Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-11-26-Speech-4-065"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091126.4.4-065"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, you will all be familiar with Google, the internet search engine. You will probably also know about the new Google Books Project, which everyone has been discussing over the last few months. The aim of the project is to scan in books from libraries and make them available over the internet, so that readers have quick and easy access to a large number of works on the web.
From the perspective of readers and internet users, this is a wonderful idea. However, what does it mean for authors, creative people, artists and publishers? What part will they play in the publication of their work on the web? We must look closely at these questions over the next few months. You may already be aware that publishers and authors in the US have initiated legal proceedings against Google with regard to the scanning and publication of works on the web. As far as I know, the legal dispute has been resolved and the parties have settled out of court. However, the questions remain unanswered and they relate not only to the situation with Google, because there are certain to be similar cases in future. We must deal with these questions as quickly as possible.
Does copyright need to be adapted in the digital age? Do we need to change existing structures? In this respect, I am thinking particularly of the role of the collecting societies, which we have often discussed in Parliament. Are new monopolies being created on the web? How should we react to this? How will this change the structures in our countries, for example, with regard to the bookshops in the regions? What are the opposing interests in this case and how can we find a suitable balance between them?
Authors and publishers want to receive a financial reward for their work. This also applies, of course, when their works are made available on the internet. Libraries want to put their archives on the web without having to sign a licence agreement with every copyright holder first. The interests of consumers are clear. They would very much like to have quick and easy access to the content on the web. We have not yet reached the point of being able to discuss possible solutions, but we need to ask ourselves a lot of questions and that is the purpose of the written question submitted to the Commission by the Committee on Legal Affairs.
Do we need to make distinctions in order to resolve the copyright issues, for example, with regard to content? If so, what distinctions should be made? The Commission seems to be moving in this direction, as it is first of all focusing on the situation of the library stocks. Should there be a process of mass digitisation in future, or is our existing licensing system sufficient to resolve the problem? How can copyright clearance be simplified in the internet age? As you know, copyright is primarily a national right and in this respect, we must once again ask ourselves: is this still an up-to-date approach? How should we deal with orphan works in future, in other words, books whose copyright holder cannot be identified or located? Should we perhaps distinguish between literary works and scientific or academic works? For example, the authors of novels earn their living from the publication of their books, but when scientists make their papers available on the web, they are primarily interested in making a name for themselves in their field of research and are less reliant on the money that their work earns. There are numerous questions that we need to ask ourselves and I am pleased to be able to discuss them with you.
I would like to consider one last important point and that is once again the subject of collecting societies. Look at how easy it is nowadays to download music from the internet. You simply go to iTunes and buy songs for 20, 30, 40 or 50 cents. What are the implications for the collecting societies? Do we still need them? I would be pleased if the Commission could once again give us an idea of what the current situation is.
In Parliament, we have been asking the Commission for years to take a look at the collecting societies. To put it rather imprecisely, these are also monopolistic bodies, which have been established over a period of decades. I am interested to know what the Commission is planning. My final point is that if you take a platform like Google, which makes everything freely available, this will result in a monopoly being created on the web. We need to consider how the situation should be handled in order to ensure that we do not end up with just one supplier, who then decides on the conditions for access to content on the web. I am looking forward to a debate with you over the next few weeks and months and I will be interested to hear the Commission’s response to the first question from the Committee on Legal Affairs."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples