[open-heritage] PSI directive & GLAM

Paul Keller pk at kl.nl
Sat Oct 27 12:40:39 UTC 2012 

not sure if this is identical to the latest published version (so please check) but this is the last version that i have on my machine...
/paul 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 120105CommuniaPSIpolicypaper_draft.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 165376 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-glam/attachments/20121027/26b6beed/attachment-0003.doc>
-------------- next part --------------


On 25 Oct 2012, at 22:36, Primavera De Filippi <pdefilippi at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Paul (and others), do any of you have an editable version of the document ?
> I'd like to start an online document with it.
> Thanks,
> Primavera
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Javier Ruiz <javier at openrightsgroup.org> wrote:
> I was thinking of this
> 
> http://www.communia-association.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/120122communia_PSI_directive_reaction.pdf
> 
> it does not cover all the angles we have discussed but it is ready to go
> 
> -- 
> Javier Ruiz
> javier at openrightsgroup.org
> +44(0)7877 911 412
> @javierruiz
> 
> On Tuesday, 16 October 2012 at 08:25, Primavera De Filippi wrote:
> 
>> Which document are you referring to ?
>> I think we should act soon, but I'd like to incorporate the graphical representation we have made into the document to be endorsed. 
>> 
>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Javier Ruiz <javier at openrightsgroup.org> wrote:
>>> maybe the quickest thing would be to get paul's document signed, it does not cover the broadcasters, but I don't think we have time for much more                 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Javier Ruiz
>>> javier at openrightsgroup.org
>>> +44(0)7877 911 412
>>> @javierruiz
>>> 
>>> On Monday, 8 October 2012 at 07:44, Amelia Andersdotter wrote:
>>> 
>>>> we are having an exchange of views on the amendments in ITRE tomorrow. if there could be a statement to be sent to ITRE MEPs about your positions on the amendments that would be helpful.
>>>> 
>>>> please support inclusion of public broadcasters because i'm trying to get the parliament to do that.
>>>> 
>>>> On 07.10.2012 12:37, Primavera De Filippi wrote:
>>>>> Hi all, 
>>>>> as regards the drafting of the short paper to be endorsed by Communia, maybe we could schedule a skype meeting sometimes next week to discuss the next steps ?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Sorry Amelia, of course I know you are! :-)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The negotiations in JURI did not result in a compromise. Our amendment to re-use the Orphan Works formula will be voted separately. Here's the OWD article:
>>>>>> Article 6 - Permitted uses of orphan works
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>> 2.  The organisations referred to in Article 1(1) shall use an orphan work in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article only in order to achieve aims related to their public-interest missions, in particular the preservation of, the restoration of, and the provision of cultural and educational access to, works and phonograms contained in their collection . The organisations may generate revenues in the course of such uses, for the exclusive purpose of covering their costs of digitising orphan works and making them available to the public.
>>>>>> http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2012-349
>>>>>> Please note (again) that this is an amendment to JURI's Opinion (not the real thing in ITRE):
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Amendment   2
>>>>>> Christian Engström, Eva Lichtenberger
>>>>>> on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
>>>>>> Proposal for a directive
>>>>>> Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point 1
>>>>>> Directive 2003/98/EC
>>>>>> Article 6 – paragraph 2
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Text proposed by the Commission
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Amendment
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 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 Article.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 2. 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 authority referred to in Article 4(4), and without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Article.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>   Justification
>>>>>> Analogous to Article 6.2 in the Orphan Works Directive as adopted Thursday, 13 September 2012 (provisional edition P7_TA-PROV(2012)0349).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best regards.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> //Erik
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 26/09/12 22:46, Amelia Andersdotter wrote:
>>>>>>> you do know i'm mep and that i'm in the recipient list? 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Pe 26.09.2012 07:41, Erik Josefsson a scris: 
>>>>>>>> It is my understanding that there will be a majority on one of our amendments in JURI on Europeana style metadata licensing. 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The sticky point seems to be what the public bodies hosting/holding/producing the data are supposed to do with the money they need/generate. As far as I can see this is a traditional left-right issue, i.e. how is a "public body" supposed to be financed in the first place, and also, what should they do? (if there are private players who can do it better, why have a public body at all?) 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> In JURI, we have tabled an amendment re-cycling the principle laid down in the Orphan Works Directive. 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I expect negotiations on that issue, but the risk for MS competence carve-out is huge (art. 1.5 ODW style). 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The chart on http://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/PSI_Directive is awesome but please don't show it to MEPs! :-) 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> (if they knew, they will be expecting staff to deliver all reports in that format...) 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Best regards. 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> //Erik 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 25/09/12 10:13, Daniel Dietrich wrote: 
>>>>>>>>> I am in drafting this. 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Daniel 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 24 Sep 2012, at 16:27, Primavera De Filippi wrote: 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, and thank you Javier for the wiki ! 
>>>>>>>>>> I think we should start drafting a document (1 or 2 pages) based on that schema so as to precisely express what we think is wrong about the current proposal for the PSI. 
>>>>>>>>>> I'm happy to work on it if anyone else volunteers to do it with me   :) 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Javier Ruiz<javier at openrightsgroup.org>  wrote: 
>>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/PSI_Directive 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>> Javier Ruiz 
>>>>>>>>>> javier at openrightsgroup.org 
>>>>>>>>>> +44(0)7877 911 412 
>>>>>>>>>> @javierruiz 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, 24 September 2012 at 10:27, Alek Tarkowski wrote: 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe we could collect all this information (links, documents, comments) 
>>>>>>>>>>> in one place - on some pad or wiki? Any ideas where we could host this? 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> best, 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Alek 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 21/09/12 12:59 , Primavera De Filippi wrote: 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, 
>>>>>>>>>>>> after the workshop last wednesday, we started to work on identifying 
>>>>>>>>>>>> the issues of the proposed PSI directive as regards GLAM institutions. 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Find attached the schematic representation of our preliminary analysis 
>>>>>>>>>>>> based on the danish compromise version (attached). We would love to 
>>>>>>>>>>>> hear comments or feedback about how to improve it. 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> We have set up a little task-force of people interested in drafting a 
>>>>>>>>>>>> document (rather short) describing the identified problems, we would 
>>>>>>>>>>>> like to know if anyone is willing to join us. 
>>>>>>>>>>>> The goal would be that Communia would then take action into 
>>>>>>>>>>>> influencing the amendment process for the directive. 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, if you are in contact with local MEPs or national negotiating 
>>>>>>>>>>>> teams in the Council, please let us know if you would be able to help 
>>>>>>>>>>>> circulate the document. 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> We also need to know the deadlines to send comments - Erik and Amelia 
>>>>>>>>>>>> have been really helpful at providing information concerning the 
>>>>>>>>>>>> process, but we need the exact timelines to coordinate our actions. 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Useful links: 
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/psi/actions_eu/policy_actions/index_en.htm 
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/cult/ad/912/912049/912049en.pdf 
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/juri/pa/909/909674/909674en.pdf 
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/com/com_com(2011)0877_/com_com(2011)0877_en.pdf 
>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/com/com_com%282011%290877_/com_com%282011%290877_en.pdf> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>>> dr Alek Tarkowski 
>>>>>>>>>>> koordynator / public lead 
>>>>>>>>>>> Creative Commons Polska / Poland 
>>>>>>>>>>> www: http://creativecommons.pl 
>>>>>>>>>>> identica: http://identi.ca/alek 
>>>>>>>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/atarkowski 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ 
>>>>>>>>>>> open-glam mailing list 
>>>>>>>>>>> open-glam at lists.okfn.org 
>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-glam 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ 
>>>>>>>>>> open-glam mailing list 
>>>>>>>>>> open-glam at lists.okfn.org 
>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-glam 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
>

More information about the open-glam mailing list