2018-04-30 10:54 GMT+02:00 Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov < [email protected]>:
> tl;dr > The Council of the EU failed to reach a decision on copyright reform last > Friday, meaning bickering between Member States will continue well into > May. Meanwhile the Parliament is making timid progress towards a committee > vote still scheduled on 21 June. > > > This and past reports: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Monitor > > === > Copyright Reform > > --- > > The Council: COREPER I is a body made up of the deputy heads of missions > of EU Member States. [1] A legislative file is usually put forward to this > body when the attachés (technical experts) have reached a compromise and > majority support seems ensured. The Bulgarian Presidency believed it had > such a compromise capable to secure a majority and referred it to COREPER > I. [2] There, it was discussed last Friday only to the rejected. Regardless > of the positive spin the Bulgarian Presidency is trying put on it [3], this > is a pretty embarrassing situation for them. > > --- > > So what? Had the proposal been accepted, the negotiations in Council > between the Member States would have come to a halt waiting for the > Parliament position. The compromise proposal put forward by Bulgaria was > not good, to say the least. It essentially does prescribe ex-ante > take-downs (so potential deletions of content before it even appears on > sites) of user uploaded content that is deemed as infringing by > rightsholders. And while there is a carve-out for an “online encyclopedia” > (Guess who they mean!), the situation with Wikimedia Commons and open > source code sharing platforms remained very unclear. The situation buys us > some time to motivate some Member States, most importantly Germany, to > update their position. Belgium and the Netherlands are the two countries > still vocally standing up for user rights and facing off a large group of > states demanding upload filters, which is lead by France. Big guns would be > needed to stop them. > > --- > > European Parliament: Some bits of the current text in the European > Parliament look better than in the Council, but we still cannot be contempt > with it. It seems that the the rapporteur Axel Voss is prioritising Article > 11 (ancillary copyright for press publishers) to Article 13 (upload > filters). We are especially worried the potential for an ex-ante filtering > provision, as in the Council. Other than that, the educational exception > seems to be a done deal, while safeguarding the public domain, freedom of > panorama, text and data mining and out-of-commerce works are still question > marks. > > --- > > Next steps: This week the EP is kicking off a new round of discussions > with a technical meeting (experts and legal advisors working on the Legal > Affairs Committee) on Wednesday. We are bracing for one to two negotiation > rounds each week and daily tactical manoeuvring on all sides until at least > the end of June. > > === > > Revision of the Public Sector Information Directive proposed > > --- > > First run through: The European Commission proposed a revision of the PSI > Directive last week. [4] The main goal is to broaden the current text by > opening up transportation data (including private companies that run > concession on behalf of public bodies), scientific data and to limit the > situations in which public bodies can demand payment for giving access to > data, documents and information. Skimming the proposal we see some very > positive changes, albeit we would have wished for a more ambitious text. > > --- > > Particularly interesting: Article 5 (4) says “Public sector bodies and > public undertakings shall make dynamic data available for re-use > immediately after collection, via suitable Application Programming > Interfaces (APIs).”, which is a great opportunity and of particular > interest to data applications. The issue with the Directive is the still > many carve-outs and exceptions to the rule. But this is one of the rare > times where we are starting with a “rather OK” Commission proposal and have > the chance to get something positive in the end without risking to worsen > our situation. > > === > > French Jurisprudence: Chambord vs. Kronenbourg > > --- > > Beer vs. castle: Chambord is a 16 century French castle owned by the > public. Kronenbourg is a popular French beer brand. The brewery used an > image of the former in an advertising campaign. The authority maintaining > the castle claimed that this was unauthorised use of images of the castle > and demanded indemnities. The court disagreed. [5] This is a ruling we > appreciate, as we are of the opinion that public domain works should be > free for re-use by all. > > What is allowed in France? The legal situation in France remains > complicated. In 2016 a French law established a new image right on national > cultural heritage sites. [6] Wikimédia France and La Quadrature du Net > petitioned the constitutional court claiming that this image right > unlawfully restricts the public domain. [7] While this was rejected [8], it > seems that the new decision in the Chambord case actually goes in the > direction of the claim made by WMFR and LQDN. > Chambord lost because the new law is not retroactive. The new law was adopted because Chambord was losing all the trials against Kronenbourg. > > [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_of_Permanent_Representatives > > [2]https://www.parlament.gv.at/PAKT/EU/XXVI/EU/01/86/EU_ > 18668/imfname_10803001.pdf > > [3]https://twitter.com/zlateea/status/989838220740517888 > > [4]https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/ > proposal-revision-directive-200398ec-reuse-public-sector-information > > [5]https://www.lanouvellerepublique.fr/loir-et-cher/commune/chambord/ > chambord-perd-son-action-en-justice-contre-kronenbourg > > [6]https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loi_relative_%C3%A0_la_ > libert%C3%A9_de_la_cr%C3%A9ation,_%C3%A0_l%27architecture_et_au_patrimoine > > [7]https://www.laquadrature.net/fr/Wikimedia-La-Quadrature-domaine-public- > Conseil-constitutionnel%20 > > [8]http://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/conseil- > constitutionnel/root/bank/download/2017687QPC2017687qpc_ccc.pdf > > > _______________________________________________ > Publicpolicy mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy > >
_______________________________________________ Publicpolicy mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy
