Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-15-Speech-2-333"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000215.14.2-333"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, the adoption of the WIPO agreements was a very positive step in the direction of the global information society. The agreements crystallise the decades-old legacy of copyright, and they represent a precisely considered and balanced solution for the regulation of copyright and neighbouring rights. The entry into force of the treaties and their final form is, however, in addition to this recommendation, dependent on implementation by the parties themselves. In the United States the WIPO Treaty has already entered into force, having been enacted into law by means of the Digital Millennium Corporate Act and there they have managed to retain the delicate balance of the Treaty by means of this legislation.
The EU too must proceed in its legislative work in accordance with what is agreed in the WIPO. It is worrying that the position adopted by the previous Parliament does not support this balanced WIPO system. The opinion on the copyright directive at first reading was very distorted, and, furthermore, the balance is moving in a harmful direction from the point of view of Europeans. The recommendations that have been made will not improve the status of culture in Europe, on the contrary. Parliament’s amendments would mainly improve opportunities for the media enterprises that are well established in the market to move their old, in excess of 80% market share to a new environment with rigid, excessive copyright regulations. I am not now speaking of Charlotte Cederschiöld’s recommendation, which is an excellent paper, but of the matters of copyright that the previous Parliament discussed.
On one point of detail, I would like to thank Mrs Cederschiöld for having clarified, for example, the concept of so-called temporary copies in her opinion. There is no consciously adopted position in the WIPO Treaty on temporary copies. If these, which technically speaking are copies, were covered by the protection in force it would make the transfer of information – as the recommendation quite rightly states – expensive and complicated for no good reason. It would be as if the deliveryman had to pay a copyright fee whenever he carried a book to be read by the purchaser. The real benefit of culture is that art and knowledge can be transferred safely and easily from the artist directly to the user, the consumer. The new operational environment is, above all, a huge opportunity to create and spread culture in a different way than ever before. It is essential that the interests of all parties are taken into account. Parliament has tried to take account of this in its own recommendation."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples