[Fsfe-ie] Enforcement directive-deadlines

teresahackett at eircom.net teresahackett at eircom.net
Mon Jan 26 22:56:20 CET 2004

Thanks, Bernhard, for the info. Response below.
> I don't think that the deadline of amendments and the >vote will be this far apart. I wouldn greet such time >with applause if the EP would make all amendments which >are going to be tabled available to the public some weeks
>before the vote so that there is more time to compose >voting recomendations.
The deadline for tabling amendments is on the Parliament website; your link, then go to deadlines. I've been told that even if the vote is delayed to March, the deadline for amendments will still be 5.2.2004, I'll let you know if I hear any different. As you say, the dates are a movable feast, and every few days I get another story ;-) We just have to keep our ears to the ground.

> I'm hoping it can be delayed at least once and it would >be cool if we could get a "best of all" from council and >parliament without the bad points...
Same here, but I fear we're gonna get a "worst of all".

>If I understood what I've read correctly, the criminal >provisions are part of the orginal proposal(mainly >Article 20 - Provisions under criminal law) and JURI >adopted an amendment which is now Amendment No. 43 of the >JURI Report which deletes this aricle basically and >replaces it by a more generic text:
Yes, but there's a catch. The criminal provisions were part of the original Commission proposal, but the directive was aimed at "counterfeiting and piracy" and the scope was limited to large scale commercial infringments or which caused significant harm to the rightholder. The Parliament has widened the scope to include *all* infringements, however trivial, unintentional, unknowing and which cause no harm to the rightholder. So big deal that they replaced criminal with civil sanctions ;-) The problem is that the Council have taken the Parliament amendment to widen the scope but have kept the Commission criminal provisions text. This is totally the worst of both worlds, and not in line with the original objective of the proposal. If the Council maintain their Art 20, and the Parliment theirs, then there's a conflict and that might delay things into the next term.

The story continues...

Teresa Hackett
114 Cedar House
Mespil Estate, Sussex Road
Dublin 4, Ireland
Email: teresahackett at eircom.net
Dutch Mobile: +316 523 63486 (until 19.3.2004)
NEW! Irish Mobile +353 87 6253768

More information about the FSFE-IE mailing list