The draft European Parliament report on the InfoSoc Directive, sometimes also called the Copyright Directive, has generated an enormous wave of responses. It was presented by the Member of the Parliament (MEP) responsible for leading the file, Julia Reda, to the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) on 20 January.
What are the next steps and what is the report’s ultimate significance? After all of the relevant Committees have transmitted their opinions, JURI will vote on the report and transmit it to the Plenary. If it is adopted there, it becomes a non-legislative and non-binding resolution in which the Parliament states its current position on certain matters of copyright reform. The Parliament hereby communicates to the Commission what it expects of future copyright legislation. This in turn can shape the Commission’s proposal for copyright reform, which is expected within this year. The Parliament has a notoriously short memory, especially of its own positions, so it will not consider itself bound by anything it decides upon now.
Everyone is talking about EU copyright reform. However, in the European Parliament, everyone is having the same discussions on enforcement that they were having ten years ago – and talking about stopping any reform.
The Draft Report “Towards a renewed consensus on the enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: An EU Action Plan” (2014/2151(INI)) presented by Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Pavel Svoboda reacts supportively to the rather bland, regressive and unimaginative Commission Communication of the same name. Sadly, Mr Svoboda seems to be choosing to support the mistakes that the Commission’s view that the failures of the last ten years should be the model for the next decade.
The European Parliament is going to adopt a Resolution on TTIP. A resolution is a political statement which does not have binding effects. However, a strong resolution from the Parliament could be a step in the right direction.
The Committee on International Trade (INTA) is in charge of the dossier and it will be guided by Opinions from 14 other Committees before it submits its report to Plenary (vote scheduled 18-21 May).
On 25 November the European Parliament voted, by 383 votes to 271, in favour of a resolution to refer the EU-Canada agreement on Passenger Name Records (PNR) to the European Court of Justice (CJEU). The CJEU will now decide on the compliance of the agreement with EU law, in particular the Charter of Fundamental Rights. As explained in previous EDRi-gram articles, PNR data has become an attractive and invasive source for governments to obtain personal data.