Parltrack

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1 a (new)

(1a) Data and information produced by Member States' governments, the public sector and EU institutions and bodies, constitute a vast, diverse and valuable pool of resources that can benefit the knowledge economy.

Amendment 13 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2

(2) Open data policies which encourage the wide availability and re-use of public sector information for private or commercial purposes, with minimal or no legal, technical or financial constraints, can play an important role in kick-starting the development of new services based on novel ways to combine and make use of such information, stimulate economic growth and promote social engagement. However, this requires a level playing field at Union level in terms of whether or not the re-use of documents is authorised, which cannot be achieved by leaving it up to the different rules and practices of the Member States or the public bodies concerned.

Amendment 14 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3

(3) Allowing re-use of data and documents held by a public sector body adds value for the re- users, for the end users ~~and~~, for the society in general and ~~in many cases~~ for the public body itself, by promoting transparency and providing feedback from re- users and end users which allows the holder to improve the quality of the information collected.

Amendment 15 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) Directive 2003/98/EC does not ~~contain~~justify an obligation ~~to allow re-use of~~for Member States to allow access to, and re-use of, public-sector documents. The decision whether or not to authorise re-use remains with the Member States or the public sector body concerned. The Directive only harmonises the conditions subject to which documents are made available for re-use. At the same time, the Directive builds on national rules on access to documents. Some Member States have expressly linked the right of re- use to this right of access, ~~so that all generally accessible documents are re-usable. In other Member States, the link between the two sets of rules is less clear and this is a source of legal uncertainty~~whereas other Member States have legally separated the right of re-use from national rules on access to information and freedom of information.

Amendment 16 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)

(6a) National regulations on access to public documents are based on transparency and freedom of information. In some cases, however, this right is restricted, for example to those who have a particular interest in these documents or in cases in which the documents contain sensitive information relating, for example, to national or public security.

Amendment 17 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)

(6a) The obligation to make all generally available documents re-usable should be done while guaranteeing the protection of privacy and personal data at Union level in respect with the Union data protection legislation, including in cross-border data reuse, by ensuring the anonymisation of the personal data, where appropriate.

Amendment 18 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 b (new)

(6b) Directive 2003/98/EC does not contain an obligation for Member States to digitise analogue material which they have available, or to make it machine- readable in a technologically neutral manner. Public sector bodies may themselves decide what data are to be digitised when and under what conditions.

Amendment 19 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 c (new)

(6c) Directive 2003/98/EC applies to documents the supply of which forms part of the public task of the public-sector bodies concerned, as defined by law or by other binding rules in the Member State in question. It should be possible for this public task to be defined for the bodies concerned either in general or from case to case.

Amendment 20 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) Directive 2003/98/EC should therefore lay down a clear obligation for Member States to make all generally available documents re-usable. As it constitutes a limitation to the intellectual property rights hold by the authors of the documents, the scope of such a link between the right of access and the right of use should be narrowed to what is strictly necessary to reach the objectives pursued by its introduction. In this respect, tTaking into account the Union legislation and Member States' and Union's international obligations, notably under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (the TRIPS Agreement), documents on which third parties hold intellectual property rights should be excluded from the scope of Directive 2003/98/EC. If a third party was the initial owner of a document held by libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives that is still protected by intellectual property rights, that document should, for the purpose of this Directive, be considered as a document for which third parties hold intellectual property rights.

Amendment 21 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) Directive 2003/98/EC ~~should therefore lay down a clear obligation for Member States to make all generally available documents re-usable. As it constitutes a limitation to~~limits the intellectual property rights hoeld by the authors of the documents~~, t~~. The scope of such a link between the right of access and the right of use should therefore be narrowed to what is strictly necessary to reach the objectives pursued by its introduction. In this respect, taking into account the Union legislation and Member States' and Union's international obligations, notably under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (the TRIPS Agreement), documents on which third parties hold intellectual property rights should be excluded from the scope of Directive 2003/98/EC. If a third party was the initial owner of a document held by libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives that is still protected by intellectual property rights, that document should, for the purpose of this Directive, be considered as a document for which third parties hold intellectual property rights.

Amendment 22 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) Directive 2003/98/EC should therefore lay down a clear obligation for Member States ~~to make all generally available documents~~, as well as the European Union institutions and bodies, to make all generally available documents re-usable and to generate all such future documents with a view of being re-usable. As it constitutes a limitation to the intellectual property rights hold by the authors of the documents, the scope of such a link between the right of access and the right of use should be narrowed to what is strictly necessary to reach the objectives pursued by its introduction. In this respect, taking into account the Union legislation and Member States' and Union's international obligations, notably under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (the TRIPS Agreement), documents on which third parties hold intellectual property rights should be excluded from the scope of Directive 2003/98/EC. If a third party was the initial owner of a document held by libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives that is still protected by intellectual property rights, that document should, for the purpose of this Directive, be considered as a document for which third parties hold intellectual property rights.

Amendment 23 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) Directive 2003/98/EC should therefore lay down ~~a clear obligation for~~that Member States to make all generally available documents re-usable. As it constitutes a limitation to the intellectual property rights hold by the authors of the documents, the scope of such a link between the right of access and the right of use should be narrowed to what is strictly necessary to reach the objectives pursued by its introduction. In this respect, taking into account the Union legislation and Member States' and Union's international obligations, notably under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (the TRIPS Agreement), documents on which third parties hold intellectual property rights should be excluded from the scope of Directive 2003/98/EC. If a third party was the initial owner of a document held by libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives that is still protected by intellectual property rights, that document should, for the purpose of this Directive, be considered as a document for which third parties hold intellectual property rights.

Amendment 24 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)

(7a) For the purpose of identifying documents the supply of which is an activity falling outside the scope of the public task of the public sector bodies concerned as defined by law or by other binding rules in the Member State, the public task could be defined generally or on a case-by-case basis for individual public sector bodies.

Amendment 25 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)

(7a) Documents in the public domain held by libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives will be presumed to be reusable.

Amendment 26 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 b (new)

(7b) This Directive should be implemented and applied in full compliance with the principles relating to the protection of personal data in accordance with the Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of data and of the free movement of such data. In particular, the granting of permission to re-use documents access to which is not restricted by virtue of access regimes in the Member States should respect the restrictions set by national law in compliance with Directive 95/46/EC on processing of personal data contained therein.

Amendment 27 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) The scope of application of the Directive is extended to libraries (including university libraries), museums, public bodies managing archaeological and cultural sites and archives. The Directive does not apply to other cultural institutions, such as operas, ballets or theatres, including the archives that are part of these institutions.

Amendment 28 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)

(10a) As regards the description, digitisation and presentation of cultural collections, there are numerous cooperation arrangements between libraries (including university libraries), museums, archives and private partners which involve public sector bodies granting exclusive rights of access and commercial exploitation to cooperation partners. Practice has shown that these public-private partnerships can facilitate worthwhile use of cultural collections and at the same time that they accelerate access to the cultural heritage for members of the public. Directive 2003/98/EC should therefore not preclude the conclusion of agreements granting exclusive rights. Moreover, cultural institutions should be free to choose for themselves the partners with which they wish to cooperate, subject to compliance with the principles of transparency and non-discrimination.

Amendment 29 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)

(10a) The European Union institutions and bodies should lead by example in the re-use of public sector information, thus transforming information management across the public sector, promoting best practices and developing innovative technology solutions.

Amendment 30 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 b (new)

(10b) The application of the Directive is extended to regional governments and local authorities, which constitute a particularly valuable source of public service data.

Amendment 31 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11

(11) To facilitate re-use, public sector bodies should make documents available through machine readable formats and together with their metadata where possible and appropriate, using open standards where possible, in a format that ensures interoperability , e.g. by processing them in a way consistent with the principles governing the compatibility and usability requirements for spatial information under Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE)23

Amendment 32 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11

(11) To facilitate re-use, public sector bodies should make documents available through technology-neutral machine- readable formats and together with their metadata where possible and appropriate, in a format that ensures interoperability , e.g. by processing them in a way consistent with the principles governing the compatibility and usability requirements for spatial information under Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE)22.

Amendment 33 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11

(11) To facilitate re-use, public sector bodies should make documents available through technology-neutral machine readable formats and together with their metadata where possible and appropriate, in a format that ensures interoperability , e.g. by processing them in a way consistent with the principles governing the compatibility and usability requirements for spatial information under Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE)23

Amendment 34 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 a (new)

(11a) A document should be considered as a document in a machine readable format if it is in a file format that is structured in such a way that software applications can easily identify, recognise and extract data of interest from it. Data encoded in files that are structured in a machine-readable format are machine-readable data. Machine-readable formats can exist as formal open standards or not. Documents encoded in a file format that limits such automatic processing, because the data cannot or cannot easily be extracted from these documents, should not be considered as documents in machine- readable format. Member States should when appropriate encourage the use of open, machine-readable formats.

Amendment 35 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) Where charges are made for supplying and allowing the re-use of documents, they should in principle be limited to the marginal costs ~~incurred for their reproduction and dissemination, unless exceptionally justified according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria. T~~. However, the necessity of not hindering the normal running of public sector bodies that cover~~ing~~ a substantial part of the ~~operating~~ir costs relating to the performance of their public task ~~from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights should notably be taken into consideration~~or any particular activity falling within their public task as well as the normal running of libraries, museums and archives should notably be taken into consideration. Those public sector bodies should be allowed to charge higher charges for re-use. The total income from supplying and allowing re-use of documents should not exceed the cost of collection, production, reproduction and dissemination, together with a reasonable return on investment. The burden of proving that charges are cost-oriented and comply with relevant ~~limits~~criteria should lie with the public sector body charging for the re- use of documents.

Amendment 36 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) Where charges are made for supplying and allowing the re-use of documents, they should in principle be limited to the marginal costs ~~incurred for their reproduction and dissemination, unless exceptionally justified according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria. T~~. However, the necessity of not hindering the normal running of public sector bodies that are required to cover~~ing~~ a substantial part of the ~~operating~~ir costs relating to the performance of their public task ~~from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights should notably be taken into consideration~~as well as the normal running of libraries, museums and archives should notably be taken into consideration. Those public sector bodies should be allowed to charge higher charges for re-use. Such charges above marginal costs should be set according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria and the total income from supplying and allowing re-use of documents should not exceed the cost of collection, production, reproduction and dissemination, together with a reasonable return on investment. The burden of proving that charges are cost-oriented and comply with relevant ~~limits~~criteria should lie with the public sector body charging for the re- use of documents.

Amendment 37 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) Where charges are made for the re-use of documents, they should in principle be limited to the marginal costs incurred for their reproduction, provision and dissemination, unless exceptionally justified according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria. The necessity of not hindering the normal running of public sector bodies covering a substantial part of the operating cost relating to the performance of their public task from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights should notably be taken into consideration. ~~The burden of proving that charges are cost-oriented and comply with relevant limits should lie with the public sector body charging for the re- use of documents.~~

Amendment 38 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) Where charges are made for the re-use of documents, they should in principle be limited to the marginal costs incurred for their reproduction and formatting, ensuring of their interoperability and dissemination, unless exceptionally justified according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria. The necessity of not hindering the normal running of public sector bodies covering a substantial part of the operating cost relating to the performance of their public task from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights should notably be taken into consideration. The burden of proving that charges are cost-oriented and comply with relevant limits should lie with the public sector body charging for the re- use of documents.

Amendment 39 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13

(13) In relation to any re-use that is made of the document, public sector bodies ~~may~~shall, where practicable, impose conditions on the re-user, such as acknowledgment of source. ~~Any licences for the re-use of public sector information should in any case place as few restrictions on re-use as possible.~~ Open licences available online, which grant wider re-use rights without technological, financial or geographical limitations and relying on open data formats, may also play an important role in this respect. Therefore, Member States should encourage the use of open government licences.

Amendment 40 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13

(13) In relation to any re-use that is made of the document, public sector bodies may, where practicable, impose conditions on the re-user, such as acknowledgment of source. Any licences for the re-use of public sector information should in any case place as few restrictions on re-use as possible. Open licences available online, which grant wider re-use rights without technological, financial or geographical limitations and relying on open data formats, may also play an important role in this respect. Therefore, Member States should encourage the use of open government licences that enable free re- use, including commercial re-use.

Amendment 41 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14

(14) Proper implementation of some of the features of this Directive, such as means of redress, compliance with charging principles and reporting obligations require supervision by ~~independent authorities competent on the re-use of public sector information~~a competent impartial body, entitled to review any public sector body's decision on re-use. To ensure consistency between approaches at Union level, coordination between the ~~independent authorit~~se bodies should be encouraged, particularly through exchange of information on best practices and data re- use policies.

Amendment 42 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14

(14) Proper implementation of some of the features of this Directive, such as means of redress, compliance with charging principles and reporting obligations require ~~supervision by independent~~review by authorities competent on the re- use of public sector information. Member States have a responsibility to make appropriate national authorities responsible for this review. To ensure consistency between approaches at Union level, coordination between the independent authorities should be encouraged, particularly through exchange of information on best practices and data re- use policies.

Amendment 43 #

Béla KOVÁCS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15

(15) Since the objective of this Directive, namely to facilitate the creation of Union- wide information products and services based on public sector documents, to ensure the effective cross-border use of public sector documents by private companies, focusing on small and medium enterprises, for added-value information products and services, and to limit distortions of competition on the Union market, cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States and can therefore, in view of the intrinsic pan- European scope of the proposed action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. In accordance with the principles of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.

Amendment 44 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15 a (new)

(15a) Documents and works, including audio and audiovisual productions, produced by public service broadcasters and other bodies or their subsidiaries for the fulfilment of a public service broadcasting remit should as a principle be re-usable. The possibility of accessing and re-using such publicly funded documents would be particularly beneficial to stimulate production of derivative creative content and would allow a future lifecycle for works that are held in public broadcasters' archives.

Amendment 45 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15 a (new)

(15a) Each member state shall make public service information easily available through a central point of access, such a national PSI portal, thus ensuring that datasets are easy to find and exploit both nationally and across-borders. The European Commission shall create a central European repository of its own public service information that should also act as a gateway to national PSI portals.

Amendment 46 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 17

(17) It is necessary to ensure that the Member States (see recital 19) report to the Commission on the extent of the re-use of public sector information, the conditions under which it is made available, and the work of the i~~ndependent authorit~~mpartial body. To ensure consistency between approaches at Union level, coordination between the i~~ndependent authorit~~mpartial bodies should be encouraged, particularly through exchange of information on best practices and data re-use policies.

Amendment 47 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Recital 18

(18) The Commission should assist the Member States in implementing the Directive in a consistent way by ~~giv~~making ~~guidance~~proposals, particularly on charging and calculation of costs, on recommended licensing conditions and on formats, after consulting interested parties.

Amendment 48 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 18

(18) The Commission ~~should~~may assist the Member States in implementing the Directive in a consistent way by giving guidance, particularly on charging and calculation of costs, on recommended licensing conditions and on formats, after consulting interested parties.

Amendment 49 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point 1 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b

(1a) In paragraph 2, point (b) is replaced by the following: "(b) documents for which third parties hold intellectual property rights, including documents held by a university library in which the university holds intellectual property rights;".

Amendment 50 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point d

(1a) In paragraph 2, point (d) is deleted.

Amendment 51 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point e

‘“(e) documents held by educational and research establishments, ~~such as research facilities, including, where relevant,~~including organisations established for the transfer of research results, schools and universities (except university libraries in respect of documents other than research documents protected by third party intellectual property rights) and ;’”

Amendment 52 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point 2 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)

(2a) In paragraph 2, the following point is inserted after point (e): “(ea) documents held by archives, museums or libraries (including university libraries) of a particularly sensitive religious nature or that involve traditional knowledge;”

Amendment 53 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point f

‘“(f) documents held by cultural establishments, other than libraries, museums, public bodies managing archaeological and cultural sites, and archives;’”

Amendment 54 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point 3 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 1– paragraph 3

(3a) In Article 1, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: “3. This Directive builds on and is without prejudice to access regimes in the Member States.”

Amendment 55 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point 5 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 1– paragraph 5 a (new)

"5a. Public bodies should ensure that access to and re-use of public sector information comply with the Union data protection legislation."

Amendment 56 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 2 – paragraph 1

1a. In Article 2 paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: "1. 'public sector body' means the State, regional or local authorities, bodies governed by public law and associations formed by one or several such authorities or one or several such bodies governed by public law and other undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest (SGEI);".

Amendment 57 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 b (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a

1b. In Article 2 paragraph 2, point (a) is replaced by the following: "(a) established for the specific purpose of meeting needs in the general interest, not having exclusively an industrial or commercial character; and".

Amendment 58 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 c (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point a

1c. In Article 2 (Definitions) paragraph 3, point (a) is replaced by the following: (a) any content whatever its medium (written on paper or stored in electronic form or as a sound, visual or audiovisual recording, including software source code);

Amendment 59 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 2 – point 6

6. “"machine-readable”" means that digital documents are ~~sufficiently~~ structured ~~for~~so that software applications ~~to identify reliably individual statements of fact and their internal structure~~can, in a technology-neutral manner, extract individual data which are of interest.

Amendment 60 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 2 – point 6

(6) 'machine-readable' means that digital documents are ~~sufficiently~~ structured ~~for~~so that software applications ~~to identify reliably individual statements of fact and their internal structure.’~~can, in a technology-neutral manner, extract individual data which are of interest.'

Amendment 61 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 2 – point 6

6. “machine-readable” means that a digital document~~s are sufficiently structured for~~ is structured in such a way that software applications ~~to identify reliabl~~can reliably identify individual statements of fact and their internal structure.

Amendment 62 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 2 – paragraph 6 a (new)

2a. In Article 2 the following paragraph is added: "6a. undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest are defined by Commission Decision of 28 November 2005 on the application of Article 106(2) Treaty on the functioning of the European Union to state aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest. The documents subject to this directive are the documents strictly connected to the operation of services of general economic interest.".

Amendment 63 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 2 – paragraph 6 a (new)

2a. In Article 2 the following paragraph is added: 6a. "generally accessible documents" means documents that are accessible under the national rules on access to documents. This includes, where applicable, documents held by private organisations carrying out a public task.

Amendment 64 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2 b (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 2 – paragraph 6 b (new)

2b. In Article 2 the following paragraph is added: "6b. "formal standard" means a standard which has been codified in written form, detailing specifications for the requirements on how to make interoperable software for the management of files.".

Amendment 65 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2 c (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 2 – paragraph 6 c (new)

2c. In Article 2 the following paragraph is added: "6c. "open format" means that the format's specification is maintained by a not-for-profit organisation the membership of which is not contingent on membership fees; its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an open decision-making procedure available to all interested parties; the format specification document is available freely; the intellectual property of the standard is made irrevocably available on a royalty- free basis.".

Amendment 66 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 1

(1) Subject to paragraph (2) Member States shall ensure that documents of public sector bodies referred to in Article 1 shall be re-usable for commercial or non- commercial purposes in accordance with the conditions set out in Chapters III and IV, provided that the documents concerned are of types classified as accessible under the rules which exist in the Member States regarding access to public sector information. Where possible, these documents shall be disseminated in technology-neutral, machine-readable form.

Amendment 67 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 1

Amendment 68 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 2

(2) For documents for which libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives have intellectual property rights, Member States shall ensure that, where the re-use of documents is allowed, these documents shall be re-usable for commercial or non-commercial purposes in accordance with the conditions set out in Chapters III and IV, provided that the documents concerned are of types classified as accessible under the rules which exist in the Member States regarding access to public-sector information. Where possible, these documents shall be disseminated in technology-neutral, machine-readable form.

Amendment 69 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4 – point 2 – introductory part

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 4

(2) ~~At the end of paragraph 4, the following wording is added~~Paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

Amendment 70 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 4

‘'The means of redress shall include a reference to the possibility of review by an ~~independent authority that is vested with specific regulatory powers regard~~authority ing the ~~re-use of public sector information and whose decisions are binding upon the public sector body concerned.’~~Member States.'

Amendment 71 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 4

Any decision on re-use shall contain a reference to the means of redress in case the applicant wishes to appeal the decision. The means of redress shall include the possibility of review by an i~~ndependent~~mpartial review body, such as the national competition authority, th~~at is vested with specific regulatory power~~e national access to documents authority or the national judicial authority, that has the authority to investigate complaints regarding the re-use of public sector ~~information~~documents and whose decisions ~~are binding upon~~must be considered by the public sector body concerned.

Amendment 72 #

Béla KOVÁCS

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 4

The means of redress shall include the possibility of review by an independent authority that ~~is vested with specific~~has regulatory powers regarding the re-use of public sector information and whose decisions are binding upon the public sector body concerned.

Amendment 73 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 4

The means of redress shall include the possibility of review by an i~~ndependent authorit~~mpartial body that is vested with specific regulatory powers regarding the re-use of public sector information and whose decisions are binding upon the public sector body concerned.

Amendment 74 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 5 – paragraph 1

(1) In paragraph 1, the words ‘through electronic means’ are replaced by ‘in machine-readable format and together with their metadata, both of which in so far as possible should comply with open, formal standards.’.

Amendment 75 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 5 – paragraph 1

1. ~~In p~~Paragraph 1~~, the words ‘through electronic means’ are replaced by ‘in machine-readable format and together with their metadata.’.~~ is replaced by the following: '1. 'Public sector bodies shall make their documents available in the pre-existing formats or languages and, where possible and appropriate, in technology-neutral, machine-readable format and together with their metadata. This shall not imply an obligation for public sector bodies to create, digitise or adapt documents or render them machine-readable in a technology-neutral manner in order to comply with the request, nor shall it imply an obligation to provide extracts from documents where this would involve disproportionate effort, going beyond a simple operation.'

Amendment 76 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 5 – paragraph 1

(1) InArticle 5, paragraph 1~~, the words ‘through electronic means’ are replaced by ‘~~ is replaced by the following: Public sector bodies shall make their documents available in any pre existing format or language and where possible and appropriate, in machine-readable format based on open standards together with their metadata. Documents created after entry into force of this Directive shall in principle be made available in machine- readable format ~~and together with their metadata.’~~. This shall not imply an obligation where the adaptation of existing documents, including the provision of extracts, would involve disproportionate effort, according to transparent, objective and verifiable criteria.

Amendment 77 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1

1. Documents will be made available at zero cost wherever possible. Where charges are made for the re-use of documents, the total amount charged by public sector bodies shall be limited to the marginal costs incurred for their reproduction and dissemination.

Amendment 78 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1

1. Where charges are made for the re-use of documents, the total amount charged by public sector bodies shall be limited to the marginal costs incurred for their collection, production, reproduction and dissemination.

Amendment 79 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1

(1) Where charges are made for the re-use of documents, the total amount charged by public sector bodies shall be limited to the marginal costs incurred for their reproduction, provision and dissemination.’

Amendment 80 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1

1. Where charges are made for the re-use of documents, the total amount charged by public sector bodies shall be limited to the marginal costs incurred for their reproduction, provision and dissemination.

Amendment 81 #

Béla KOVÁCS

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 2

Amendment 82 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 2

(2) InParagraph 1 shall not apply to: (a) exceptional cases, in ~~particular where~~which public sector bodies generate a substantial part of their operating costs relating to the performance of their public service tasks from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights, public sector bodies may be allowed to charge for the re-use of documents over and above the marginal costs, according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria, provided this is inneed to make a profit in order to cover a large part of the costs they have incurred in carrying out their public ~~interest and subject to the approval of the independent authority referred to in Article 4(4), and without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Article.’~~remit; (b) libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives.

Amendment 83 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 2

2. In exceptional cases, in particular where public sector bodies generate a substantial part of their operating costs relating to the performance of their public service tasks from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights, public sector bodies may be allowed to charge for the re-use of documents over and above the marginal costs, according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria, provided this is in the public interest and subject to the approval of the independent authority referred to in Article 4(4), and without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4 of this ArticleParagraph 1 shall not apply to the following: (a) Public sector bodies that are required to generate revenue to cover a substantial part of the costs of collection, production, reproduction and dissemination of documents. (b) Libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives.

Amendment 84 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 2

2. ~~In exceptional cases, in particular where~~Paragraph 1 shall not apply to public sector bodies that generate revenue to cover a substantial part of their ~~operating~~ costs relating to the performance of their public service tasks from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights, public sector bodies may be allowed to charge for the re-use of documents over and above the marginal costs, according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria, provided this is tasks or any particular activity falling within their public ~~interest and subject to the approval of the independent authority referred to in Article 4(4), an~~tasks. This exclusion shall be applied without prejudice to paragraph~~s 3 and~~ 4 of this Article.

Amendment 85 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 2

2. In exceptional cases, in particular where public sector bodies generate a substantial part of their operating costs relating to the performance of their public service tasks from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights, public sector bodies may be allowed to charge for the re-use of documents over and above the marginal costs, according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria, provided this is in the public interest and subject to the approval of the independent authority referred to in Article 4(4)public sector bodies, where PSI revenues form a substantial part of their operational budget, may be expressly permitted by the independent authority to charge over and above the marginal cost for the costs of collection, production, reproduction and/ or dissemination of documents. These exceptions should be granted by the independent authority on a case-by-case basis, provided this is in the public interest and according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria, and without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Aarticle, and shall be reviewed every three years.

Amendment 86 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6– paragraph 2

Amendment 87 #

Franck PROUST

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 2

2. ~~In exceptional cases, in particular w~~Where public sector bodies generate a substantial part of their operating costs relating to the performance of their public service tasks from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights, public sector bodies may be allowed to charge for the re- use of documents over and above the marginal costs, according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria, provided this is in the public interest and subject to the approval of the ~~independent~~ authority referred to in Article 4(4), and without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Article.’

Amendment 88 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 3

~~3. Notwithstanding paragraphs 1 and 2, libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives may charge over and above the marginal costs for the re- use of documents they hold.~~deleted

Amendment 89 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 3

~~(3) Notwithstanding paragraphs 1 and 2, libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives may charge over and above the marginal costs for the re- use of documents they hold.’~~deleted

Amendment 90 #

Franck PROUST

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 3

3. Notwithstanding paragraphs 1 and 2, libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives may charge over and above the marginal costs for the re-use of documents they hold.’ These charges shall be fixed on the basis of objective, transparent and verifiable criteria, subject to the approval of the authority referred to in Article 4(4). The authority shall take the flexibility of these establishments into account when establishing their tariff structure.

Amendment 91 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 4

2. The existing text of Article 6 becomes paragraph 4. and shall read as follows: ‘4. Where charges as referred to in paragraph 2 are made, the total charges should be set in accordance with objective, transparent and variable criteria, and the total income from supplying and allowing re-use of documents shall not exceed the cost of collection, production, reproduction, provision and dissemination, together with a reasonable return on investment. Charges as referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 should be cost-oriented over the appropriate accounting period and calculated in line with the accounting principles applicable to the public sector bodies involved.’

Amendment 92 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 4

(2) The existing text of Article 6 becomes paragraph 4 amended in the following way: Where charges are made under paragraphs 2 and 3, the total income from supplying and allowing re-use of documents shall not exceed the cost of collection, production, reproduction and dissemination, together with a reasonable return on investment. Charges should be cost-oriented over the appropriate accounting period and calculated in line with the accounting principles applicable to the public sector bodies involved.

Amendment 93 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 4

(2) ~~The existing text of Article 6 becomes paragraph 4.~~Where charges are made under paragraph 2, the total charges shall be set according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria and the total income from supplying and allowing re-use of documents shall not exceed the cost of collection, production, reproduction, dissemination, preservation and rights clearance, together with a reasonable return on investment. Charges should be cost-oriented over the appropriate accounting period and calculated in line with the accounting principles applicable to the public sector bodies involved

Amendment 94 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 2 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)

2a. The following paragraph shall be inserted after paragraph 4: ‘4a. Member States shall appoint a national authority which is suitable and possesses the right expertise to review compliance with the criteria for calculating charges referred to in paragraph 4.’

Amendment 95 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 2 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)

(2 a) The following paragraph shall be inserted : "4a. Member States shall designate the appropriate body or appropriate bodies, other than the public sector body itself, competent to lay down the criteria for charging above marginal costs as laid out in paragraph 4.".

Amendment 96 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 5

~~(3) A new paragraph 5 is added: The burden of proving that charges comply with this Article shall lie with the public sector body charging for re-use.~~deleted

Amendment 97 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 5

~~‘The burden of proving that charges comply with this Article shall lie with the public sector body charging for re-use.’~~deleted

Amendment 98 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 7

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 7

(7) In Article 7 (Transparency), the ~~words ‘over and above the marginal costs or’ are inserted after ‘calculation of charges’.~~third sentence is replaced by the following: ‘The public sector body in question shall also indicate which factors will be taken into account in the calculation of charges as referred to in Article 6.’

Amendment 99 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 8 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 8 – paragraph 1

‘1. Public sector bodies may allow re-use of documents without conditions or may impose conditions, ~~such as indication of source,~~ where appropriate through a licence dealing with relevant issues. These conditions shall not unnecessarily restrict possibilities for re- use and shall not be used to restrict competition.’

Amendment 100 #

Lena KOLARSKA-BOBIŃSKA

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 8 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 8 – paragraph 1

"1. Public sector bodies may allow re-use without conditions for non-commercial use or may impose conditions, such as indication of source, where appropriate through a licence. When used for commercial purposes, a minimum condition of the indication of source shall be required. These conditions shall not unnecessarily restrict possibilities for re- use and shall not be used to restrict competition."

Amendment 101 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 8 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 8 – paragraph 1

‘Public sector bodies may allow re-use ~~without conditions or may impose conditions, such as~~by requiring indication of source, where appropriate through a licence. These conditions shall not unnecessarily restrict possibilities for re-use and shall not be used to restrict competition.’

Amendment 102 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 9

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 9

Member States shall ensure that practical arrangements facilitating the cross- lingual search for documents available for re-use are in place, such as asset lists of main documents with relevant metadata, accessible preferably online and in machine-readable format, and portal sites that are linked to decentralised asset lists. This shall not imply an obligation for public sector bodies to create or adapt documents in order to comply with the request, nor shall it imply an obligation to provide extracts from documents where this would involve disproportionate effort, going beyond a simple operation.

Amendment 103 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 9

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 9

Member States shall ~~ensure that~~make practical arrangements to facilitat~~ing the cross-lingual~~e searches for documents available for re-use ~~are in place~~throughout the Union, such as asset lists of main documents with relevant metadata, accessible preferably ~~online and in~~in technology- neutral, machine-readable format, and portal sites that are linked to ~~decentralised~~ asset lists.’

Amendment 104 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 9

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 9

Member States shall ~~ensur~~facilitate that practical arrangements f~~acilitating~~or the cross- lingual search for documents available for re-use ~~are in place~~, such as asset lists of main documents with relevant metadata, accessible preferably ~~online and in~~in technology-neutral, machine-readable format, and portal sites that are linked to ~~decentralised~~ asset lists.

Amendment 105 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 9

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 9

Member States shall ~~ensure that~~make practical arrangements facilitating the ~~cross- lingual~~ search for documents available for re-use ~~are in place,~~ such as asset lists of main documents with relevant metadata, ~~accessible preferably~~preferably accessible online and in machine-readable format, and portal sites that are linked to decentralised asset lists.

Amendment 106 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 9 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 9 a (new)

9a. The following article is inserted: "Article 9a In order to contribute to a consistent implementation of this Article, the Commission may adopt guidelines with a list of recommended datasets available for re-use."

Amendment 107 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 9 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 2

9a. In Article 11, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: '2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, where an exclusive right is necessary for the provision of the service in the public interest, the validity of the reason that justified the authorization of the exclusive right will have to be reconsidered every year, except in those cases in which the inversion involves a pay-back superior to the year in which it will have to be reconsidered at least every three years. The exclusive arrangements established after the entry into force of this Directive shall be transparent and made public.'

Amendment 108 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 9 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 2

9a. Article 11(2) is replaced by the following: ‘2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, where an exclusive right is necessary for the provision of a service in the public interest, the validity of the exclusive rights arrangement shall be subject to regular review, and shall, in any event, be reviewed every four years. The exclusive arrangements established after the entry into force of this Directive shall be subject to the principle of transparency and shall be made public by the public sector bodies concerned.’

Amendment 109 #

Franck PROUST

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 9 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 2

9a. In Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements), the following sentence is added at the end of paragraph 2: "Nevertheless, where the exclusive right relates specifically to the digitisation of data and information of a cultural nature, it shall be reviewed at intervals of no more than ten years."

Amendment 110 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 9 b (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)

9b. In Article 11, the following paragraph is inserted: '2a. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, where an exclusive right is granted in connection with the commercial exploitation which is necessary in order to digitise cultural collections, the commercial exploitation shall not continue for longer than seven years. During this period, the exclusive right need not be reviewed. The exclusive arrangements established after the entry into force of this Directive shall be transparent and made public. Where an exclusive right relating to the preferential commercial exploitation necessary to digitise cultural resources exists, the public sector body shall be provided with a copy of the digitised cultural resources as part of that agreement, and any term of that agreement shall be void in so far as it purports to restrict the re-use, after the termination of the agreement, of a digital copy of a cultural resource that was in the public domain before the agreement was made.'

Amendment 111 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 9 b (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)

9b. In Article 11 the following paragraph is added: ‘2a. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, where an exclusive right is granted in connection with the commercial exploitation which is necessary in order to digitise cultural collections, the commercial exploitation shall not continue for longer than seven years. During this period, the exclusive right may not be reviewed. Under the terms of the exclusive rights agreement, public sector bodies shall receive a copy of the digitised cultural collection and may make it publicly available for further use after the expiry of the agreement. The exclusive arrangements established after the entry into force of this Directive shall be transparent and made public.’

Amendment 112 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 9b (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)

9b. The following paragraph is added to Article 11: "2a. Notwithstanding paragraphs 1 and 2, where an exclusive right is granted in connection with commercial exploitation which is necessary in order to digitise cultural collections, the exclusive agreement shall not in general continue for longer than five years. The exclusive arrangements established after the entry into force of this Directive shall be transparent and made public. Where an exclusive right relating to the preferential commercial exploitation necessary to digitise cultural resources exists, the public sector body shall be provided with a copy of the digitised cultural resources as part of that agreement, and any term of that agreement shall be void in so far as it purports to restrict the re-use, after the termination of the agreement, of a digital copy of a cultural resource that was in the public domain before the agreement was made.".

Amendment 113 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 9b (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)

9b. The following paragraph is added to Article 11: "2a. Where an exclusive right relates to preferential commercial exploitation necessary to digitise cultural resources, the period of such preferential exploitation shall not exceed 10 years and will not be subject to review. Such exclusive arrangements, established after the entry into force of this Directive, shall be transparent and made public. Where an exclusive right relating to the preferential commercial exploitation necessary to digitise cultural resources exists, the public sector body shall be provided with a copy of the digitised cultural resources as part of that agreement. Every digital copy shall be made freely available for public use at the end of the exclusive rights' agreement.

Amendment 114 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 10

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 3

10. In Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements), the following sentence is added at the end of paragraph 3: ‘However, such arrangements involving cultural establishments and university libraries shall be terminated at the end of the contract or in any case not later than 31 December 20XX [6 years after entry into force of paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: "3. Existing exclusive arrangements that do not qualify for the exception under paragraph 2 shall be terminated at the end of the contract or in any case not later than 31 December 2008. As for existing arrangements involving libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives, only arrangements concluded after 1 January 2012 shall be subject to the limitations of duration pursuant to theis Directive~~].’~~."

Amendment 115 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 10

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 3

(10) InParagraph 3 of Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements)~~, the following sentence is added at the end of paragraph 3: ‘However, such arrangements involving cultural establishments and university libraries~~ shall read as follows: ‘3. Existing exclusive arrangements that do not qualify for an exception under paragraph 2 shall be terminated at the end of the contract or in any case not later than 31 December 2008. Such arrangements concerning libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives which do not qualify for an exception under paragraph 2 or paragraph 2a shall be terminated at the end of the contract or in any case not later than 31 December 20XX [610 years after entry into force of the Directive].’

Amendment 116 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 10 – Introductory part

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 3

10. In Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements), the following ~~sentence is added at the end of paragraph 3~~paragraph 2a is inserted and paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:

Amendment 117 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 10

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 3

10. In Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements), the following sentence is added at the end of paragraph 3: However, such arrangements involving cultural establishments and university libraries shall be terminated at the end of the contract or in any case not later than 31 December 20XX [6 years after entry into force of the Directive].deleted

Amendment 118 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 10

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 3

Amendment 119 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 10

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 3

~~However, such~~Existing arrangements involving ~~cultural establishments and university libraries shall be terminated at the end of the contract or in any case not later than 31 December 20XX [6 years after~~libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives, shall only be subject to the limitations of duration pursuant to this Directive if they were concluded following the entry into force of theis Directive].

Amendment 120 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 10

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 3

"However, such arrangements involving cultural establishments and university libraries shall be terminated at the end of the contract ~~or in any case not later than 31 December 20XX [6 years after entry into force of the Directive]~~."

Amendment 121 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 3

~~‘However, such~~As for existing arrangements involving ~~cultural establishments and university libraries shall be terminated at the end of the contract or in any case not later than 31 December 20XX [6 years after entry into force of~~libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives, only arrangements concluded after 1 January 2012 shall be subject to the limitations of duration pursuant to theis Directive~~].’~~.

Amendment 122 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 10 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 3a (new)

10a. In Article 11, the following paragraph is added: "(3a) Notwithstanding paragraph 1, where an exclusive right relates to preferential commercial exploitation necessary to digitise cultural resources, the period of such preferential exploitation shall not exceed in general seven years and need not be subject to review. The exclusive arrangements established after the entry into force of this Directive shall be transparent and made public. Where an exclusive right relating to the preferential commercial exploitation necessary to digitise cultural resources exists, the public sector body shall be provided with a copy of the digitised cultural resources as part of that agreement, and any term of that agreement shall be void in so far as it purports to restrict the re-use, after the termination of the agreement, of a digital copy of a cultural resource that was in the public domain before the agreement was made."

Amendment 123 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 12 – introductory part

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 13 – paragraph 1

(12) In Article 13 (Review) the date of 1 July 2008 is replaced by [35 years after ~~the transposition dat~~entry into force] and the following paragraph is added:

Amendment 124 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 12

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)

12. In Article 13 (Review) the date of 1 July 2008 is replaced by [3 years after the transposition date] and the following paragraph is added: ‘Member States shall submit a yearly report to the Commission on the extent of the re-use of public sector information, the conditions under which it is made available and the work of the independent authority referred to in article 4(4).’.

Amendment 125 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 12

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Member States shall submit a yearly report to the Commission on the extent of the re- use of public sector information, the conditions under which it is made available and the work of the independent authority referred to in article 4(4).The Commission shall publish yearly a relevant scoreboard including performance indicators for the re-use of public sector information.

Amendment 126 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Angelika NIEBLER, Herbert REUL, Markus PIEPER, Hermann WINKLER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 12

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)

‘Member States shall submit a ~~yearly~~ report to the Commission every two years on the extent of the re-use of public sector information, the conditions under which it is made available and the work of the ~~independent~~ authority referred to in article 4(4).’

Amendment 127 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 12

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Amendment 128 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1

(1) Member States shall adopt and publish, by 182 months at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions and a correlation table between those provisions and this Directive.

source: PE-496.525

2012/04/10 JURI 13 amendments...

Amendment 16 #

Christian ENGSTRÖM, Eva LICHTENBERGER

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) Where charges are made for supplying and allowing the re-use of documents, they should in principle be limited to the marginal costs incurred for their reproduction and dissemination, unless exceptionally justified according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria. The necessity of not hindering the normal running of public sector bodies covering a substantial part of. However, for public sector bodies that cover a substantial part of their costs relating to the performance of their public task or any particular activity falling within their public task as well as the normal running of libraries, museums and archives their ability to continue funding their operati~~ng cost relating to the performance of their public task from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights should notably be taken into consideration~~ons in this manner should notably be taken into consideration. Those public sector bodies should be allowed to charge higher charges for re-use. The total income from supplying and allowing re-use of documents should not exceed the cost of collection, production, reproduction and dissemination, together with a reasonable return on investment. The burden of proving that charges are cost- oriented and comply with relevant ~~limits~~criteria should lie with the public sector body charging for the re-use of documents.

Amendment 17 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13

(13) In relation to any re-use that is made of the document, public sector bodies may, where practicable, impose conditions on the re-user, such as acknowledgment of source. Any licences for the re-use of public sector information should in any case place as few restrictions on re-use as possible. Open licences available online, which grant wider re-use rights without technological, financial or geographical limitations and relying on open data formats, ~~may~~should also play an important role in this respect. Therefore, Member States should encourage the use of open government licences and licensing of PSI metadata should follow licensing standards as established by e.g. Europeana.

Amendment 18 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point 1 a (new)

(1a) In paragraph 2, point (b) is replaced by the following: '(b) documents for which third parties hold intellectual property rights, including documents held by a university library in which the university holds intellectual property rights;'

Amendment 19 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4 – point 2 – introductory wording

(2) ~~At the end of paragraph 4, the following wording is added~~Paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

Amendment 20 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 4

'4. Any decision on re-use shall contain a reference to the means of redress in case the applicant wishes to appeal the decision. The means of redress shall include the possibility of review by an i~~ndependent~~mpartial review body, such as the national competition authority, th~~at is vested with specific regulatory power~~e national access to documents authority or the national judicial authority, that has the authority to investigate complaints regarding the re-use of public sector ~~information~~documents and whose decisions ~~are binding upon~~must be considered by the public sector body concerned.'

Amendment 21 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1

'1. Where charges are made for the re-use of documents, the total amount charged by public sector bodies shall be limited to the marginal costs incurred for their reproduction, collection, production and dissemination.'

Amendment 22 #

Christian ENGSTRÖM, Eva LICHTENBERGER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 2

'2. ~~In exceptional cases, in particular where p~~Paragraph 1 shall not apply to the following: (a) Public sector bodies that generate revenue to cover a substantial part of their ~~operating~~ costs relating to the performance of their public service tasks from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights, public sector bodies may be allowed to charge for the re-use of documents over and above the marginal costs, according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria, provided this is tasks or any particular activity falling within their public ~~interest and subject to the approval of the independent authority referred to in Article 4(4), and without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Article~~tasks. (b) Libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives.'

Amendment 23 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 2

'2. ~~In exceptional cases, in particular w~~Where public sector bodies generate a substantial part of their operating costs relating to the performance of their public service tasks from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights, public sector bodies may be allowed to charge for the re- use of documents over and above the marginal costs, according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria for the exclusive purpose of covering their costs of digitising documents and making them available to the public, provided this is in the public interest and subject to the approval of the ~~independent~~ authority referred to in Article 4(4), and without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Article.'

Amendment 24 #

Evelyn REGNER

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 3

'(3) Notwithstanding paragraphs 1 and 2, libraries (including university libraries), museums ~~and archives~~, archives and public sector bodies serving similar purposes to the above may charge over and above the marginal costs for the re-use of documents they hold.'

Amendment 25 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 4 (new)

'4. Where charges are made under paragraph 2, the total income from supplying and allowing re-use of documents shall not exceed the cost of collection, production, reproduction and dissemination, together with a reasonable return on investment. Charges should be cost-oriented over the appropriate accounting period and calculated in line with the accounting principles applicable to the public sector bodies involved.'

Amendment 26 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 2

~~(2) The existing text of Article 6 becomes paragraph 4.~~deleted

Amendment 27 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 10

10. In Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements)~~, the following sentence is added at the end of paragraph 3:~~ is amended as follows: '(1) The following paragraph is inserted : 2a. Notwithstanding paragraph 11(1), where an exclusive right is necessary for the provision of a service in the public interest such as digitisation, the validity of the reason for granting such an exclusive right shall be subject to regular review, and shall, in any event, be reviewed every three years. The exclusive arrangements established after the entry into force of this Directive shall be transparent and made public. Where an exclusive right relating to the preferential commercial exploitation necessary to digitise cultural resources exists, the public sector body shall be provided with a copy of the digitised cultural resources as part of that agreement.'

Amendment 28 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 10 – point 2 (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 3

~~However, such arrangements involving cultural establishments and~~(2) The following sentence is added at the end of paragraph 3: However, such arrangements involving archives, museums and libraries (including university libraries) shall be terminated at the end of the contract or in any case not later than 31 December 20XX [610 years after entry into force of the Directive].

source: PE-496.478

2012/06/29 IMCO 42 amendments...

Amendment 15 #

Barbara WEILER

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2 a (new)

(2a) Unbureaucratic, cost-effective re-use of public sector information is available for the following important communities of users: SMEs, particularly those in ICT; journalists; and scientists. In addition, improved access to information in the public sector promotes transparency and clarity in the work of public bodies vis-à- vis citizens.

Amendment 16 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) Directive 2003/98/EC does not ~~contain~~justify an obligation ~~to allow re-use of~~for Member States to allow access to, and re-use of, public-sector documents. The decision whether or not to authorise re-use remains with the Member Sates or the public sector body concerned. The Directive only harmonises the conditions subject to which documents are made available for re-use. At the same time, the Directive builds on national rules on access to documents. Some Member States have expressly linked the right of re- use to this right of access, ~~so that all generally accessible documents are re-usable. In other Member States, the link between the two sets of rules is less clear and this is a source of legal uncertainty~~whereas other Member States have legally separated the right of re-use from national rules on access to information and freedom of information.

Amendment 17 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)

Amendment 18 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 b (new)

Amendment 19 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 c (new)

Amendment 20 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

Amendment 21 #

Franz OBERMAYR

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) The scope of application of the Directive is extended to libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives. The Directive does not apply to other cultural institutions, such as operas, ballets or theatres, including the archives that are part of these institutions. Publicly- funded research findings are also excluded from the scope of the Directive.

Amendment 22 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)

(10a) As the re-use of documents held by libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives possesses substantial social and economic potential for cultural and creative industries, on- going digitisation of European cultural collections should be promoted.

Amendment 23 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 b (new)

(10b) As regards the description, digitisation and presentation of cultural collections, there are numerous cooperation arrangements between libraries (including university libraries), museums, archives and private partners which involve public sector bodies granting exclusive rights of access and commercial exploitation to cooperation partners. Practice has shown that these public-private partnerships can facilitate worthwhile use of cultural collections and at the same time that they accelerate access to the cultural heritage for members of the public. Directive 2003/98/EC should therefore not preclude the conclusion of agreements granting exclusive rights. Moreover, cultural institutions should be free to choose for the themselves the partners with which they wish to cooperate, subject to compliance with the principles of transparency and non-discrimination.

Amendment 24 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 a (new)

(11a) A document is considered a document in a machine-readable format if it is a digital document in a file format which allows software applications to easily identify, recognise and extract data from it. Documents encoded in files limiting in any way such processing, or determining a specific technology needed for this processing, shall not be considered as documents in machine- readable formats. Member States shall ensure the use of open machine-readable formats, with the exception of data where use of open formats would be unjustifiable due to technological or economical reasons. Every usage of non- open machine-readable data format should be justified and the technical description of the format used should be provided.

Amendment 25 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 b (new)

(11b) ‘open’ means that the format’s specification is maintained by a not-for- profit organisation; its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an open decision-making procedure available to all interested parties; the format specification document is available freely; the intellectual property of the standard is made irrevocably available on a royalty- free basis.

Amendment 26 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11

Amendment 27 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) Where charges are made for the re-use of documents, they should in principle be limited to the marginal costs incurred for their reproduction, provision and dissemination, unless exceptionally justified according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria. The necessity of not hindering the normal running of public sector bodies covering a substantial part of the operating cost relating to the performance of their public task from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights should notably be taken into consideration. The burden of proving that charges are cost-oriented and comply with relevant limits should lie with the public sector body charging for the re- use of documents.

Amendment 28 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13

(13) In relation to any re-use that is made of the document, public sector bodies may, where practicable, impose conditions on the re-user, such as acknowledgment of source. Any licences for the re-use of public sector information should in any case place as few restrictions on re-use as possible, preferably limiting them to the indication of source. Open licences available online, which grant wider re-use rights without technological, financial or geographical limitations and relying on open data formats, may also play an important role in this respect. Therefore, Member States should encourage the use of open government licences.

Amendment 29 #

Barbara WEILER

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14

(14) Proper implementation of some of the features of this Directive, such as means of redress, compliance with charging principles and reporting obligations require supervision by independent authorities competent on the re-use of public sector information. To ensure consistency between approaches at Union level, coordination between the independent authorities should be encouraged, particularly through exchange of information on best practices and data re- use policies. Where implementation results in conflict, recourse can be made to national ombudsmen systems or the European Ombudsman.

Amendment 30 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14

(14) Proper implementation of some of the features of this Directive, such as means of redress, compliance with charging principles and reporting obligations require supervision by independent authorities competent on the re-use of public sector information. Member States have a responsibility to make appropriate national authorities responsible for supervision. To ensure consistency between approaches at Union level, coordination between the independent authorities should be encouraged, particularly through exchange of information on best practices and data re- use policies.

Amendment 31 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 18

(18) The Commission should assist the Member States in implementing the Directive in a consistent way by ~~giving guidance~~making proposals and laying down guidelines, particularly on charging and calculation of costs, on recommended licensing conditions and on formats, after consulting interested parties.

Amendment 32 #

Franz OBERMAYR

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point 2

2. In paragraph 2, point (e) is replaced by the following: ‘ (e) documents held by educational and research establishments, such as research facilities, including, where relevant, organisations established for the transfer of research results, schools and universities (except university libraries in respect of documents other than research documents protected by third party intellectual property rights) and; ’deleted

Amendment 33 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 2 – paragraph 6

(6) '‘machine-readable'’ means that digital documents are ~~sufficiently~~ structured ~~for~~so that software applications ~~to identify reliably individual statements of fact and their internal structure~~can, in a technology-neutral manner, extract individual data which are of interest.

Amendment 34 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 1

(1) Subject to paragraph (2) Member States shall ensure that documents of public sector bodies referred to in Article 1 shall be re-usable for commercial or non- commercial purposes in accordance with the conditions set out in Chapters III and IV, provided that the documents concerned are of types classified as accessible under the rules which exist in the Member States regarding access to public-sector information. Where possible, these documents shall be disseminated in technology-neutral, machine-readable form.

Amendment 35 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 2

Amendment 36 #

Heide RÜHLE, Christian ENGSTRÖM

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

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 4

The means of redress shall include a reference to the possibility of review by an ~~independent authority that is vested with specific regulatory powers regard~~authority ing the ~~re-use of public sector information and whose decisions are binding upon the public sector body concerned~~Member States.

Amendment 37 #

Malcolm HARBOUR

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

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 4

The means of redress shall include the possibility of review by an independent authority that is vested with specific regulatory powers regarding the re-use of public sector information ~~and whose decisions are binding upon the public sector body concerned~~.

Amendment 38 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point 2 (new)

2003/98/EC
Article 4 – new paragraph

Before a public sector body can make personal data available for reuse, it must undertake an assessment in order to decide whether the data involved can be made available for reuse. This assessment should also establish under what conditions and subject to what specific data protection safeguards reuse is permissible. This assessment must ensure that there is an adequate legal basis for the transfer and reuse of data under national law, that the reuse is available only for a compatible purpose and that applicants and subsequent users are required to comply with all other provisions of applicable data protection law

Amendment 39 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 5 – paragraph 1

1. ~~In p~~Paragraph 1~~, the words ‘through electronic means’ are replaced by ‘in machine-readable format and together with their metadata.’.~~ is replaced by the following: ‘1. Public sector bodies shall make their documents available in the pre-existing formats or languages and, where possible and appropriate, in technology-neutral, machine-readable format and together with their metadata. This shall not imply an obligation for public sector bodies to create, digitise or adapt documents or render them machine-readable in a technology-neutral manner in order to comply with the request, nor shall it imply an obligation to provide extracts from documents where this would involve disproportionate effort, going beyond a simple operation.’

Amendment 40 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1

Amendment 41 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 2

Amendment 42 #

Malcolm HARBOUR

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6.

2. ~~In exceptional cases, in particular w~~Where public sector bodies generate a ~~substantial~~ part of their operating costs relating to the performance of their public service tasks from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights, public sector bodies may be allowed to charge for the re- use of documents over and above the marginal costs, according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria, provided this is in the public interest and subject to the approval of the independent authority referred to in Article 4(4), and without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Article.

Amendment 43 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 3

Amendment 44 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 4

Amendment 45 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point 2 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Amendment 46 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 5

~~‘The burden of proving that charges comply with this Article shall lie with the public sector body charging for re-use.~~deleted

Amendment 47 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 7

Amendment 48 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 8 – paragraph 1

Public sector bodies may allow re-use of documents without conditions or may impose conditions, ~~such as indication of source,~~ where appropriate through a licence dealing with relevant issues. These conditions shall not unnecessarily restrict possibilities for re- use and shall not be used to restrict competition.

Amendment 49 #

Heide RÜHLE, Christian ENGSTRÖM

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point 1 a (new)

(1a) For the purpose of a consistent implementation of this Article, the Commission shall adopt guidelines for recommended standard and open licences for the re-use of public sector information. These guidelines will include a specific data protection clause.

Amendment 50 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)

8a. Whenever personal data are made available for reuse; (a) Licences should include a specific data protection clause. The content of this clause should be determined on the basis of the licence and data in question, inter alia, data protection risks present, complexity of the case, nature of personal data involved and expected purposes of reuse (b) Licence conditions should include the purposes for which personal data can be processed (c) Licence conditions should include provisions ensuring that re-users shall not make any attempt or facilitate third parties to identify the data subjects or use that data in support of measures nor decisions regarding these individuals. (d) Licence conditions for international data transfer for the purposes of reuse must contain provisions, and contractual clauses where necessary, for adequate levels of data protection, or another adequate legal basis for transfers to third countries for the purposes of reuse.

Amendment 51 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 9

Member States shall ~~ensure that~~make practical arrangements to facilitat~~ing the cross- lingual~~e searches for documents available for re-use ~~are in place~~throughout the Union, such as asset lists of main documents with relevant metadata, accessible preferably ~~online and in~~in technology- neutral, machine-readable format, and portal sites that are linked to ~~decentralised~~ asset lists.

Amendment 52 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 2

(9a) Article 11, paragraph 2 is amended as follows: ‘2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, where an exclusive right is necessary for the provision of a service in the public interest, the validity of the exclusive rights arrangement shall be subject to regular review, and shall, in any event, be reviewed every four years. The exclusive arrangements established after the entry into force of this Directive shall be subject to the principle of transparency and shall be made public by the public sector bodies concerned.’

Amendment 53 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 b (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)

(9b) In Article 11, the following paragraph is inserted: ‘2a. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, where an exclusive right is granted in connection with the commercial exploitation which is necessary in order to digitise cultural collections, the commercial exploitation shall not continue for longer than seven years. During this period, the exclusive right may not be reviewed. The exclusive arrangements established after the entry into force of this Directive shall be transparent and made public.’

Amendment 54 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – introductory part

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 3

(10) InParagraph 3 of Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements)~~, the following sentence is added at the end of paragraph 3:~~ shall read as follows: ‘3. Existing exclusive arrangements that do not qualify for an exception under paragraph 2 shall be terminated at the end of the contract or in any case not later than 31 December 2008. Such arrangements concerning libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives which do not qualify for an exception under paragraph 2 or paragraph 2a shall be terminated at the end of the contract or in any case not later than 31 December 20XX [6 years after entry into force of the Directive].’

Amendment 55 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – introductory part

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 13

(12) In Article 13 (Review) the date of 1 July 2008 is replaced by [35 years after the ~~transposition dat~~date of entry into force] and the following paragraph is added:

Amendment 56 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 13 – paragraph 3

(3) Member States shall submit a ~~yearly~~ report to the Commission every two years on the extent of the re- use of public sector information, the conditions under which it is made available and the work of the independent authority referred to in article 4(4).

source: PE-492.636

2012/11/06 CULT 26 amendments...

Amendment 33 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2

(2) Open data policies which encourage the ~~wide~~ availability and re-use of public sector information for private or commercial purposes, with minimal or no legal, technical or financial constraints, and which promote the circulation of information not only for economic operators but also for members of the public and the free movement of persons within the Union, with due regard for fundamental rights in every case, can play an important role in kick-starting the development of new services based on novel ways to combine and make use of such information. However, this requires a level playing field at Union level in terms of whether or not the re-use of documents is authorised, which cannot be achieved by leaving it up to the different rules and practices of the Member States or the public bodies concerned.

Amendment 34 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) Directive 2003/98/EC does not contain an obligation to allow re-use of documents. This state of affairs should be reviewed. As the Directive currently stands, the decision whether or not to authorise re-use remains with the Member States or the public sector body concerned. At the same time, the Directive builds on national rules on access to documents. Some Member States have expressly linked the right of re- use to this right of access, so that all generally accessible documents are re- usable. In other Member States, the link between the two sets of rules is less clear and this is a source of legal uncertainty. The directive should promote harmonisation of practices so that access to documents and authorisation to re-use them become the rule and are reflected in the establishment of open data projects.

Amendment 35 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)

(6a) While Directive 2003/98/EC cannot compel Member States to digitise existing analogue content, the publication of public data in digital form should become the rule.

Amendment 36 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)

(6a) National regulations on access to public documents are based on transparency and freedom of information. However, certain restrictions on the right of access exist, particularly in the case of administrative documents whose content is regarded as sensitive or documents concerning persons which could damage privacy and personal files.

Amendment 37 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) Directive 2003/98/EC should therefore lay down a clear obligation for Member States to make all generally available documents re-usable. As it constitutes a limitation to the intellectual property rights hold by the authors of the documents, the scope of such a link between the right of access and the right of use should be narrowed to what is strictly necessary to reach the objectives pursued by its introduction. In this respect, taking into account the Union legislation and Member States' and Union's international obligations, notably under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (the TRIPS Agreement), documents on which third parties hold intellectual property rights should be excluded from the scope of Directive 2003/98/EC. If a third party was the initial owner of a document held by libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives that is still protected by intellectual property rights, that document should, for the purpose of this Directive, be considered as a document for which third parties hold intellectual property rights.

Amendment 38 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)

(7a) Re-use of documents should respect the intellectual property rights of the authors of the documents. Taking into account the legislation of the Union and the Member States and the Union's international obligations, notably under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (the TRIPS Agreement), documents on which third parties hold intellectual property rights should be excluded from the scope of Directive 2003/98/EC. If a third party was the initial owner of a document held by libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives that is still protected by intellectual property rights, that document should, for the purpose of this Directive, be considered as a document for which third parties hold intellectual property rights.

Amendment 39 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)

(7a) Documents in relation to which intellectual property rights have expired and which consequently enter the public domain constitute a very important part of the collections of libraries, archives and museums and should be assigned priority in digitisation campaigns; it is therefore desirable to ensure that such digitisation does not alter their legal status. Access to, and re-use of, these data must be guaranteed in order to respect the fundamental right of access to culture, information and education.

Amendment 40 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)

(9a) Seeking out, digitising and presenting cultural assets are important challenges with the aim of ensuring access to culture, information and education for all. It is therefore important to opt for judicious use of cultural assets which facilitate access to the cultural heritage for members of the public, while taking account of the fact that cultural assets are not economic assets like any others and that they should be protected against excessive marketisation. The cultural institutions with which this Directive is concerned should be supported by the public authorities by establishing public funds for the digitisation and dissemination of data. If agreements between these institutions and the private sector are concluded or planned, this cooperation should be pursued only in a non-profit-making spirit, and exclusivity clauses should be banned, particularly in the case of public- domain data.

Amendment 41 #

Marco SCURRIA

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) The scope of application of the Directive is extended to libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives, encouraging the use of virtualisation of historical sites in order to simplify access to this type of information. The Directive does not apply to other cultural institutions, such as operas, ballets or theatres, including the archives that are part of these institutions.

Amendment 42 #

Róża Gräfin von THUN UND HOHENSTEIN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) The scope of application of the Directive is extended to libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives. The Directive does not apply to research and education establishments or to other cultural institutions, such as operas, ballets or theatres, including the archives that are part of these institutions.

Amendment 43 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)

(10a) As the re-use of documents held by libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives offers substantial social and economic potential for the cultural and creative industries, as well as to society through the extension of the collection of Europeana, the ongoing digitisation of European cultural collections should be promoted.

Amendment 44 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)

(10a) Certain personal data contained in archive documents to which the ban on any form of discrimination applies should be excluded from the scope of Directive 2003/98/EC or, if the legislation in force requires them to be communicated, should be rendered anonymous or the data concerning individuals should be masked out before any use is made of them.

Amendment 45 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 b (new)

(10b) Data held by educational and research establishments should remain outside the scope of Directive 2003/98/EC.

Amendment 46 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11

(11) To facilitate re-use, public sector bodies should make documents permanently available ~~through~~online in machine readable, searchable and current formats and together with their metadata where possible and appropriate, in a format that ensures interoperability , e.g. by processing them in a way consistent with the principles governing the compatibility and usability requirements for spatial information under Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE).

Amendment 47 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) The basic principle should be that public sector information is freely available for re-use, because this ensures the highest economic returns. Where charges are made for the re-use of documents, they should in principle be limited to the marginal costs incurred for their reproduction and dissemination, unless exceptionally justified according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria. The necessity of not hindering the normal running of public sector bodies covering a substantial part of the operating cost relating to the performance of their public task from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights should notably be taken into consideration. The burden of proving that charges are cost-oriented and comply with relevant limits should lie with the public sector body charging for the re- use of documents.

Amendment 48 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14

(14) Proper implementation of some of the features of this Directive, such as means of redress, especially for private individuals with regard to data protection, compliance with charging principles and reporting obligations require supervision by independent authorities competent on the re-use of public sector information. To ensure consistency between approaches at Union level, coordination between the independent authorities should be encouraged, particularly through exchange of information on best practices and data re- use policies.

Amendment 49 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15

(15) Since the objective of this Directive, namely to facilitate the creation of Union- wide information products and services based on public sector documents, to ensure the effective cross-border use of public sector documents on the one hand by private companies for added-value information products and services, and ~~to limit distortions of competition on the Union market~~on the other hand by citizens to facilitate the free circulation of information and communication, cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States and can therefore, in view of the intrinsic pan- European scope of the proposed action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. In accordance with the principles of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.

Amendment 50 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16

(16) This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, including ~~the right to property (Article 17~~respect for private life and family life (Article 7), the protection of personal data (Article 8), the right to property (Article 17) and the right of access to documents (Article 42). Nothing in this Directive should be interpreted or implemented in a manner that is inconsistent with the European Convention on Human Rights.

Amendment 51 #

Proposal for a directive
Recital 17

(17) It is necessary to ensure that the Member States (see recital 19) report to the Commission on the extent of the re-use of public sector information, the conditions under which it is made available, the problems and difficulties encountered and the work of the independent authority. To ensure consistency between approaches at Union level, coordination between the independent authorities should be encouraged, particularly through exchange of information on best practices and data re-use policies.

Amendment 52 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/CE
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point e

In paragraph 2, point (e) is replaced by the following: 'documents held by educational and research establishments, such as research facilities, including, where relevant, organisations established for the transfer of research results, schools and universities (except university libraries in respect of documents other than research documents protected by third party intellectual property rights) and;’deleted.

Amendment 53 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point f

(f) documents held by cultural establishments, other than libraries, museums and archives, with the exception of certain personal data contained in archive documents in relation to which all discrimination is prohibited pursuant to Article 21(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;

Amendment 54 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 4

(2) ~~At the end of paragraph 4, the following wording is added: ‘T~~Paragraph 4 is replaced by the following: ‘4. Any negative decision shall contain a reference to the means of redress in case the applicant wishes to appeal the decision. In each Member State, the means of redress shall include the possibility of review by an independent authority that is vested with specific regulatory powers regarding the re-use of public sector information and whose decisions are binding upon the public sector body concerned.’

Amendment 55 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 5 – paragraph 1

(1) In paragraph 1, the words ‘ through electronic means’ are replaced by ‘permanently available online in machine- readable, searchable and current format and together with their metadata.’.

Amendment 56 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1

1. The basic principle is that documents may be re-used freely, unless there are significant economic costs which are incurred in order to make the information freely available in a specific case. Where charges are made for the re-use of documents, the total amount charged by public sector bodies shall be limited to the marginal costs incurred for their reproduction and dissemination.

Amendment 57 #

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 4

(2) The existing text of Article 6 becomes paragraph 4. and shall read as follows: “4. Where charges are made pursuant to paragraph 2, their total volume must be established using objective, transparent and variable criteria, and the total revenue derived from supplying and from authorising re-use of these documents shall not exceed their cost of collection, production, reproduction, provision and dissemination, while allowing a return on investment which accords with the performance of the public remits of the bodies and institutions referred to in Article 1 of this Directive. In the case of projects whose purposes are purely commercial, revenue from these charges must be invested in accordance with objective and transparent criteria which are not detrimental to the general interest. The charges referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 should be cost-oriented over the appropriate accounting period and calculated in line with the accounting principles applicable to the public sector bodies involved.”

Amendment 58 #