Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-09-Speech-2-043"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040309.3.2-043"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Directive on enforcement that we are discussing today is completely superfluous. After all, there is already a directive in force regarding the harmonisation of copyright, and, besides, there is the Directive on e-commerce, which regulates, among other things, the rights and obligations of service providers. This new Directive threatens to cause disruption on account of the obligation to monitor what users are doing. The present compromise explicitly stipulates that previous directives remain fully in force, therefore, and that is the way it should be: why else do we make legislation here? We do not want a US-style situation in which legislation is made according to the misconceptions of the day. This new Directive on enforcement officially declares people making illegal copies to be thieves, but everyone has known for a long time that pirating of software, CDs and DVDs is a punishable offence. We certainly do not need a new directive to do this, and especially not one that fails to define the scope of intellectual property rights. We in Europe have different criminal justice systems with different penalties, and we cannot harmonise legal systems with a single directive, particularly without a proper debate in this Parliament. I can say that I am pleased that the compromise now restricts the scope of the directive to piracy for commercial purposes, as copying for personal use must continue to be permitted. Nevertheless, I shall be voting against the Directive."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples