the existing framework does not provide fora cross-border effect. This situation may
hamper the development of digitallysupported teaching activities and distancelearning. Therefore, the introduction of a
new mandatory exception or limitation isnecessary to ensure that educational
establishments benefit from full legal
certainty when using works or other subjectmatter in digital teaching activities, including
online and across borders.

(14) Article 5(3)(a) of Directive 2001/29/
EC allows Member States to introduce an
exception or limitation to the rights ofreproduction, communication to the public
and making available to the public for thesole purpose of, among others, illustration
for teaching. In addition, Articles 6(2)(b) and9(b) of Directive 96/9/EC permit the use of adatabase and the extraction or re-utilizationof a substantial part of its contents for the
purpose of illustration for teaching. The
scope of those exceptions or limitations as
they apply to digital uses is unclear. In
addition, there is a lack of clarity as towhether those exceptions or limitations
would apply where teaching is provided
online and thereby at a distance. Moreover,the existing framework does not provide fora cross-border effect. This situation may
hamper the development of digitallysupported teaching activities and distancelearning which may be carried out outside
traditional, formal learning settings andinvolve a wider range of providers.
Therefore, the introduction of a new
mandatory exception or limitation isnecessary to ensure that educational
establishments and entities certified by theMember States to carry out a teachingactivity benefit from full legal certainty whenusing works or other subject-matter in digitalteaching activities, including online andacross borders.

Amendment 9
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!195/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(15) While distance learning and crossborder education programmes are mostly
developed at higher education level, digital
tools and resources are increasingly used at
all education levels, in particular to improveand enrich the learning experience. The
exception or limitation provided for in thisDirective should therefore benefit all
educational establishments in primary,secondary, vocational and higher education
to the extent they pursue their educational
activity for a non-commercial purpose. The
organisational structure and the means offunding of an educational establishment are
not the decisive factors to determine the noncommercial nature of the activity.

(15) While distance learning and crossborder education programmes are mostly
developed at higher education level, digital
tools and resources are increasingly used at
all education levels, in particular to improveand enrich the learning experience. The
exception or limitation provided for in thisDirective should therefore benefit all
educational establishments recognised by theMember State in which they are establishedand involved in primary, secondary,vocational and higher education, as well as
any entities that are certified by the Member
State in which they are established to carryout specific teaching activities to the extent
that they pursue their educational activity fora non-commercial purpose. The
organisational structure and the means offunding of an educational establishment orof a certified entity are not the decisive
factors in determining the non-commercial
nature of the activity.

Amendment 10
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!196/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(16) The exception or limitation should
cover digital uses of works and other subjectmatter such as the use of parts or extracts ofworks to support, enrich or complement theteaching, including the related learning
activities. The use of the works or othersubject-matter under the exception orlimitation should be only in the context ofteaching and learning activities carried out
under the responsibility of educational
establishments, including during
examinations, and be limited to what isnecessary for the purpose of such activities.
The exception or limitation should coverboth uses through digital means in theclassroom and online uses through theeducational establishment's secure electronic
network, the access to which should beprotected, notably by authentication
procedures. The exception or limitation
should be understood as covering thespecific accessibility needs of persons with adisability in the context of illustration forteaching.

(16) The exception or limitation should
cover digital uses of works and other subjectmatter such as the use of parts or extracts ofworks, with the exception of sheet music, tosupport, enrich or complement the teaching,including the related learning activities.
Member States should be allowed to set
appropriate limits concerning the amountof certain categories of protected works orother subject-matter that can be used, aslong as such limits strike a fair balance
between the needs and legitimate interestsof users and rightholders. The use of theworks or other subject-matter or of extracts
from them under the exception or limitation
should be only in the context of teaching andlearning activities carried out under the
responsibility of educational establishments
or certified entities, including during
examinations, and be limited to what isnecessary for the purpose of such activities.
The exception or limitation should coverboth uses through digital means in thesetting in which the teaching and learning
activities are carried out, including whenoutside the premises of the educational
establishment or certified entity carrying
them out, and online uses through theeducational establishment's or certified
entity’s secure electronic network, the accessto which should be protected, notably byauthentication procedures. The exception orlimitation should be understood as covering
the specific accessibility needs of persons
with a disability in the context of illustration
for teaching.

Amendment 11
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!197/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(17) Different arrangements, based on theimplementation of the exception provided forin Directive 2001/29/EC or on licensing
agreements covering further uses, are inplace in a number of Member States in orderto facilitate educational uses of works andother subject-matter. Such arrangements
have usually been developed taking accountof the needs of educational establishments
and different levels of education. Whereas itis essential to harmonise the scope of the
new mandatory exception or limitation in
relation to digital uses and cross-borderteaching activities, the modalities of
implementation may differ from a Member
State to another, to the extent they do nothamper the effective application of the
exception or limitation or cross-border uses.
This should allow Member States to build on
the existing arrangements concluded atnational level. In particular, Member States
could decide to subject the application of the
exception or limitation, fully or partially, tothe availability of adequate licences,
covering at least the same uses as thoseallowed under the exception. Thismechanism would, for example, allow giving
precedence to licences for materials which
are primarily intended for the educational
market. In order to avoid that suchmechanism results in legal uncertainty or
administrative burden for educational
establishments, Member States adopting thisapproach should take concrete measures toensure that licensing schemes allowing
digital uses of works or other subject-matterfor the purpose of illustration for teachingare easily available and that educational
establishments are aware of the existence ofsuch licensing schemes.

PE601.094v02-00

EN(17) Different arrangements, based on theimplementation of the exception provided forin Directive 2001/29/EC or on licensing
agreements covering further uses, are inplace in a number of Member States in orderto facilitate educational uses of works andother subject-matter. Such arrangements
have usually been developed taking accountof the needs of educational establishments
and different levels of education. Whereas itis essential to harmonise the scope of the
new mandatory exception or limitation in
relation to digital uses and cross-borderteaching activities, the modalities of
implementation may differ from a Member
State to another, to the extent they do nothamper the effective application of the
exception or limitation or cross-border uses.
This should allow Member States to build on
the existing arrangements concluded atnational level. In particular, Member States
could decide to subject the application of the
exception or limitation, fully or partially, tothe availability of adequate licences,
covering at least the same uses as thoseallowed under the exception. Thismechanism would, for example, allow giving
precedence to licences for materials which
are primarily intended for the educational
market, for which licences are easily
available. In order to avoid such amechanism resulting in legal uncertainty or
administrative burden for educational
establishments, Member States adopting thisapproach should take concrete measures toensure that licensing schemes allowing
digital uses of works or other subject-matterfor the purpose of illustration for teachingare easily available and that educational
establishments and entities certified to carryout a teaching activity are aware of theexistence of such licensing schemes. In
order to ensure the availability andaccessibility of such licences forbeneficiaries, Member States should use ordevelop appropriate tools, such as a single
portal or database.

!198/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 12
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(17a) In order to guarantee legal certainty,
in the event that a Member State decides tomake the application of the exception
subject to the availability of adequate
licences, it is necessary to specify underwhich conditions an educational
establishment or an entity certified to carryout teaching activities may use protected
works or other subject-matter under the
exception and, conversely, when it should
act under a licensing scheme. Therefore,
when an educational establishment or acertified entity cannot find a licencecovering the use of a given copyrightprotected work or other subject-matter
through the technical tool created by theMember State to ensure the visibility oflicensing schemes covering use for teachingactivities, it should be entitled to use such awork or other subject matter under thescope of the exception.

Amendment 13
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!199/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(20) Member States should therefore be
required to provide for an exception topermit cultural heritage institutions to
reproduce works and other subject-matter
permanently in their collections forpreservation purposes, for example toaddress technological obsolescence or the
degradation of original supports. Such an
exception should allow for the making of
copies by the appropriate preservation tool,means or technology, in the required number
and at any point in the life of a work or othersubject-matter to the extent required in orderto produce a copy for preservation purposes
only.

(20) Member States should therefore be
required to provide for an exception topermit cultural heritage institutions to
reproduce works and other subject-matter
permanently in their collections forpreservation purposes, for example toaddress technological obsolescence or the
degradation of original supports or for the
purpose of digitisation. Such an exception
should allow for the making of copies in any
format or medium by the appropriate
preservation tool, means or technology, inthe required number and at any point in thelife of a work or other subject-matter to theextent required in order to produce a copy forpreservation purposes only. Such an
exception should cover both cultural
heritage institutions holding the works orother subject-matter and third parties
mandated by such cultural heritage
institutions to reproduce the works or othersubject-matter within the scope of the
exception.

Amendment 14
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!200/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(21a) Following technologicaldevelopments and evolving consumer
behaviour, new information society services
have emerged that allow their users to
upload content in various forms. Suchcontent uploaded by users sometimes
comprises short extracts or short quotations
from protected works or other subjectmatter, which may be altered, combined ortransformed. Such use of extracts or
quotations from protected works or othersubject-matter within content uploaded byusers, for the purposes of illustration,
caricature, parody, pastiche, criticism orreview, is now widespread online and,provided that that use is proportionate anddoes not cause significant economic harmto the rightholders concerned, it can evenserve to advertise the work used within thecontent concerned.
Amendment 15
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 b (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!201/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(21b) Despite some overlap with existing
exceptions or limitations, content uploaded
or made available by a user that comprises
short extracts or short quotations fromprotected works or other subject-matter, is
not properly covered by the existing list of
exceptions or limitations, nor can thequestion of how such content is used besolely addressed through contractual
arrangements. Such circumstances create
legal uncertainty for both users andrightholders, leading to frustration andabuses. It is therefore necessary tocomplement the existing exceptions
provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC, inparticular those related to quotation andparody, by providing for a new specificexception to authorise the short,proportionate and non-commercial uses ofextracts or quotations from protected works
or other subject-matter within content
uploaded by a user.
Amendment 16
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 c (new)Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!202/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(21c) Where content uploaded by anatural person involves the short,proportionate and non-commercial use fora legitimate purpose of a short extract or
short quotation from a work or othersubject-matter, such use should be coveredby the exception provided for in thisDirective. This exception should only beapplied in certain special cases which do
not conflict with normal uses of the work orother subject-matter concerned and do notunreasonably prejudice the legitimate
interests of the rightholder. For the purposeof assessing a prejudice, the degree oforiginality of the content concerned, thelength and extent of the extract or quotation
used, whether the extract or quotation is asubordinate part of the content concerned,
the professional nature of the content
concerned and the degree of economic
harm should be examined, where relevant.
This exception should be without prejudice
to the moral rights of the authors of thework or other subject-matter concerned.
Amendment 17
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 d (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(21d) Information society services should
not be able to invoke for their benefit the
exception provided in this Directive for theuse of short extracts or short quotations
from protected works or other subjectmatter in content uploaded by users, for the
purpose of limiting their liability or theextent of their obligations under theagreements concluded with rightholders
pursuant to Article 13 of this Directive.

RR\1157669EN.docx!203/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 18
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(22) Cultural heritage institutions should
benefit from a clear framework for thedigitisation and dissemination, including
across borders, of out-of-commerce works orother subject-matter. However, the particularcharacteristics of the collections of out-ofcommerce works mean that obtaining theprior consent of the individual rightholders
may be very difficult. This can be due, forexample, to the age of the works or othersubject-matter, their limited commercial
value or the fact that they were neverintended for commercial use. It is therefore
necessary to provide for measures tofacilitate the licensing of rights in out-ofcommerce works that are in the collectionsof cultural heritage institutions and thereby
to allow the conclusion of agreements withcross-border effect in the internal market.

(22) Cultural heritage institutions should
benefit from a clear framework for thedigitisation and dissemination, including
across borders, of out-of-commerce works orother subject-matter. However, the particularcharacteristics of the collections of out-ofcommerce works mean that obtaining theprior consent of the individual rightholders
may be very difficult or impossible. This canbe due, for example, to the age of the works
or other subject-matter, their limited
commercial value or the fact that they were
never intended for commercial use or havenever been in commerce. It is therefore
necessary to provide for measures tofacilitate the licensing of rights in out-ofcommerce works that are in the collectionsof cultural heritage institutions and thereby
to allow the conclusion of agreements withcross-border effect in the internal market.

Amendment 19
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(23) Member States should, within theframework provided for in this Directive,
have flexibility in choosing the specific typeof mechanism allowing for licences for outof-commerce works to extend to the rights ofrightholders that are not represented by thecollective management organisation, in
accordance to their legal traditions, practices
or circumstances. Such mechanisms can
include extended collective licensing andpresumptions of representation.

(23) Member States should, within theframework provided for in this Directive,
have flexibility in choosing the specific typeof mechanism allowing for licences for outof-commerce works to extend to the rights ofrightholders that are not represented by therelevant collective management
organisation, in accordance with their legal
traditions, practices or circumstances. Suchmechanisms can include extended collective
licensing and presumptions of representation.

PE601.094v02-00

EN!204/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 20
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(24) For the purpose of those licensing
mechanisms, a rigorous and well-functioning
collective management system is important.
That system includes in particular rules ofgood governance, transparency andreporting, as well as the regular, diligent andaccurate distribution and payment ofamounts due to individual rightholders, as
provided for by Directive 2014/26/EU.
Additional appropriate safeguards should beavailable for all rightholders, who should begiven the opportunity to exclude theapplication of such mechanisms to theirworks or other subject-matter. Conditions
attached to those mechanisms should notaffect their practical relevance for cultural
heritage institutions.

(24) For the purpose of those licensing
mechanisms, a rigorous and well-functioning
collective management system is importantand should be encouraged by the Member
States. That system includes in particular
rules of good governance, transparency andreporting, as well as the regular, diligent andaccurate distribution and payment ofamounts due to individual rightholders, as
provided for by Directive 2014/26/EU.
Additional appropriate safeguards should beavailable for all rightholders, who should begiven the opportunity to exclude theapplication of such mechanisms to theirworks or other subject-matter. Conditions
attached to those mechanisms should notaffect their practical relevance for cultural
heritage institutions.

Amendment 21
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!205/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(28a) In order to ensure that the licensing
mechanisms established for out-ofcommerce works are relevant and function
properly, that rightholders are adequately
protected under those mechanisms, thatlicences are properly publicised and thatlegal certainty is ensured with regard to therepresentativeness of collective
management organisations and thecategorisation of works, Member Statesshould foster sector-specific stakeholder
dialogue. They should also, where
necessary, facilitate dialogue to help
establish collective management
organisations, in sectors where they do notalready exist, covering the rights in eachcategory of works.
Amendment 22
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!206/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(30) To facilitate the licensing of rights inaudiovisual works to video-on-demand
platforms, this Directive requires Member
States to set up a negotiation mechanism
allowing parties willing to conclude anagreement to rely on the assistance of an
impartial body. The body should meet withthe parties and help with the negotiations byproviding professional and external advice.
Against that background, Member Statesshould decide on the conditions of thefunctioning of the negotiation mechanism,
including the timing and duration of theassistance to negotiations and the bearing of
the costs. Member States should ensure thatadministrative and financial burdens remain
proportionate to guarantee the efficiency ofthe negotiation forum.

(30) To facilitate the licensing of rights inaudiovisual works, relevant rights areconsolidated with the producer by law or bycontract. In order to promote cultural
diversity and the availability of works onvideo-on-demand platforms, this Directive
requires Member States to set up afacilitation mechanism, managed by anexisting or newly-established national body,allowing relevant parties willing to conclude
an agreement for the licensing ofaudiovisual works to video-on-demand
platforms to rely on the assistance of an
impartial body. Where a negotiation
involves parties from different Member
States, they should agree beforehand on
which Member State is to be competent in
the event that the facilitation mechanism isrequired. The body should meet with theparties and facilitate the negotiations byproviding professional and external advice.
Against that background, Member Statesshould decide on the conditions of thefunctioning of the facilitation mechanism,
including the timing and duration of theassistance to negotiations and the division of
any costs arising. Member States should
ensure that administrative and financial
burdens remain proportionate to guarantee
the efficiency of the facilitation forum. In
order to encourage the continuous
exploitation of audiovisual works on videoon-demand platforms, Member Statesshould foster dialogue between
representative organisations of authors,
producers, video-on-demand platforms andother relevant stakeholders.

Amendment 23
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!207/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(31) A free and pluralist press is essential
to ensure quality journalism and citizens'
access to information. It provides afundamental contribution to public debate
and the proper functioning of a democraticsociety. 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 ofpress publications as rightholders, licensing
and enforcement in the digital environmentis often complex and inefficient.

(31) A free and pluralist press is essential
to ensure quality and fairly remunerated
journalism and citizens' access to
information. It provides a fundamental
contribution to public debate and the proper
functioning of a democratic society. In thetransition from print to digital, publishers ofpress publications are facing problems inlicensing the online use of their publications
and recouping their investments. Online
services, such as news aggregators andsearch engines, have increasingly developed
their activities by making profits from thecontent of press publishers. Such profits are
not shared fairly with journalists andpublishers. In the absence of recognition of
publishers of press publications asrightholders, licensing and enforcement in
the digital environment are often complex
and inefficient.

Amendment 24
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(32) The organisational and financial
contribution of publishers in producing press
publications needs to be recognised andfurther encouraged to ensure thesustainability of the publishing industry. It istherefore necessary to provide at Union levela harmonised legal protection for press
publications in respect of digital uses. Suchprotection should be effectively guaranteed
through the introduction, in Union law, ofrights related to copyright for the
reproduction and making available to the
public of press publications in respect ofdigital uses.

(32) The organisational and financial
contribution of publishers in producing press
publications needs to be recognised andfurther encouraged to ensure thesustainability of the publishing industry. It istherefore necessary to provide at Union levela harmonised legal protection for press
publications. Such protection should be
effectively guaranteed through theintroduction, in Union law, of rights related
to copyright for the reproduction and making
available to the public of press publications.

PE601.094v02-00

EN!208/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 25
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(33) For the purposes of this Directive, itis necessary to define the concept of press
publication in a way that embraces only
journalistic publications, published by aservice 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 magazinesof 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 topress publications under this Directive. This
protection does not extend to acts ofhyperlinking which do not constitutecommunication to the public.

(33) For the purposes of this Directive, itis necessary to define the concept of press
publication in a way that embraces only
professional journalistic publications,published by a service provider, periodicallyor regularly updated in any media, for the
purpose of informing or entertaining andwhose credibility in the eyes of the public
relies to a certain extent on their specificbrand name. Such publications would
include, for instance, daily newspapers,
weekly or monthly magazines of general or
special interest and news websites.
Periodical publications which are publishedfor 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 notextend to acts of hyperlinking where suchacts do not constitute communication to the
public under Directive 2001/29/EC.

Amendment 26
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!209/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(34) The rights granted to the publishersof press publications under this Directive
should have the same scope as the rights ofreproduction 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 theexception on quotation for purposes such as
criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive.

(34) The rights granted to the publishersof press publications under this Directive
should have the same scope as the rights ofreproduction and making available to the
public provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC.
They should also be subject to the sameprovisions on exceptions and limitations as
those applicable to the rights provided for in
Directive 2001/29/EC including theexception on quotation for purposes such as
criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive. The rights granted
under this Directive should be without
prejudice to authors’ rights and should not
apply to legitimate uses of press
publications by individual users acting in a
private and non-commercial capacity. The
protection granted to press publications
under this Directive should apply to content
automatically generated by an act ofhyperlinking related to a press publication
without prejudice to the legitimate use of
quotations.

Amendment 27
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!210/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(35) The protection granted to publishersof press publications under this Directive
should not affect the rights of the authors andother rightholders in the works and othersubject-matter incorporated therein,
including as regards the extent to whichauthors and other rightholders can exploit
their works or other subject-matter
independently from the press publication inwhich they are incorporated. Therefore,publishers of press publications should not
be able to invoke the protection granted tothem against authors and other rightholders.
This is without prejudice to contractual
arrangements concluded between the
publishers of press publications, on the one
side, and authors and other rightholders, on
the other side.

(35) The protection granted to publishersof press publications under this Directive
should not affect the rights of the authors andother rightholders in the works and othersubject-matter incorporated therein,
including as regards the extent to whichauthors and other rightholders can exploit
their works or other subject-matter
independently from the press publication inwhich they are incorporated. Therefore,publishers of press publications should not
be able to invoke the protection granted tothem against authors and other rightholders.
This is without prejudice to contractual
arrangements concluded between the
publishers of press publications, on the one
side, and authors and other rightholders, on
the other side. Member States should beallowed to provide that a fair share of
remuneration derived from uses of press
publishers’ rights is attributed tojournalists.

Amendment 28
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!211/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(36) Publishers, including those of press
publications, books or scientific publications,
often operate on the basis of the transfer ofauthors' rights by means of contractual
agreements or statutory provisions. In thiscontext, publishers make an investment witha view to the exploitation of the works
contained in their publications and may insome instances be deprived of revenues
where such works are used under exceptions
or limitations such as the ones for private
copying and reprography. In a number ofMember States compensation for uses underthose exceptions is shared between authors
and publishers. In order to take account of
this situation and improve legal certainty for
all concerned parties, Member States shouldbe allowed to determine that, when an author
has transferred or licensed his rights to a
publisher or otherwise contributes with hisworks to a publication and there are systems
in place to compensate for the harm causedby an exception or limitation, publishers areentitled to claim a share of suchcompensation, whereas the burden on the
publisher to substantiate his claim should notexceed what is required under the system inplace.

(36) Publishers, including those of press
publications, books or scientific publications,
often operate on the basis of the transfer ofauthors' rights by means of contractual
agreements or statutory provisions. In thiscontext, publishers make an investment witha view to the exploitation of the works
contained in their publications and may insome instances be deprived of revenues
where such works are used under exceptions
or limitations such as the ones for private
copying and reprography. In a number ofMember States compensation for uses underthose exceptions is shared between authors
and publishers. In order to take account of
this situation and improve legal certainty for
all concerned parties, Member States should
determine that, when an author has
transferred or licensed his rights to a
publisher or otherwise contributes with hisworks to a publication and there are systems
in place to compensate for the harm causedby an exception or limitation, publishers areentitled to claim a share of suchcompensation. The burden on the publisher
to substantiate his claim should not exceed
what is required under the system in place.

Amendment 29
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!212/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(37) Over the last years, the functioningof the online content marketplace has gainedin complexity. Online services providing
access to copyright protected content
uploaded by their users without the
involvement of right holders have flourishedand have become main sources of access tocontent online. This affects rightholders'possibilities to determine whether, and underwhich conditions, their work and othersubject-matter are used as well as their
possibilities to get an appropriate
remuneration for it.

(37) Over recent years, the functioning of
the online content marketplace has gained incomplexity. Online services providing accessto copyright protected content uploaded bytheir users, without the involvement oragreement of rightholders, have flourishedand have become primary sources of accessto content online. In so doing, such services
unfairly compete with services whose
content is licensed directly by rightholders,since they make profits from content thatthey do not create and do not always sharethose profits fairly with the creatorsconcerned. Consequently, online services
providing access to copyright-protected
content uploaded by their users, without the
involvement or agreement of right holders
drive down the overall value of creative
content online. While allowing easy accessto diverse content, this affects rightholders'ability to determine whether, and underwhich conditions, their work and othersubject-matter are being used, as well as
their scope for obtaining appropriate
remuneration for it, since some useruploaded content services do not enter into
licensing agreements on the basis that they
are covered by the ‘safe harbour’ exemptionof Directive 2000/31/EC.

Amendment 30
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!213/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(38) Where information society service
providers store and provide access to the
public to copyright protected works or othersubject-matter uploaded by their users,
thereby going beyond the mere provision ofphysical facilities and performing an act ofcommunication to the public, they are
obliged to conclude licensing agreementswith rightholders, unless they are eligible forthe liability exemption provided in Article 14
of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council34.

(38) Where information society service
providers store and/or provide access to the
public to copyright protected works or othersubject-matter uploaded by their users,
thereby going beyond the mere provision ofphysical facilities and performing both an actof communication to the public and an actof reproduction, they should be obliged toconclude fair and balanced licensing
agreements with rightholders that request
such an agreement, in order to ensure theprotection of rightholders’ legitimate
interests and their fair remuneration, unlessthey are eligible for the liability exemption
provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/
EC of the European Parliament and of theCouncil34 .

In respect of Article 14, it is necessary toverify whether the service provider plays anactive role, including by optimising thepresentation of the uploaded works or
subject-matter or promoting them,irrespective of the nature of the means used
therefore.

In respect of Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/
EC and eligibility for the liability exemption
provided therein, it is necessary to verify theextent of the role played by the informationsociety service provider. Where the provider
plays an active role, including by optimising
the presentation of the uploaded works or
subject-matter, promoting them orcommercially exploiting them, irrespectiveof the nature of the means used therefor, theprovider should no longer be considered tobe merely hosting such content and should
therefore be considered ineligible for theliability exemption.

PE601.094v02-00

EN!214/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

In order to ensure the functioning of any
licensing agreement, information society
service providers storing and providing
access to the public to large amounts ofcopyright protected works or other subjectmatter uploaded by their users should takeappropriate and proportionate measures toensure protection of works or other subjectmatter, 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/EC.

In order to ensure the functioning of any
licensing agreement, or, in the absence ofsuch an agreement, to prevent theunauthorised making available on theirservice of works or other-subject matter
identified by their rightholders, informationsociety service providers storing and/or
providing access to the public to significant
amounts of copyright protected works orother subject-matter uploaded by their users
should take, in cooperation withrightholders, appropriate and proportionate
measures to ensure protection of works orother subject-matter, such as implementing
effective technologies, and facilitate
effective and transparent reporting torightholders. 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/EC. This obligation
should not apply to online marketplaces.

____________________________________

34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European

34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000
on certain legal aspects of informationsociety services, in particular electroniccommerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178,
17.7.2000, p. 1–16).

Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000
on certain legal aspects of informationsociety services, in particular electroniccommerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178,
17.7.2000, p. 1–16).

Amendment 31
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!215/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(39) Collaboration between informationsociety service providers storing andproviding access to the public to large
amounts of copyright protected works orother subject-matter uploaded by their users
and rightholders is essential for thefunctioning of technologies, such as content
recognition technologies. In such cases,
rightholders should provide the necessary
data to allow the services to identify theircontent and the services should betransparent towards rightholders with regard
to the deployed technologies, to allow theassessment of their appropriateness. The
services should in particular provide
rightholders with information on the type oftechnologies used, the way they are operated
and their success rate for the recognition ofrightholders' 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.

PE601.094v02-00

EN(39) Collaboration between informationsociety service providers storing andproviding access to the public to significant
amounts of copyright protected works orother subject-matter uploaded by their users
and rightholders is essential to ensure theeffective functioning of technologies, such as
content recognition technologies. In suchcases, rightholders should provide thenecessary data to allow the services to
identify their content, such as reference files
and metadata. They should deliver data in atimely fashion and in an appropriate format
and those data should be complete andaccurate. The services should be transparent
towards rightholders with regard to thedeployed technologies, to allow theassessment of their appropriateness. The
services should in particular provide
rightholders with information on the type oftechnologies used, the way they are operated
and their success rate for the recognition ofrightholders' 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. When assessing
the proportionality and effectiveness of themeasures implemented, technologicalconstraints and limitations should be taken
into due consideration. Those technologies
should not require the identification ofindividual users that upload content andshould not involve the processing of data
relating to individual users, in accordancewith Directive 95/46/EC and Directive
2002/58/EC. They should be limited topreventing the unauthorised making
available of specifically identified and duly
notified works based on the information
provided by rightholders and therefore
should not lead to a general monitoring
obligation.

!216/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 32
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(39a) Since the measures and technologies
deployed by information society services
providers in application of this Directive
could have a negative or disproportionate
effect on legitimate content that is uploaded
or displayed by users, in particular where
the concerned content is covered by an
exception or limitation, information society
service providers should be required to offer
a complaints mechanism for the benefit ofusers whose content has been affected by
the measures. Such a mechanism should
enable the user to ascertain why the content
concerned has been subject to measuresand include basic information on therelevant exceptions and limitations
applicable. It should prescribe minimum
standards for complaints to ensure thatrightholders are given sufficient
information to assess and respond tocomplaints. Rightholders should process
any complaints received within areasonable amount of time and takecorrective action where measures prove to
be unjustified. User-uploaded content
stored or provided on an informationsociety service can generate revenue,
including when such content is affected bymeasures deployed by an informationsociety service provider. While a dispute
over user-uploaded content is being
processed and resolved, such revenues
should not be attributed or distributed to theuser or the rightholder concerned, until the
dispute has been resolved through thecomplaints and redress mechanism.

RR\1157669EN.docx!217/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 33
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 b (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(39b) In view of the requirements laid
down in this Directive regarding
agreements and cooperation between
information society service providers andrightholders, and in order to avoid
unnecessary, long and costly legal
proceedings, it is necessary to provide for
an intermediate procedure which canpermit parties to seek an amicable solution
to any dispute concerning the provisions of
this Directive. Member States should
support such a mechanism by designating
an impartial body with relevant experienceand competence to assist the parties in the
resolution of their dispute.

Amendment 34
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!218/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(40) Certain rightholders such as authors
and performers need information to assess
the economic value of their rights which areharmonised under Union law. This isespecially the case where such rightholders
grant a licence or a transfer of rights in returnfor remuneration. As authors and performers
tend to be in a weaker contractual position
when they grant licences or transfer theirrights, they need information to assess thecontinued economic value of their rights,
compared to the remuneration received fortheir licence or transfer, but they often face alack of transparency. Therefore, the sharingof adequate information by their contractual
counterparts or their successors in title isimportant for the transparency and balancein the system that governs the remunerationof authors and performers.

(40) Certain rightholders such as authors
and performers need information to assess
the economic value of their rights which areharmonised under Union law. This isespecially the case where such rightholders
grant a licence or a transfer of rights in returnfor remuneration. As authors and performers
tend to be in a weaker negotiating position
when they grant licences or transfer theirrights by contract, they need information toassess the continued economic value of theirrights, compared to the remuneration
received for their licence or transfer.
However, they often face a lack oftransparency. Therefore, the regular sharingof adequate and accurate information by
their direct contractual counterparts or theirsuccessors in title is necessary fortransparency and balance in the system thatgoverns the remuneration of authors andperformers.

Amendment 35
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!219/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(41) When implementing transparency
obligations, the specificities of different
content sectors and of the rights of theauthors and performers in each sector should
be considered. Member States should
consult all relevant stakeholders as thatshould help determine sector-specificrequirements. Collective bargaining should
be considered as an option to reach an
agreement between the relevant stakeholders
regarding transparency. To enable theadaptation of current reporting practices tothe transparency obligations, a transitional
period should be provided for. The
transparency obligations do not need toapply to agreements concluded withcollective management organisations as
those are already subject to transparency
obligations under Directive 2014/26/EU.

(41) When implementing transparency
obligations, the specificities of different
content sectors and of the rights of theauthors and performers in each sector should
be considered. Member States should
undertake appropriate consultation with all
relevant stakeholders as that should help
determine sector-specific requirements andestablish standard reporting requirements
and procedures accordingly, including
through automated processing and the useof international identifiers. 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, atransitional period should be provided for.
The transparency obligations do not need toapply to agreements concluded withcollective management organisations as
those are already subject to transparency
obligations under Directive 2014/26/EU, or
where existing collective bargaining
agreements provide an equivalent level oftransparency.

Amendment 36
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!220/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(42) Certain contracts for the exploitationof rights harmonised at Union level are oflong duration, offering few possibilities for
authors and performers to renegotiate themwith their contractual counterparts or theirsuccessors in title. Therefore, without
prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in
Member States, there should be a
remuneration adjustment mechanism forcases where the remuneration originallyagreed under a licence or a transfer of rights
is disproportionately low compared to therelevant revenues and the benefits derived
from the exploitation of the work or the
fixation of the performance, including inlight of the transparency ensured by thisDirective. The assessment of the situation
should take account of the specificcircumstances of each case as well as of thespecificities and practices of the different
content sectors. Where the parties do notagree on the adjustment of the remuneration,
the author or performer should be entitled tobring a claim before a court or othercompetent authority.

(42) Many contracts for the exploitationof rights harmonised at Union level are longterm in nature, offering few possibilities for
authors and performers to renegotiate themwith their contractual counterparts or theirsuccessors in title. Therefore, without
prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in
Member States, there should be a
remuneration adjustment mechanism forcases where an author or performer candemonstrate that the remuneration originallyagreed under a licence or a transfer of rights
is disproportionately low compared to therelevant revenues and the benefits, such as
subsidies or equity shares, derived from the
exploitation of the work or the fixation of theperformance, taking into account thetransparency ensured by this Directive. The
assessment of the situation should takeaccount of the specific circumstances of eachcase, of any expenditure genuinely incurredin the production of the work or
performance, as well as of the specificities
and practices of the different content sectors.
It should be possible for Member States todecide not to apply the adjustment
mechanism when the contribution of theauthors or performers is not significant,having regard to the overall work or
performance. Where the parties do not agree
on the adjustment of the remuneration, theauthor or performer should be entitled tobring a claim before a court or othercompetent authority.

Amendment 37
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!221/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN(42a) Member States should guarantee theright for authors and performers to fair,
proportional and unwaivable remuneration
for the making available of their work on
on-demand services and for relevant
reproduction acts involving their work onsuch services. Such a right to fair
remuneration should be administered inaccordance with national practices andlegal requirements, without prejudice toexisting mechanisms, such as voluntarycollective management agreements or
extended collective licences.

Amendment 38
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(43) Authors and performers are often
reluctant to enforce their rights against theircontractual partners before a court or
tribunal. Member States should therefore
provide for an alternative dispute resolution
procedure that addresses claims related to
obligations of transparency and the contract
adjustment mechanism.

(43) Authors and performers are often
reluctant to enforce their rights against theircontractual partners before a court or tribunal
as bringing a legal action can entail
significant costs and can have an adverse
effect on their capacity to enter into
contractual relationships in the future.
Member States should therefore provide foran alternative dispute resolution procedurethat addresses claims by authors, performers
or their appointed representatives andrelated to obligations of transparency, theunwaivable right to remuneration and thecontract adjustment mechanism. Such amechanism should cater for individual orcollective claims, brought either directly by
the authors and performers concerned or
through an organisation acting on theirbehalf. The mechanism should also be
affordable.

PE601.094v02-00

EN!222/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 39
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(43a) To support the effective application
across Member States of the relevant
provisions of this Directive, the Commission
should, in cooperation with Member States,
encourage the exchange of best practices
and promote dialogue at Union level.

Amendment 40
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.
This Directive lays down rules which
aim at further harmonising the Union law
applicable to copyright and related rights inthe framework of the internal market, taking
into account in particular digital and crossborder uses of protected content. It also lays
down rules on exceptions and limitations, on
the facilitation of licences as well as rules
aiming at ensuring a well-functioning
marketplace for the exploitation of works
and other subject-matter.

1.
This Directive lays down rules which
aim at further harmonising the Union law
applicable to copyright and related rights inthe framework of the internal market, taking
into account in particular digital and crossborder uses of protected content and theneed for a high level of protection of
intellectual property. It also lays down rules
on exceptions and limitations, on thefacilitation of licences as well as rules
aiming at ensuring a well-functioning
marketplace for the exploitation of works
and other subject-matter.

Justification
To emphasise that protection of intellectual property, and its function as a revenue stream forcreators, is a core principle that must be taken into account in any reform of the copyright
regime.
Amendment 41
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
RR\1157669EN.docx!223/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENText proposed by the Commission

Amendment(a)on a non-for-profit basis or byreinvesting all the profits in its scientificresearch; or(a)on a not-for-profit basis or byreinvesting all the profits in its scientificresearch; orAmendment 42
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(3)‘cultural heritage institution’ means apublicly accessible library or museum, anarchive or a film or audio heritage
institution;(3)‘cultural heritage institution’ meansan entity whose main purpose is theprotection and promotion of cultural
heritage, specifically a publicly accessible
library, museum, gallery, an archive or a film
or audio heritage institution;

Amendment 43
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(4)‘press publication’ means a fixationof a collection of literary works of ajournalistic nature, which may also comprise
other works or subject-matter and constitutes
an individual item within a periodical or
regularly-updated publication under a single
title, such as a newspaper or a general or
special interest magazine, having the
purpose of providing information related tonews or other topics and published in any
media under the initiative, editorial
responsibility and control of a service
provider.

(4)‘press publication’ means a
professional fixation, under a single title, ofa collection of literary works of a journalistic
nature produced by one or several authors,which may also comprise other works or
subject-matter and constitutes an individual
item where:(a)it occurs within a periodical or
regularly-updated publication under a single
title, such as a newspaper or a general or
special interest magazine;
PE601.094v02-00

EN!224/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

(b)its purpose is to provide information
related to news or other topics; and(c)
it is published in any media under the
initiative, editorial responsibility and control
of a service provider.

Amendment 44
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and Article 11(1)of this Directive for reproductions andextractions made by research organisations
in order to carry out text and data mining ofworks or other subject-matter to which they
have lawful access for the purposes ofscientific research.

1.
Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and Article 11(1)of this Directive for reproductions andextractions made by research organisations
in order to carry out text and data mining ofworks or other subject-matter to which they
have acquired lawful access for the purposesof scientific research.

Amendment 45
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.
Rightholders shall be allowed toapply measures to ensure the security andintegrity of the networks and databases
where the works or other subject-matter are
hosted. Such measures shall not go beyond
what is necessary to achieve that objective.

3.
Rightholders shall be allowed toapply proportionate measures to ensure thesecurity and integrity of the networks anddatabases where the works or other subjectmatter are hosted. Such measures shall not
go beyond what is necessary to achieve that
objective and shall not prevent or hinderresearch organisations from enjoying theexception provided for in paragraph 1.

RR\1157669EN.docx!225/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 46
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4.
Member States shall encouragerightholders and research organisations todefine commonly-agreed best practices
concerning the application of the measuresreferred to in paragraph 3.

4.
Member States shall encouragerightholders and research organisations towork together to define commonly-agreed
best practices concerning the application of
the measures referred to in paragraph 3 andany text and data mining protocols. In
cooperation with Member States, theCommission shall encourage the exchangeof best practice and experience across theUnion.

Amendment 47
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
4a.
Member States may provide for faircompensation to rightholders for the use of
their works or other subject-matter
pursuant to paragraph 1.

Amendment 48
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point -a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(-a)
is made by an educational
establishment recognised by the Member
State in which it is established or by anentity certified by the Member State inwhich it is established to carry out teachingactivities;

PE601.094v02-00

EN!226/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 49
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(a)takes place on the premises of an
educational establishment or through asecure electronic network accessible only by
the educational establishment's pupils or
students and teaching staff;(a)takes place where the teachingactivities take place or through a secure
electronic network accessible only by theeducational establishment's or the certified
entity’s students or by teaching staff of theeducational establishment or certified entitythat are directly involved in the teachingactivity concerned;

Amendment 50
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment(ba) is limited to the duration justified by
the illustrative purpose.

Amendment 51
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
1a.
Member States may provide for
proportionate restrictions on the amount ofa work that can be used. Such restrictions
shall take into account the needs andlegitimate interests of both users andrightholders.

Amendment 52
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

RR\1157669EN.docx!227/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENText proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States may provide that the
exception adopted pursuant to paragraph 1
does not apply generally or as regards
specific types of works or other subjectmatter, to the extent that adequate licences
authorising the acts described in paragraph 1
are easily available in the market.

Member States may provide that the
exception adopted pursuant to paragraph 1
does not apply generally or as regards
specific types of works or other subjectmatter, to the extent that adequate licences
authorising at least the acts described inparagraph 1 are easily available on themarket and appropriate to the needs andspecificities of educational establishments
and entities certified to carry out teachingactivities.

Amendment 53
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States availing themselves of theprovision of the first subparagraph shall takethe necessary measures to ensure appropriate
availability and visibility of the licences
authorising the acts described in paragraph 1
for educational establishments.

Member States availing themselves of theprovision of the first subparagraph shall takethe necessary measures to ensure appropriate
availability, accessibility and visibility of thelicences authorising the acts described inparagraph 1 for educational establishments
and entities certified to carry out teachingactivities.

Amendment 54
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!228/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

2a.
For the purposes of applying
paragraph 2, Member States shall actively
assist in ensuring the availability of thelicences authorising at least the acts
described in paragraph 1 or facilitate
dialogue between rightholders, educational
establishments and entities certified to carryout teaching activities with a view toestablishing specific licences authorising
the acts described in paragraph 1.
Member States shall ensure that thelicences authorising the acts described inparagraph 1 are adequately publicisedthrough appropriate tools, such as a single
portal or database accessible to educational
establishments and entities certified to carryout teaching activities. The Member Statesshall ensure that the available licences arelisted and kept up-to-date on those tools.
Where a Member State has availed itself ofthe provision in paragraph 2 and a licence
for the digital use of a work is not displayedon the tool referred to in the second
subparagraph, an educational
establishment or entity certified to carry out
teaching activities established on its
territory shall be covered by the exception
provided for under paragraph 1.
Amendment 55
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 b (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
2b.
Without prejudice to paragraph 2,
any contractual provision contrary to the
exception provided for in paragraph 1 shallbe unenforceable.

Amendment 56
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
RR\1157669EN.docx!229/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENText proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.
The use of works and other subjectmatter for the sole purpose of illustration forteaching through secure electronic networks
undertaken in compliance with theprovisions of national law adopted pursuant
to this Article shall be deemed to occur
solely in the Member State where theeducational establishment is established.

3.
The use of works and other subjectmatter for the sole purpose of illustration forteaching through secure electronic networks
undertaken in compliance with theprovisions of national law adopted pursuant
to this Article shall be deemed to occur
solely in the Member State where theeducational establishment or entity certified
to carry out teaching activities isestablished.

Amendment 57
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4.
Member States may provide for faircompensation for the harm incurred by therightholders due to the use of their works orother subject-matter pursuant to paragraph 1.

4.
Without prejudice to paragraph 2,
Member States shall provide for faircompensation to rightholders for the use of
their works or other subject-matter pursuant
to paragraph 1.

Amendment 58
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!230/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1)(a) of
Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of
this Directive, permitting cultural heritage
institutions, to make copies of any works orother subject-matter that are permanently intheir collections, in any format or medium,for the sole purpose of the preservation ofsuch works or other subject-matter and to theextent necessary for such preservation.

Member States shall provide for an
exception to the rights provided for in Article
2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1)(a) of
Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of
this Directive, permitting cultural heritage
institutions, to make copies of or digitise any
works or other subject-matter that arepermanently in their collections, in any
format or medium, for the sole purpose of
the preservation of such works or othersubject-matter, to the extent necessary forsuch preservation and without modifying theoriginal works beyond the degree necessary
for their preservation.

Amendment 59
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
When a cultural heritage institution
mandates a third party, including inanother Member State, to perform, under
its responsibility, an act of reproduction ordigitisation for the purposes of the firstsubparagraph, the exception provided for in
the first subparagraph shall be deemed toapply to that act of reproduction ordigitisation, provided that all copies of theworks or other subject-matter are returnedto the requesting cultural heritage
institution or deleted.
Any contractual provision contrary to the
exception provided for in the firstsubparagraph shall be unenforceable.

Amendment 60
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission
RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!231/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENArticle 5a
Use of short extracts and quotations from
copyright- protected works or other subject
matter in content uploaded by users
1.
Where a natural person makes
digital, non-commercial and proportionate
use of short extracts or short quotations
from works and other subject-matter in thecreation of a new work he or she has
uploaded, for the purpose of criticism,
review, illustration, caricature, parody or
pastiche, Member States may provide for an
exception or limitation to the rights
provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive
2001/29/EC, point (a) of Article 5 andArticle 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, point (a)of Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC and
Article 11 of this Directive provided that theextracts or quotations:(a)relate to works or other subjectmatter that have already been lawfully
made available to the public;(b)
are accompanied by an indication of
their source, including the author's name,unless this turns out to be impossible; and(c)are used in accordance with fair
practice and in a manner that does notextend beyond the specific purpose forwhich they are being used.
2.
Any contractual provision contrary
to the exception provided for in this Article
shall be unenforceable.

PE601.094v02-00

EN!232/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

3.
Information society service
providers that store and/or provide to the
public access to copyright-protected works
or other subject-matter uploaded by theirusers, thereby going beyond the mere
provision of physical facilities andperforming an act of communication to the
public shall not be able invoke for theirbenefit the exception provided for inparagraph 1 of this Article in order to limit
their liability or the extent of their
obligations under the agreements
concluded with rightholders in applicationof Article 13 of this Directive.
4.
This exception is without prejudice
to the provisions of Article 13 of thisDirective.

Amendment 61
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

A work or other subject-matter shall bedeemed to be out of commerce when thewhole work or other subject-matter, in all its
translations, versions and manifestations, is
not available to the public through customarychannels of commerce and cannot bereasonably expected to become so.

A work or other subject-matter shall bedeemed to be out of commerce when thewhole work or other subject-matter, in all its
versions and manifestations, is not available
to the public through customary channels ofcommerce and cannot be reasonably
expected to become so in the Member States
where the competent collective management
organisation and the cultural heritage
institution are established. For the purposesof this Article, works that have never been,
or were never intended to be, in commerce
shall be treated as being out-of-commerce.

Amendment 62
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
RR\1157669EN.docx!233/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENText proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall, in consultation withrightholders, collective management
organisations and cultural heritage
institutions, ensure that the requirements
used to determine whether works and othersubject-matter can be licensed in accordancewith paragraph 1 do not extend beyond whatis necessary and reasonable and do notpreclude the possibility to determine the outof-commerce status of a collection as awhole, when it is reasonable to presume that
all works or other subject-matter in thecollection are out of commerce.

Member States shall, in consultation withrightholders, collective management
organisations and cultural heritage
institutions, ensure that the requirements
used to determine whether works and othersubject-matter are out-of-commerce and canbe licensed in accordance with paragraph 1
do not extend beyond what is necessary,
proportionate, reasonable, are tailored to thespecific category of works or other subjectmatter concerned and do not preclude thepossibility to determine the out-of-commerce
status of a collection as a whole, when it isreasonable to presume that all works or othersubject-matter in the collection are out ofcommerce.

Amendment 63
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.
Member States shall provide thatappropriate publicity measures are taken
regarding:3.
Member States shall provide thatappropriate and effective publicity measures
are taken regarding:Amendment 64
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

including during a reasonable period of time
before the works or other subject-matter are
digitised, distributed, communicated to the
public or made available.

including for a reasonable period of time
before the works or other subject-matter are
digitised, distributed, communicated to the
public or made available.

PE601.094v02-00

EN!234/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment 65
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall ensure a regulardialogue between representative users' andrightholders' organisations, and any otherrelevant stakeholder organisations, to, on asector-specific basis, foster the relevance andusability of the licensing mechanisms
referred to in Article 7(1), ensure theeffectiveness of the safeguards forrightholders referred to in this Chapter,notably as regards publicity measures, and,
where applicable, assist in the establishmentof the requirements referred to in the second
subparagraph of Article 7(2).

Member States shall ensure a regular, sectorspecific dialogue between representative
users' and rightholders' organisations, andany other relevant stakeholder organisations,to foster the relevance and usability of thelicensing mechanisms referred to in Article
7(1) ensure the effectiveness of thesafeguards for rightholders referred to in this
Chapter, notably as regards publicity
measures, and, where applicable, assist in theestablishment of the requirements referred toin the second subparagraph of Article 7(2),in particular regarding therepresentativeness of collective
management organisations and thecategorisation of works.

Amendment 66
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Where necessary, Member States shall
facilitate dialogue between rightholders
with a view to establishing collective
management organisations responsible forthe relevant rights in their category ofworks.

Amendment 67
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 b (new)Text proposed by the Commission
RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!235/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENIn cooperation with the Member States, theCommission shall encourage the exchangeof best practice across the Union regarding
any dialogue established pursuant to this
Article.
Amendment 68
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – title
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Negotiation mechanism

Support for the availability of audiovisual
works

Amendment 69
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall ensure that whereparties wishing to conclude an agreement forthe purpose of making available audiovisual
works on video-on-demand platforms facedifficulties relating to the licensing of rights,
they may rely on the assistance of an
impartial body with relevant experience.
That body shall provide assistance withnegotiation and help reach agreements.

1.
Member States shall facilitate theavailability of audiovisual works on videoon-demand platforms by ensuring that,
where relevant parties wishing to conclude
an agreement for the purpose of making
available audiovisual works on video-ondemand platforms face difficulties relating to
the licensing of rights, they may, by mutual
agreement, rely on the assistance of an
impartial body with relevant experience to be
designated by Member States for the
purposes of this Article. That body shallprovide impartial assistance with negotiation
with a view to the conclusion of mutuallyacceptable agreements.

Amendment 70
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission
PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!236/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

1a.
Member States shall foster dialogue
between representative organisations ofauthors, producers, video-on-demand
platforms and other relevant stakeholders.
Amendment 71
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – title
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Protection of press publications concerning
digital uses

Protection of press publications

Amendment 72
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.
Member States shall provide
publishers of press publications with therights provided for in Article 2 and Article
3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the digitaluse of their press publications.

1.
Member States shall provide
publishers of press publications with therights provided for in Article 2 and Article
3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the use of
their press publications.

Amendment 73
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
1a.
The rights referred to in paragraph1 shall not prevent legitimate private andnon-commercial use of press publications
by individual users.

Amendment 74
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4

RR\1157669EN.docx!237/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENText proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4.
The rights referred to in paragraph 1
shall expire 20 years after the publication of
the press publication. This term shall becalculated from the first day of January of
the year following the date of publication.

4.
The rights referred to in paragraph 1
shall expire eight years after the publicationof the press publication. This term shall becalculated from the first day of January of
the year following the date of publication.

Amendment 75
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
4a.
Member States may choose toensure that a fair share of the revenue
derived from uses of press publishers' rights
is attributed to journalists.

Amendment 76
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States may provide that where an
author has transferred or licensed a right to a
publisher, such a transfer or a licence
constitutes a sufficient legal basis for the
publisher to claim a share of thecompensation for the uses of the work madeunder an exception or limitation to thetransferred or licensed right.

Member States shall provide that where an
author has transferred, assigned or licensed aright to a publisher, that publisher is to beconsidered a rightholder by virtue and to
the extent of such a transfer, assignment or alicence. Therefore, such transfer,assignment or licence shall constitute a
sufficient legal basis for the publisher toclaim a share of the compensation for theuses of the work made under an exception orlimitation to the transferred, assigned or
licensed right.

Amendment

77

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – title

PE601.094v02-00

EN!238/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Use of protected content by informationsociety service providers storing and giving
access to large amounts of works and othersubject-matter uploaded by their users

Use of protected content by informationsociety service providers storing and/or
giving access to significant amounts ofworks and other subject-matter uploaded bytheir users

Amendment 78
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.
Information society service providers
that store and provide to the public access tolarge amounts of works or other subjectmatter 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 toprevent the availability on their services ofworks or other subject-matter identified byrightholders through the cooperation with theservice providers. Those measures, such as
the use of effective content recognition
technologies, shall be appropriate andproportionate. The service providers shallprovide rightholders with adequate
information on the functioning and thedeployment of the measures, as well as,
when relevant, adequate reporting on therecognition and use of the works and othersubject-matter.

1.
Information society service providers
that store and/or provide to the public accessto copyright-protected works or othersubject-matter uploaded by their users,
thereby going beyond the mere provision ofphysical facilities and performing an act ofcommunication to the public, shall conclude
fair and balanced licensing agreementswith any requesting rightholders. Under theterms of the agreements, such service
providers shall, in cooperation withrightholders, take measures to ensure theeffective and transparent functioning of theagreements concluded with rightholders forthe use of their works or other subjectmatter.

RR\1157669EN.docx!239/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENWhere, in the absence of a request from therightholder, no licensing agreements areconcluded pursuant to the firstsubparagraph, or where information society
service providers that store significant
amounts of copyright-protected works orother subject-matter and/or provide to the
public access thereto are eligible for theliability exemption provided for in Article
14 of Directive 2000/31/EC, those providers
shall take measures to prevent theavailability on their services of works orother subject-matter identified byrightholders through the cooperation with theservice providers.
Those measures, such as the use of effective
content recognition technologies, shall beappropriate, proportionate and compliant
with the relevant industry standards. The
service providers shall provide rightholders
with adequate and timely information on thefunctioning and the deployment of themeasures, as well as, when relevant,adequate reporting on the recognition anduse of the rightholders’ works and othersubject-matter. Rightholders shall provide
the information society service provider
with the relevant and necessary data toallow the effective functioning of themeasures deployed by the provider inaccordance with this Article.
Amendment 79
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!240/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

2.
Member States shall ensure that theservice providers referred to in paragraph 1
put in place complaints and redress
mechanisms that are available to users incase of disputes over the application of themeasures referred to in paragraph 1.

2.
Member States shall ensure that theservice providers referred to in paragraph 1
put in place effective mechanisms forrightholders to request licences andcomplaints and redress mechanisms that areavailable to users in case of disputes over theapplication of the measures referred to inparagraph 1, in particular regarding thepossible application of an exception orlimitation to any rights covering the content
concerned. When such a mechanism isactivated, any remuneration accruing fromthe disputed content during the course of
the procedure shall not be distributed toeither party until such time as the disputehas been resolved under the mechanism.

Amendment 80
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
The complaints and redress mechanism
established pursuant to the firstsubparagraph shall ensure that users andrightholders have access to sufficient
information on the relevant exceptions andlimitations that may apply in relation tocontent affected by the measures referred toin paragraph 1.

Amendment 81
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 b (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!241/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAny complaint filed by a user under themechanism referred to in the firstsubparagraph shall be processed by therelevant rightholder within a reasonable
period of time. The rightholder shall duly
justify his or her decision with regard to thecomplaint.
Amendment 82
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
2a.
Where information society providers
take the measures referred to in paragraph1, such measures shall be in fullcompliance with Directive 95/46/EC and
Directive 2002/58/EC. Measures to preventthe unauthorised making available ofcopyright-protected works or other subjectmatter shall be limited to specifically
identified and duly notified works and shallnot involve active monitoring of the entire
data of each user of the service.

Amendment 83
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!242/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

3.
Member States shall facilitate, whereappropriate, the cooperation between theinformation society service providers andrightholders through stakeholder dialogues todefine best practices, such as appropriate andproportionate content recognition
technologies, taking into account, among
others, the nature of the services, theavailability of the technologies and theireffectiveness in light of technologicaldevelopments.

3.
Member States shall facilitate, whereappropriate, the cooperation between theinformation society service providers andrightholders through stakeholder dialogues todefine best practices, such as appropriate andproportionate content recognition
technologies, taking into account, inter alia,
the nature of the services, the availability
and affordability of the technologies andtheir effectiveness in respect of the range oftypes of content and in light of technologicaldevelopments. In cooperation with theMember States, the Commission shallencourage the exchange of best practiceacross the Union regarding the results ofany cooperation established pursuant toparagraph 1 of this Article.

Amendment 84
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Member States shall encourage industry-led
solutions to address sector-specific issues
and the effective enforcement of existingmeasures to tackle piracy, including raisingawareness of legal means of accessing
copyright-protected works or other subjectmatter.

Amendment 85
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
3a.
Member States shall provide that
disputes between rightholders andinformation society providers concerning
the application of paragraph 1 of this
Article may be submitted to an alternative
dispute resolution mechanism.

RR\1157669EN.docx!243/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENMember States shall create or designate an
impartial body with relevant expertise to
assist the parties in the resolution of theirdispute under the mechanism provided forin the first subparagraph.
No later than ... [date mentioned in Article
21(1)] Member States shall notify to theCommission the body referred to in
subparagraph 2.
Amendment 86
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Article 13a
Use of protected content by informationsociety services providing automated image
referencing
Member States shall ensure that
information society service providers that
automatically reproduce or refer tosignificant amounts of copyright-protectedvisual works and make them available tothe public for the purpose of indexing andreferencing conclude fair and balanced
licensing agreements with any requestingrightholders in order to ensure their fair
remuneration. Such remuneration may be
managed by the collective management
organisation of the rightholders concerned.

Amendment 87
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!244/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

1.
Member States shall ensure that
authors and performers receive on a regularbasis and taking into account the specificitiesof each sector, timely, adequate andsufficient information on the exploitation of
their works and performances from those towhom they have licensed or transferred theirrights, notably as regards modes of
exploitation, revenues generated andremuneration due.

1.
Member States shall ensure that
authors and performers receive at least oncea 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 directly licensed, assigned ortransferred their rights, notably as regards
modes of exploitation, promotional activities
undertaken, revenues generated andremuneration due.

Amendment 88
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
For the purposes of this paragraph, any
relevant successor in title shall provide thebeneficiary of a licence or transfer of rights
with the necessary and relevant information
to allow that beneficiary to fulfil theobligations provided for under the firstsubparagraph.

Amendment 89
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!245/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN2.
The obligation in paragraph 1 shallbe proportionate and effective and shallensure an appropriate 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, provided that the
obligation remains effective and ensures anappropriate level of transparency.

The obligation in paragraph 1 shall be
proportionate and effective and shall ensure
a high level of transparency in every sector.
However, in those cases where theadministrative burden resulting from theobligation would be disproportionate in viewof the revenues generated by the exploitationof the work or performance, Member States
may adjust the obligation in paragraph 1,
provided that the obligation remains
effective and ensures an appropriate level oftransparency and the disproportionate
nature of the burden is duly justified.

Amendment 90
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
2a.
Member States shall facilitate thedevelopment of sector-specific standard
procedures through stakeholder dialogue,
and foster automated processing that makes
use of international identifiers of works.

Amendment 91
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
3a.
Where existing collective bargaining
agreements provide for comparable
requirements resulting in a level oftransparency that is equivalent to thatreferred to in paragraph 2, the obligation inparagraph 1 shall be deemed to have been
fulfilled.

Amendment 92
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 a (new)PE601.094v02-00

EN!246/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Article 14a
Unwaivable right to fair remuneration forauthors and performers
1.
Member States shall ensure that
where authors and performers transfer orassign the right of making available to the
public their works or other subject-matterfor their use on information society services
that make available works or other subjectmatter through a licensed catalogue, thoseauthors and performers retain the right toobtain fair remuneration from such use.
2.
Member States shall proscribe thewaiving of the right of an author or
performer to obtain fair remuneration forthe making available of his or her work as
described in paragraph 1. Paragraph 1
shall not apply where an author or
performer grants a free non-exclusive rightfor the benefit of all users for the use of hisor her work.
3.
The administration of the right tofair remuneration for the making availableof an author's or performer's work shall be
entrusted to the respective collective
management organisation. That collective
management organisation shall collect thefair remuneration from information society
services making works available to the
public.
4.
Where the right to fair remuneration
has been already provided for inagreements relating to audiovisual works orin collective agreements, including
voluntary collective managementagreements, between the author or the
performer and his or her contractual
counterparty, the provisions in this Article
shall be deemed to have been compliedwith.

RR\1157669EN.docx!247/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENAmendment 93
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall ensure that authors andperformers are entitled to request additional,
appropriate remuneration from the party withwhom they entered into a contract for the
exploitation of the rights when the
remuneration originally agreed isdisproportionately low compared to thesubsequent relevant revenues and benefits
derived from the exploitation of the works or
performances.

Member States shall ensure that authors andperformers, or their appointed
representatives, are entitled to request
additional, fair remuneration from the party
with whom they entered into a contract for
the exploitation of the rights when due
justification is given to demonstrate that the
remuneration originally agreed isdisproportionately low compared to thesubsequent relevant revenues and benefits
derived from the exploitation of the works or
performances.

Amendment 94
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
Member States may decide that the
obligation in paragraph 1 is not to be
applied when the contribution of the author
or performer is not significant having
regard to the overall nature of the work or
performance.

Amendment 95
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!248/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Member States shall provide that disputes
concerning the transparency obligation under
Article 14 and the contract adjustment
mechanism under Article 15 may besubmitted to a voluntary, alternative dispute
resolution procedure.

Without prejudice to other judicial
remedies, Member States shall provide that
disputes concerning the transparency
obligation under Article 14, the contract
adjustment mechanism under Article 15 andthe unwaivable right to remuneration under
Article 14a may be submitted to a voluntary,alternative dispute resolution procedure.

Amendment 96
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
The procedure referred to in paragraph 1
may be initiated by any of the parties to thedispute or through collective action by
several authors or performers with the same
contractual partner and similar claims, orbe initiated on their behalf by a collective
organisation representing them. The costs
directly linked to the procedure should beaffordable.

RR\1157669EN.docx!249/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENANNEX: LIST OF ENTITIES OR PERSONSFROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR FOR THE OPINION HAS RECEIVED INPUTThe following list is drawn up on a purely voluntary basis under the exclusive responsibilityof the rapporteur for the opinion. The rapporteur has received input from the following
entities or persons in the preparation of the draft opinion, until the adoption thereof incommittee.
Methodology : The following document aims to list all stakeholders that provided an input on
the Directive that that was the subject of the Rapporteur’s draft opinion. The list covers
stakeholders who provided their input during a face-to-face meeting or phone call, either
following a meeting request or during a chance discussion (provided that the exchange waslong enough to be equivalent to a meeting and concerned the substance of the Directive).

Where public affairs companies organised a meeting, the client concerned is indicated.
The list is provided in a chronological order, from the first meeting to the most recent.
The current list covers meetings which occurred between the date where the Rapporteur was
officially designated (26 October 2016) and the date where the draft opinion was sent to the
CULT Secretariat (3 February 2017).

Entity and/or
personPRS For Music
Syndicat de la Presse Quotidienne Nationale
Association de la Presse d’information Politique et Générale
LERU
Science Europe
Représentation permanente de la France auprès de l’Union européenne
EDRi
BEUC
GoogleEdima
SNEP
PE601.094v02-00

EN!250/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

SCAM
SACD
Europeana
Authors’ Group
IFJ
FERA
EWC
EPC
EBLIDAIFLAIFRROCommunia
International Association of STM Publishers
SAA
ENPA
EMMA
CMS - Axel Springer
GESAC
CEPIC
Sacem
Audible Magic
IFPI
Avisa - Springer-Nature
IMPALA
FEP
SNE
Kreab - Soundcloud
Représentation permanente de la France auprès de l’Union européenne
NotaBene (YouTuber)
Dave Sheik (YouTuber)RR\1157669EN.docx!251/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENLa Tronche en Biais (YouTuber)
DanyCaligula (YouTuber)
Cabinet DN - RELX GroupNews Media Europe
France Télévisions
IFJ

PE601.094v02-00

EN!252/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION
Title

Copyright in the Digital Single Market

References

COM(2016)0593 – C8-0383/2016 – 2016/0280(COD)

Committee responsible
Date announced in plenary

JURI
6.10.2016

Opinion by
Date announced in plenary

CULT
6.10.2016

Rapporteur
Date appointed

Marc Joulaud
7.11.2016

Discussed in committee

28.2.2017

Date adopted

11.7.2017

Result of final vote

+:
–:
0:

Members present for the final vote

Isabella Adinolfi, Dominique Bilde, Nikolaos Chountis, Silvia
Costa, María Teresa Giménez Barbat, Giorgos Grammatikakis,
Petra Kammerevert, Svetoslav Hristov Malinov, Stefano Maullu,
Morten Messerschmidt, Luigi Morgano, Momchil Nekov, John
Procter, Michaela Šojdrová, Yana Toom, Helga Trüpel, Sabine
Verheyen, Julie Ward, Bogdan Brunon Wenta, Bogdan Andrzej
Zdrojewski, Milan Zver, Krystyna Łybacka

Substitutes present for the final vote

Mary Honeyball, Marc Joulaud, Morten Løkkegaard, Emma
McClarkin, Martina Michels

Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present
for the final vote

Lefteris Christoforou, Maria Heubuch

RR\1157669EN.docx

2081!253/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENFINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

+

20
ALDE

María Teresa Giménez Barbat, Morten Løkkegaard

PPE

Lefteris Christoforou, Marc Joulaud, Svetoslav Hristov Malinov, Stefano Maullu,
Sabine Verheyen, Bogdan Brunon Wenta, Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski, Milan Zver,
Michaela Šojdrová

S&D

Silvia Costa, Giorgos Grammatikakis, Mary Honeyball, Luigi Morgano, Momchil
Nekov, Julie Ward, Krystyna Łybacka

Verts/ALEMaria Heubuch, Helga Trüpel

-

8
ALDE

Yana Toom

ECR

Emma McClarkin, Morten Messerschmidt, John Procter

EFDD

Isabella Adinolfi

GUE/NGL

Nikolaos Chountis, Martina Michels

S&D

Petra Kammerevert

0

1
ENF

Dominique Bilde

Key to symbols:+ : in favour- : against
0 : abstention

PE601.094v02-00

EN!254/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

22.11.2017
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME
AFFAIRSfor the Committee on Legal Affairs
on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright in
the Digital Single Market(COM(2016)0593 – C80383/2016 – 2016/0280(COD))
Rapporteur: Michał BoniSHORT JUSTIFICATION
The draft opinion of the LIBE Committee focuses on Article 13 of the Directive andrespective recitals.
As the LIBE Committee is responsible for the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms
and legislation regarding the protection of personal data recognised by the Charter of theEuropean Union this draft opinion reflects the objective to make sure that any solutions
adopted in this legal instrument will be respecting the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
The draft opinion provides clarifications on which information society service providers arecovered by the Article. The information society services providers that perform an act ofcommunication to the public and are actively and directly involved in allowing users to
upload, making works available and promoting works to the public, shall conclude licensing
agreements with rightholders Those that provide a service of mere technical, automatic andpassive nature will be out of scope of these provisions. Article 13 also underlines that service
providers eligible for the liability exemptions under Directive 2000/31/EC shall also be
excluded from the scope.
In order to implement the licensing agreements, service providers shall take appropriate andproportionate measures. For the sake of technological neutrality and taking into account thetechnological capabilities of SMEs and startups, the draft opinion talks about ‘appropriate andproportionate measures' as this is a broader term that might include technologies and/or othermeasures. Such approach ensures as well technological neutrality. Any measures applied shallrespect fundamental rights and Article 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC.
In order to implement the licensing agreements, the draft opinion emphasises the necessity of
RR\1157669EN.docx!255/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENcooperation between the service providers and rightholders. Certain details of this cooperation
were explained in the draft opinion. The rightholders shall accurately identify to informationsociety service providers the works or other subject-matter in respect of which they havecopyrights. The information society service providers shall inform rightholders of themeasures employed and about the accuracy of their functioning.
Member States shall ensure that the service providers in cooperation with the rightholders
establish a complaint mechanism for users who claim to have right or exemption to use
protected works. Member States shall also ensure for the redress mechanism for users.
In order to make sure that the voice of users is taken into account when establishing bestpractices for implementation of the agreements, users’ representatives shall be allowed to takepart in the dialogue with all involved stakeholders.
AMENDMENTS
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs calls on the Committee on Legal
Affairs, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:
Amendment 1
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where information society service providers
store and provide access to the public tocopyright protected works or other subjectmatter uploaded by their users, thereby
going beyond the mere provision of physicalfacilities and performing an act ofcommunication to the public, they are
obliged to conclude licensing agreementswith rightholders, unless they are eligible forthe liability exemption provided in Article
14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council34 .

Where information society service providers
offer users content storage services andprovide the public with access to content
and where such activity constitutes an act ofcommunication to the public and is not of amerely technical, automatic and passive
nature, they should be obliged to conclude
licensing agreements with rightholders as
regards copyright protected works or othersubject-matter, unless they are eligible forthe liability exemptions provided in
Directive 2000/31/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council34.

____________________________________

PE601.094v02-00

EN!256/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European

34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000
on certain legal aspects of informationsociety services, in particular electroniccommerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178,
17.7.2000, p. 1–16).

Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000
on certain legal aspects of informationsociety services, in particular electroniccommerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178,
17.7.2000, p. 1–16).

Amendment 2
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

In respect of Article 14, it is necessary todeletedverify whether the service provider plays anactive role, including by optimising thepresentation of the uploaded works or
subject-matter or promoting them,irrespective of the nature of the means used
therefor.
Amendment 3
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!257/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENIn order to be eligible for the liability
exemption provided for in Article 14 of
Directive 2000/31/EC, information society
service providers are, upon receiving
notification or on becoming aware that awork which is subject to copyright andrelated rights is used in an unauthorisedmanner, obliged to act expeditiously toremove the content in question or conclude
a licensing agreement with the relevant
rightholders on fair and reasonable terms.
To prevent misuses or abuses of
notifications and of limitationsand toprevent the exercise of exceptions tocopyright law, and in order to protect
freedom of information and expression,
users of the information society services
should have access to effective andexpeditious redress and complaint
mechanisms.
Justification
The addition intends to add a clear, positive definition of what measures internet society
service providers are expected to take when receiving notification of copyright infringements.

Amendment 4
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!258/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

In order to ensure the functioning of any
licensing agreement, information society
service providers storing and providing
access to the public to large amounts ofcopyright protected works or other subjectmatter uploaded by their users should takeappropriate and proportionate measures toensure protection of works or other subjectmatter, 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/EC.

In order to ensure the functioning of any
licensing agreement, information society
service providers actively and directly
involved in allowing users to upload,
making works available and promoting
works to the public should take appropriate
and proportionate measures to ensure
protection of works or other subject-matter.
Such measures should respect the Charterof Fundamental Rights of the European
Union and should not impose a generalobligation on information society service
providers to monitor the information which
they transmit or store as referred to in
Article 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC.

Amendment 5
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
For the implementation of such measures,the cooperation between informationsociety service providers and rightholders isessential. Rightholders should accurately
identify to information society service
providers the works or other subject-matterin respect of which they claim to have thecopyright. Rightholders should retain
responsibility for claims made by third
parties over the use of works which theywould have identified as being their own in
the implementation of any agreement
reached with the information society service
provider.

Amendment 6
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39

RR\1157669EN.docx!259/!267

PE601.094v02-00

ENText proposed by the Commission

Amendment(39) Collaboration between information deletedsociety service providers storing andproviding access to the public to large
amounts of copyright protected works orother subject-matter uploaded by their users
and rightholders is essential for thefunctioning of technologies, such as
content recognition technologies. In suchcases, rightholders should provide thenecessary data to allow the services to
identify their content and the services
should be transparent towards rightholders
with regard to the deployed technologies, toallow the assessment of theirappropriateness. The services should inparticular provide rightholders withinformation on the type of technologies
used, the way they are operated and theirsuccess rate for the recognition ofrightholders' 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 7
Proposal for a directive
Title IV – Chapter 2 – title
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Certain uses of protected content by online
services

Certain uses of protected content online

Amendment 8
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – title
Text proposed by the Commission
PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!260/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

Use of protected content by informationsociety service providers storing and giving
access to large amounts of works and othersubject-matter uploaded by their users

Use of protected content by informationsociety service providers storing and giving
access to works and other subject-matter

Amendment 9
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.
Information society service providers
that store and provide to the public access tolarge amounts of works or other subjectmatter uploaded by their users shall, in
cooperation with rightholders, takemeasures to ensure the functioning ofagreements concluded with rightholders forthe use of their works or other subjectmatter or to prevent the availability on theirservices of works or other subject-matter
identified by rightholders through thecooperation with the service providers.
Those measures, such as the use of effective
content recognition technologies, shall beappropriate and proportionate. The service
providers shall provide rightholders withadequate information on the functioning
and the deployment of the measures, as wellas, when relevant, adequate reporting on
the recognition and use of the works andother subject-matter.

1.
Where information society service
providers offer users content storage
services and provide the public with accessto content and where such activity is not
eligible for the liability exemptions provided
for in Directive 2000/31/EC, they shall takeappropriate and proportionate measures toensure the functioning of licensing
agreements concluded with rightholders. The
implementation of such agreements shallrespect the fundamental rights of users andshall not impose a general obligation on
information society service providers tomonitor the information which they transmit
or store, in accordance with Article 15 ofDirective 2000/31/EC.

Amendment 10
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

RR\1157669EN.docx

Amendment!261/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

1a.
For the purpose of ensuring thefunctioning of licensing agreements, as
referred to in paragraph 1, informationsociety service providers and rightholders
shall cooperate with each other.
Rightholders shall accurately identify to
information society service providers theworks or other subject-matter in respect ofwhich they have the copyright. The
information society service providers shallinform rightholders of the measures
employed and the accuracy of theirfunctioning as well as, when relevant,periodically report on the use of the works
and other subject-matter.

Amendment 11
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.
Member States shall ensure that theservice providers referred to in paragraph 1
put in place complaints and redress
mechanisms that are available to users incase of disputes over the application of themeasures referred to in paragraph 1.

2.
Member States shall ensure that theservice providers referred to in paragraph 1
in cooperation with rightholders put inplace complaints mechanisms that areavailable to users in case of disputes over the
implementation of the licensing agreements
referred to in paragraph 1.

Amendment 12
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

PE601.094v02-00

EN

Amendment!262/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

2a.
Member States shall ensure thatusers have access to a court or anothercompetent authority for the purpose of
asserting their right of use under an
exception or limitation and to appeal any
restrictive measures agreed upon pursuant
to paragraph 3.

Amendment 13
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.
Member States shall facilitate, whereappropriate, the cooperation between theinformation society service providers andrightholders through stakeholder dialogues todefine best practices, such as appropriate
and proportionate content recognition
technologies, taking into account, among
others, the nature of the services, theavailability of the technologies and theireffectiveness in light of technologicaldevelopments.

3.
Member States shall facilitate, whereappropriate, the cooperation between theinformation society service providers
referred to in paragraph 1, user
representatives and rightholders throughstakeholder dialogues to define best practices
for the implementation of paragraph 1. The
measures undertaken shall be appropriate
and proportionate and shall take into
account, among others, the nature of theservices, the availability of the technologies
and their effectiveness in light oftechnological developments.

Amendment 14
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3 a (new)Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment
3a.
Hyperlinking to already publicly
available content shall not constitutecommunication to the public of the sourceof that content, where the hyperlink only
contains information necessary to find orrequest the source's contents.

RR\1157669EN.docx!263/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION
Title

Copyright in the Digital Single Market

References

COM(2016)0593 – C8-0383/2016 – 2016/0280(COD)

Committee responsible
Date announced in plenary

JURI
6.10.2016

Opinion by
Date announced in plenary

LIBE
16.3.2017

Rapporteur
Date appointed

Michał Boni
30.3.2017

Discussed in committee

29.5.2017

Date adopted

20.11.2017

Result of final vote

+:
–:
0:

Members present for the final vote

Asim Ademov, Jan Philipp Albrecht, Monika Beňová, Malin
Björk, Michał Boni, Agustín Díaz de Mera García Consuegra,
Frank Engel, Cornelia Ernst, Ana Gomes, Nathalie Griesbeck,
Sophia in ‘t Veld, Eva Joly, Dietmar Köster, Barbara Kudrycka,
Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monica
Macovei, Barbara Matera, József Nagy, Péter Niedermüller,
Soraya Post, Judith Sargentini, Birgit Sippel, Sergei Stanishev,
Helga Stevens, Traian Ungureanu, Bodil Valero, Marie-Christine
Vergiat, Udo Voigt, Josef Weidenholzer, Kristina Winberg, Tomáš
Zdechovský, Auke Zijlstra

Substitutes present for the final vote

Carlos Coelho, Pál Csáky, Maria Grapini, Anna Hedh, Jeroen
Lenaers, Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz

Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present
for the final vote

André Elissen, Eugen Freund, Elisabetta Gardini, Susanne Melior,
Virginie Rozière

PE601.094v02-00

EN

20.11.201736
5
3!264/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

+

36
ALDE

Nathalie Griesbeck, Sophia in 't Veld, Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz

ECR

Monica Macovei, Helga Stevens

GUE/NGL

Malin Björk, Cornelia Ernst, Marie-Christine Vergiat

PPE

Asim Ahmedov Ademov, Michał Boni, Carlos Coelho, Pál Csáky, Agustín Díaz de
Mera García Consuegra, Frank Engel, Barbara Kudrycka, Jeroen Lenaers, József Nagy,
Traian Ungureanu, Tomáš Zdechovský

S&D

Monika Beňová, Eugen Freund, Ana Gomes, Maria Grapini, Anna Hedh, Cécile
Kashetu Kyenge, Dietmar Köster, Susanne Melior, Péter Niedermüller, Soraya Post,
Birgit Sippel, Sergei Stanishev, Josef Weidenholzer

VERTS/ALE

Jan Philipp Albrecht, Eva Joly, Judith Sargentini, Bodil Valero

-

5
ENF

André Elissen, Auke ZijlstraNI

Udo Voigt

PPE

Elisabetta Gardini, Barbara Matera

0

3
EFDD

Kristina Winberg

S&D

Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Virginie Rozière

Key to symbols:+ : in favour- : against
0 : abstention

RR\1157669EN.docx!265/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE
Title

Copyright in the Digital Single Market

References

COM(2016)0593 – C8-0383/2016 – 2016/0280(COD)

Date submitted to Parliament

14.9.2016

Committee responsible
Date announced in plenary

JURI
6.10.2016

Committees asked for opinions
Date announced in plenary

INTA
6.10.2016

ITRE
6.10.2016

IMCO
6.10.2016

22.3.201713.7.2017

CULT
6.10.2016

LIBE
16.3.2017
Not delivering opinions
Date of decision

INTA
12.10.2016

Associated committees
Date announced in plenary

IMCO
19.1.2017

Rapporteurs
Date appointed

Axel Voss
12.10.2016

Discussed in committee

12.1.2017

Date adopted

20.6.2018

Result of final vote

+:
–:
0:

Members present for the final vote

Max Andersson, Joëlle Bergeron, Marie-Christine Boutonnet, JeanMarie Cavada, Mady Delvaux, Rosa Estaràs Ferragut, Enrico
Gasbarra, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Heidi Hautala,Mary Honeyball, Sajjad Karim, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Gilles
Lebreton, António Marinho e Pinto, Emil Radev, Julia Reda,
Evelyn Regner, Pavel Svoboda, József Szájer, Axel Voss, Francis
Zammit Dimech, Tadeusz Zwiefka

Substitutes present for the final vote

Isabella Adinolfi, Sergio Gaetano Cofferati, Luis de Grandes
Pascual, Geoffroy Didier, Angel Dzhambazki, Angelika Niebler,Jens Rohde

Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present
for the final vote

Luke Ming Flanagan

Date tabled

29.6.2018

PE601.094v02-00

EN

14
9
2

!266/!267

RR\1157669EN.docx

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

+

14
ALDE

Jean-Marie Cavada, António Marinho e Pinto

EFDDJoëlle Bergeron

ENF

Marie-Christine Boutonnet, Gilles Lebreton

PPE

Geoffroy Didier, Rosa Estaràs Ferragut, Pavel Svoboda, József Szájer, Axel Voss,Francis Zammit Dimech, Tadeusz Zwiefka

S&D

Enrico Gasbarra, Mary Honeyball

-

9
EFDD

Isabella Adinolfi

GUE/NGL

Luke Ming Flanagan

S&D

Mady Delvaux, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann,
Evelyn Regner

VERTS/ALE

Max Andersson, Heidi Hautala, Julia Reda

0

2
ECR

Angel Dzhambazki, Sajjad Karim

Key to symbols:+ : in favour- : against
0 : abstention

RR\1157669EN.docx!267/!267

PE601.094v02-00

EN