Procedure : 2011/0430(COD)
Document stages in plenary
Document selected : A7-0404/2012

Texts tabled :

A7-0404/2012

Debates :

PV 13/06/2013 - 3
CRE 13/06/2013 - 3

Votes :

PV 13/06/2013 - 7.4

Texts adopted :

P7_TA(2013)0275

REPORT     ***I
PDF 536kWORD 798k
7 December 2012
PE 492.922v02-00 A7-0404/2012

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2003/98/EC on re-use of public sector information

(COM(2011)0877 – C7-0502/2011 – 2011/0430(COD))

Committee on Industry, Research and Energy

Rapporteur: Ivailo Kalfin

AMENDMENTS
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
 OPINION of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection
 OPINION of the Committee on Culture and Education
 OPINION of the Committee on Legal Affairs
 PROCEDURE

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2003/98/EC on re-use of public sector information

(COM(2011)0877 – C7-0502/2011 – 2011/0430(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0877),

–   having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0502/2011),

–   having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–   having regard to the reasoned opinion submitted, within the framework of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the Swedish Parliament, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity,

–   having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 25 April 2012(1),

–   having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the opinions of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, the Committee on Culture and Education and the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0404/2012),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Amendment  1

Proposal for a directive

Citation 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

Having regard to the opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor1,

 

______________

 

1 Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor of 18 April 2012 on the 'Open-Data Package' of the European Commission including a Proposal for a Directive amending Directive 2003/98/EC on re-use of public sector information (PSI).

Amendment  2

Proposal for a directive

Recital 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

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

Amendment  3

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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. 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.

(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 to 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, 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  4

Proposal for a directive

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3) Allowing re-use of 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 providing feedback from re-users and end users which allows the holder to improve the quality of the information collected.

(3) Allowing re-use of data and documents held by a public sector body adds value for the re-users, for the end users, for the society in general and 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  5

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) Directive 2003/98/EC does not contain an obligation to allow re-use of documents. The decision whether or not to authorise re-use remains with the Member Sates 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.

(6) Directive 2003/98/EC does not justify an obligation 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. That Directive merely 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, whereas other Member States have legally separated the right of re-use from national rules on access to information and freedom of information.

Amendment  6

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(6a) The obligation to make all generally available documents re-usable and to grant permission to re-use documents access to which is not restricted by virtue of access regimes in the Member States should be ensured while respecting the subsidiarity principle and guaranteeing the protection of privacy and personal data at Union level with respect for and in full compliance with Union data protection legislation, including in cross-border data re-use.

Amendment  7

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

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

Amendment  8

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(6c) Directive 2003/98/EC does not contain an obligation for Member States to digitise analogue material which they have available, or to make it accessible in an open format. Public sector bodies may themselves decide when and under what conditions data are to be digitised .

Amendment  9

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(6d) 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 that public task to be defined for the bodies concerned either in general or from case to case.

Amendment  10

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(7) Directive 2003/98/EC should therefore lay down a general obligation for the Member States, while respecting the subsidiarity principle, to provide that generally available documents may be re-used and to generate all such future documents with a view of their being re-usable. As it constitutes a limitation to the intellectual property rights held 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  11

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(7a) Documents in which the 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 given 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, those data must be guaranteed in order to respect the fundamental right of access to culture, information and education.

Amendment  12

Proposal for a directive

Recital 9 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(9a) Seeking out, digitising and presenting cultural assets are important challenges in order to ensure access to culture, information and education for all. It is therefore important to opt for judicious use of cultural assets which facilitates access to their 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 commercialisation. The cultural institutions with which this Directive is concerned should be supported by public authorities through the establishment of public funds for the digitisation and dissemination of data.

Amendment  13

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(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, encouraging the 'virtualisation' of historical sites in order to simplify access to that type of information. The Directive does not apply to research or educational establishments or to other cultural institutions, such as operas, ballets or theatres, including the archives that are part of these institutions, or to public service broadcasting bodies.

Amendment  14

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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 on-going digitisation of European cultural collections should be promoted.

Amendment  15

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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 such 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  16

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(10c) 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  17

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(10d) Certain personal data contained in archive documents to which the prohibition of 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 they are used in any way.

Amendment  18

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 e (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

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

Amendment  19

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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, 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).

(11) To facilitate re-use, public sector bodies should make documents available through open 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  20

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(11a) A document would be in a machine readable format if it was in a file format that was structured in such a way that software applications could 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. Member States should when appropriate encourage the use of open, machine-readable formats.

Amendment  21

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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.

(12) Where charges are made for allowing and supplying the re-use of documents, they should in principle be limited to the marginal costs incurred for their reproduction, provision and formatting, ensuring of their interoperability and dissemination, unless exceptionally justified according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria. However, the necessity of not hindering the normal running of public sector bodies that are required to cover a substantial part of their costs incurred in the performance of their public task as well as the normal running costs 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 in excess of 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 production, reproduction and dissemination, together with a reasonable return on investment.. The burden of proving that charges are cost-oriented and comply with relevant criteria should always lie with the public sector body charging for the re-use of documents.

Amendment  22

Proposal for a directive

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(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 an 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, should play an important role in this respect. Therefore, Member States should encourage the use of open licences that in time should become standardised across the Union.

Amendment  23

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(14) Proper implementation of some of the features of this Directive, such as means of redress, compliance with charging principles and reporting obligations require review by authorities competent on the re-use of public sector information. Member States have a responsibility to make appropriate national authorities responsible for that 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.

Justification

The establishment of an independent regulatory authority would be contrary to the efforts of the Member States to reduce bureaucracy and consolidate budgets and would encroach to an unnecessary degree upon Member States’ powers of self-organisation.

Amendment  24

Proposal for a directive

Recital 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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.

(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, focusing on small and medium enterprises, for added-value information products and services, and 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  25

Proposal for a directive

Recital 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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). Nothing in this Directive should be interpreted or implemented in a manner that is inconsistent with the European Convention on Human Rights.

(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 protection of personal data in all aspects of life (Article 8) and the right to property (Article 17). Nothing in this Directive should be interpreted or implemented in a manner that is inconsistent with the European Convention on Human Rights.

Amendment  26

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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.

(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 impartial body competent to supervise the re-use of public sector information. To ensure consistency between approaches at Union level, coordination between the impartial bodies should be encouraged, particularly through exchange of information on best practices and data re-use policies.

Amendment  27

Proposal for a directive

Recital 18

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(18) The Commission should 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.

(18) The Commission should assist the Member States in implementing the Directive in a consistent way by making proposals and giving non-binding guidance, particularly on charging and calculation of costs, on recommended licensing conditions and on formats, after consulting interested parties. Thus, cross-border exchange of best practices and knowledge between stakeholders, public bodies and regulators should be promoted by the Commission and the Member States.

Amendment  28

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 1 – point 1 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(1a) In paragraph 2, point (b) is replaced by the following:

 

"(b) documents in which third parties hold intellectual property rights, including documents held by a university library in which the university holds intellectual property rights;".

Justification

This amendment is intended to clarify that the directive does not apply to documents held by a library which forms part of the university which holds the intellectual property right (IPR) in the document. A university and its libraries may constitute a single legal entity. Without amendment, the exclusion of documents subject to third-party IPR would not apply where a library holds the document but the IPR is held by the university because the university would not be a separate (i.e., third) party.

Amendment  29

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 1 – point 1 b (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 1 - paragraph 2 - point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(1b) In paragraph 2, point (c) is replaced by the following:

 

(c) documents which are excluded from access by virtue of the access regimes in the Member States, including on the grounds of:

 

- the protection of national security (i.e. State security), defence, or public security,

 

- statistical or commercial confidentiality;

 

- protection of privacy and personal data;”.

Amendment  30

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 1 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point e

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

‘(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 ;’

(e) documents held by educational and research establishments, 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  31

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 1 – point 2 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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;

Justification

It has to be ensured that cultural establishments which hold materials of a particularly sensitive religious nature or on traditional knowledge are able to treat the reuse of such materials ethically.

Amendment  32

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 1 – point 3 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 1– paragraph 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(3a) Paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:

 

3. This Directive builds on and is without prejudice to access regimes in the Member States.

Amendment  33

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 1 – point 5 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 1– paragraph 5 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(5a) The following paragraph is added after paragraph 5:

 

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

Amendment  34

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 2 – point 6

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) 'machine-readable' means that digital documents are sufficiently structured for software applications to identify reliably individual statements of fact and their internal structure.’

(6) 'machine-readable' means that digital documents are structured so that software applications can, in a open format manner, easily and reliably identify, recognize and extract individual statements of fact and their internal structure.

Amendment  35

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 2 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 2 – paragraph 6 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

2a. The following paragraph is added to Article 2:

 

"6a. 'anonymisation' means carrying out the necessary procedures to delete, mask or to make illegible personal data."

Amendment  36

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 2 b (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 2 – paragraph 6 b (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

2b. The following paragraph is added to Article 2:

 

"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  37

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 2 c (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 2 – paragraph 6 c (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

2c. The following paragraph is added to Article 2:

 

"6c. "open format" means a format that is platform independent, machine readable, and made available to the public without legal, technical or financial restrictions that would impede the re-use of that information".

Amendment  38

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 3 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1) Subject to paragraph (2) Member States shall ensure that documents 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.

(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, those documents shall be disseminated in an open format, machine-readable form.

Amendment  39

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 3 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(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, those documents shall be disseminated in an open format.

Amendment  40

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 4 – point - 1 (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(-1) Paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

 

"(1) Public sector bodies shall process requests for re-use by electronic means. They shall make, by electronic means where possible and appropriate, the document available for re-use to the applicant or, if a licence is needed, finalise the licence offer to the applicant within a period of reasonable time that is consistent with the time frames laid down for the processing of requests for access to documents.

Amendment  41

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 4 – point - 2

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) At the end of paragraph 4, the following wording is added:

(2) At the end of paragraph 4, the following wording is added:

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.

"The means of redress shall include the possibility of review by the respective impartial body in the Member State that rules on the re-use of public sector information and whose decisions are binding upon the public sector body concerned."

Amendment  42

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 4 – point 2 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 5 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(2a) The following paragraph is added to Article 4:

 

(5a) This Directive is fully compliant with applicable data protection law. If public data made available for re-use concern personal data, it should be specified under what conditions and subject to which specific data protection safeguards re-use is permissible, if practicable under a licence. That assessment shall ensure that there is an adequate legal basis for the transfer and re-use of data under national law, that the re-use 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. The Commission shall monitor the implementation of this Directive closely so that it does not infringe Union data protection legislation.

Amendment  43

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 5

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 5 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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

(1) Paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

 

"(1) Public sector bodies shall make their documents available in any pre existing format or language and where possible and appropriate, in open , machine-readable format together with their metadata, both of which in so far as possible should comply with open, formal standards. Documents created after the entry into force of this Directive shall in principle be made available in machine readable format. That shall not imply an obligation to adapt where the adaptation of existing documents, including the provision of extracts, would involve disproportionate effort, in accordance with transparent, objective and verifiable criteria.".

Amendment  44

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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 and dissemination.

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  45

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 6 – paragraphs 2 and 3

 

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. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to the following:

 

(a) public sector bodies that are required to generate revenue to cover a substantial part of the cost of production, reproduction and dissemination of documents;

 

(b) libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives.

 

Those exceptions maybe granted provided it is in the public interest and in accordance with objective, transparent and verifiable criteria, and without prejudice to paragraph 4 of this Article.

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.’

3. Charges made over and above the marginal costs by bodies referred to in points (a) and (b) of paragraph 2 are subject to review by an impartial body as referred to in Article 4 (4).

Amendment  46

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 6 – point 2 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(2a) The following paragraph is added to Article 6:

 

"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  47

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 6 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 5

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3) A new paragraph 5 is added:

deleted

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

 

Amendment  48

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 7

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 7

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7) In Article 7 (Transparency), the words ‘over and above the marginal costs or’ are inserted after ‘calculation of charges’.

(7) In Article 7, the 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  49

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 8 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 8 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

‘Public sector bodies may allow re-use without conditions or may impose conditions, such as 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.’

"1. Public sector bodies may allow re-use of documents without conditions or may impose conditions, 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  50

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 9

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 9

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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.

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

 

That shall not entail an obligation for public sector bodies to create or adapt documents in order to comply with the request, nor shall it entail an obligation to provide extracts from documents where that would involve disproportionate effort, going beyond a simple operation.

Amendment  51

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 9 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 9 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

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  52

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 9 b (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 11 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

9b. Article 11(2) is replaced by the following:

 

"2. However, 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 by the authority referred to in Article. 4(4), 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 by the public sector bodies concerned."

Amendment  53

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 9 c (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

9c. The following paragraph is added to Article 11:

 

"2a. Where an exclusive right granting preferential commercial exploitation terms is necessary to digitise cultural resources, such preferential exploitation shall not exceed seven years in general. Such exclusive arrangements, established after the entry into force of this Directive, shall be transparent and made public. Where an exclusive right granting preferential commercial exploitation is necessary to digitise cultural resources, the public sector body concerned shall be provided with a free copy of the digitised cultural resources as part of those arrangements. Regardless of any contractual terms to the contrary, every digital copy shall be made available by the cultural institution for public re- use at the end of the period of exclusivity .".

Amendment  54

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 10

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 11 – paragraph 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10) In Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements), the following sentence is added at the end of 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]."

"Existing arrangements involving libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives shall be terminated at the end of the contract.

Amendment  55

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 12

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 13 – paragraphs 1 and 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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:

(12) In Article 13 (Review) the date of 1 July 2008 is replaced by [five years after the entry into force of this Directive] 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).

"2a. Member States shall submit every two years a 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 impartial body in the Member States referred to in Article 4(4).The Commission shall publish every two years a relevant scoreboard including performance indicators for the re-use of public sector information.".

(1)

OJ C 191, 29.6.2012, p. 129.


OPINION of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (15.10.2012)

for the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2003/98/EC on re-use of public sector information

(COM(2011)0877 – C7-0502/2011 – 2011/0430(COD))

Rapporteur: Rafał Trzaskowski

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection calls on the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:

Amendment  1

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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  2

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) Directive 2003/98/EC does not contain an obligation to allow re-use of documents. The decision whether or not to authorise re-use remains with the Member Sates 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.

(6) Directive 2003/98/EC does not justify an obligation 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, whereas other Member States have legally separated the right of re-use from national rules on access to information and freedom of information.

Amendment  3

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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  4

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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  5

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(7) Directive 2003/98/EC should therefore regulate how Member States make all available documents available for re-use. 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  6

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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  7

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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  8

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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, 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)

(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).

Amendment  9

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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  10

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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.

Justification

Definition based on a definition provided by the European Commission for the purpose of the European Interoperability Framework.

Amendment  11

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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.

(12) Where charges are made for the re-use of documents, they should in principle be limited to the marginal costs incurred in the process of meeting a given request for re-use. 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 always lie with the public sector body charging for the re-use of documents. Those charges should be set according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria.

Amendment  12

Proposal for a directive

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(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, should play an important role in this respect. Therefore, Member States should encourage the use of open licences that in time should become standardised across the Union.

Amendment  13

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(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. Where implementation results in conflict, recourse can be made to national ombudsmen systems or the European Ombudsman.

Justification

The establishment of an independent regulatory authority would be contrary to the efforts of the Member States to reduce bureaucracy and consolidate budgets and would encroach to an unnecessary degree upon Member States’ powers of self-organisation.

Amendment  14

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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.

(17) It is necessary to ensure that the Member States (see recital 19) report to the Commission on the availability of public sector information for re-use, the conditions under which it is made available, 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  15

Proposal for a directive

Recital 18

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(18) The Commission should 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.

(18) The Commission should assist the Member States in implementing the Directive in a consistent way by 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  16

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 1 – point 1 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 1 - paragraph 2 - point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(1 a) In paragraph 2, point (c) is replaced by the following:

 

'(c) documents which are excluded from access by virtue of the access regimes in the Member States, including on the grounds of:

 

- the protection of national security (i.e. State security), defence, or public security,

 

- statistical or commercial confidentiality;

 

- protection of privacy and personal data;'

Amendment  17

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 2 – point 6 (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6. “machine-readable” means that digital documents are sufficiently structured for software applications to identify reliably individual statements of fact and their internal structure.

6. “document in a machine-readable format” means a digital document in a file format which allows software applications to easily identify, recognise and extract data of interest from that document in a technologically neutral way.

Amendment  18

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 4 – point - 1 (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(- 1) Paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

 

Public sector bodies shall process requests for re-use through electronic means. They shall make, through electronic means where possible and appropriate, the document available for re-use to the applicant or, if a licence is needed, finalise the licence offer to the applicant within a reasonable time that is consistent with the time frames laid down for the processing of requests for access to documents.

Amendment  19

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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.

The means of redress shall include a reference to the possibility of review by an authority in the Member States.

Justification

The establishment of an independent regulatory authority would be contrary to the efforts of the Member States to reduce bureaucracy and consolidate budgets and would encroach to an unnecessary degree upon Member States’ powers of self-organisation.

Amendment  20

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point 2 (new)

2003/98/EC

Article 4 – new paragraph

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

This Directive is fully compliant with applicable data protection law. If public data made available for re-use concern personal data, it should be establish under what conditions and subject to what specific data protection safeguards reuse is permissible, if practicable under a licence. 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. The Commission shall monitor closely if implementation of this Directive does not infringe EU data protection legislation.

Amendment  21

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 5 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. In paragraph 1, the words ‘through electronic means’ are replaced by ‘in machine-readable format and together with their metadata.’.

1. Paragraph 1 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  22

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 1 (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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 and dissemination.

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.

 

2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to:

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.’

a) exceptional cases, where public sector bodies are required to generate revenue to cover a substantial part of their operating costs relating to the performance of their public service task, public sector bodies may be allowed to charge for the re-use of documents over and above the marginal costs 

‘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.’

b) libraries (including university libraries), museums and archive

 

3. Where charges are made under paragraph 2, they are set according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria. 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.  If applicable, it shall also not exceed, anonymization of personal data or investments for the purpose of making the data available for re-use through electronic means. Charges made under 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.

 

4. Charges made under paragraph 3 are subject to review by the independent authority referred to in Article 4(4), and without prejudice to paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article.

Amendment  23

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 7

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7) In Article 7 (Transparency), the words ‘over and above the marginal costs or’ are inserted after ‘calculation of charges’.

(7) In Article 7 (Transparency), the 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  24

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 8 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 8 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Public sector bodies may allow re-use without conditions or may impose conditions, such as 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.

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 be made available through electronic means and shall not unnecessarily restrict possibilities for re-use and shall not be used to restrict competition.

Amendment  25

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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  26

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 9

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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.

Member States shall make practical arrangements to facilitate searches for documents available for re-use throughout the Union, such as asset lists of main documents with relevant metadata, accessible preferably in technology-neutral, machine-readable format, and portal sites that are linked to asset lists.

Justification

It is worthwhile to introduce cross-lingual search functions, and they are already provided voluntarily. However, in view of the financial situation of the public sector, introducing a general requirement always to provide such search options in other European languages as well would entail disproportionately high costs.

Amendment  27

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 11 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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  28

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 b (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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  29

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – introductory part

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 11 – paragraph 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10) In Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements), the following sentence is added at the end of paragraph 3:

(10) Paragraph 3 of Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements) 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  30

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – introductory part

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 13

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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:

(12) In Article 13 (Review) the date of 1 July 2008 is replaced by [5 years after the date of entry into force] and the following paragraph is added:

Amendment  31

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 12

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 13 – paragraph 3 (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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).

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

PROCEDURE

Title

Amendment of Directive 2003/98/EC on re-use of public sector information

References

COM(2011)0877 – C7-0502/2011 – 2011/0430(COD)

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

ITRE

15.12.2011

 

 

 

Opinion by

       Date announced in plenary

IMCO

15.12.2011

Rapporteur

       Date appointed

Rafał Trzaskowski

29.2.2012

Discussed in committee

8.5.2012

20.6.2012

18.9.2012

 

Date adopted

11.10.2012

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

28

0

2

Members present for the final vote

Pablo Arias Echeverría, Adam Bielan, Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, Sergio Gaetano Cofferati, Birgit Collin-Langen, Lara Comi, Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, António Fernando Correia de Campos, Vicente Miguel Garcés Ramón, Louis Grech, Mikael Gustafsson, Małgorzata Handzlik, Malcolm Harbour, Iliana Ivanova, Sandra Kalniete, Edvard Kožušník, Hans-Peter Mayer, Gesine Meissner, Sirpa Pietikäinen, Phil Prendergast, Zuzana Roithová, Heide Rühle, Christel Schaldemose, Andreas Schwab, Catherine Stihler, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein, Gino Trematerra, Barbara Weiler

Substitute(s) present for the final vote

Regina Bastos, Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz, María Irigoyen Pérez, Olle Schmidt, Olga Sehnalová, Kyriacos Triantaphyllides, Kerstin Westphal


OPINION of the Committee on Culture and Education (17.7.2012)

for the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2003/98/EC on re-use of public sector information

(COM(2011)0877 – C7-0502/2011 – 2011/0430(COD))

Rapporteur: Sabine Verheyen

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The proposal for a directive initiates a paradigm shift towards a policy of ‘open access’ to public data in the digital era. The basic idea is that the public has a right to information which has been gathered on behalf of the public authorities using tax revenue.

The rapporteur welcomes steps which can promote permanent open access to cultural information, and supports efforts to accelerate the digitisation of European cultural collections. She is aware of the economic and social importance of public data and their digital availability.

The digitisation of cultural collections will make the European cultural heritage more accessible for all citizens. The rapporteur therefore welcomes an extension of the scope of such action to include libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives. Public-sector information has an enormous economic, social and innovative potential. It is to be anticipated that the creative and cultural industries, in particular, will benefit from an extension of the scope.

In order to make optimal use of the opportunities available, the rapporteur considers that improvements should be made on certain points, as the proposal for a directive could adversely affect the financial situation and digitisation efforts in the public sector (relating to culture).

§ Autonomy of decision-making by public sector bodies: National (or local) decision-makers must retain the power to decide for themselves on the use of their information and be able to cover a large part of the costs which they have incurred in carrying out their public remit. The rapporteur considers that it should remain possible to exclude certain documents from re-use, e.g. because of the frequently uncontrolled collection of raw data which can only be re-used after further processing.

§  Interoperability: The rapporteur agrees with the Commission that only data and metadata which already exist in digital form should be made available in the standard data formats in a machine-readable, technology-neutral manner, in order to guarantee the interoperability of data

§ Establishment of an independent authority and reversal of the burden of proof: The call for an independent authority with special regulatory powers to be established is contrary to the efforts of the Member States to reduce bureaucracy and consolidate budgets. Compulsory reporting and a reversal of the burden of proof that charges are compliant would compel public administrations to incur disproportionate additional costs. The rapporteur proposes leaving it to Member States to decide which national body they should make responsible for supervising the correct implementation of the directive. Applicants should retain the right to bring legal proceedings if an objection procedure is unsuccessful.

§ Charges and criteria for setting them: The rapporteur would point out that libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives whose legal form is public or which are publicly administered often have to finance their own operation to varying extents. Moreover, the current costs of long-term archiving of digital data are very high. The Directive should therefore introduce appropriate charging principles, which make it possible to levy charges that cover costs in full when information is re-used, in order to internalise the extra costs involved in passing on the data. Otherwise there is a danger that the quality of public-sector information will suffer and that the capacity for investment in this field will be reduced. In addition, digitisation for commercial purposes would ultimately occur purely at the expense of public establishments, with adverse consequences for digitisation projects.

§ Exclusivity agreements: 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 facilitate worthwhile use and rapid accessing of cultural collections. For mass digitisation projects in which private partners incur substantial financial costs, it is necessary to grant exclusive rights in order to carry out a project which is in the public interest. The rapporteur therefore believes that Directive 2003/98/EC should not preclude the granting of exclusive rights but limit agreements on the subject to a term of seven years.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Culture and Education calls on the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:

Amendment  1

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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. 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.

(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  2

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) Directive 2003/98/EC does not contain an obligation to allow re-use of documents. The decision whether or not to authorise re-use remains with the Member Sates 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.

(6) Directive 2003/98/EC does not contain an obligation 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, whereas other Member States have legally separated the right of re-use from national rules on access to information and freedom of information.

Amendment  3

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6a) Member States’ arrangements for access to public-sector 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  4

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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  5

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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  6

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(7) Directive 2003/98/EC limits the intellectual property rights held by the authors of the documents. 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  7

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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  8

Proposal for a directive

Recital 9 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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.

Amendment  9

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(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 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  10

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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  11

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(10b) 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  12

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(10c) 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 the cooperation partner. 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  13

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

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

Amendment  14

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 e (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10e) Public-service broadcasting should continue to be excluded from the scope of Directive 2003/98/EC.

Amendment  15

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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, 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)

(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).

Amendment  16

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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.

(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.

Amendment  17

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(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. 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.

Justification

The establishment of an independent regulatory authority would be contrary to the efforts of the Member States to reduce bureaucracy and consolidate budgets, and would encroach to an unnecessary degree upon Member States’ powers of self-organisation.

Amendment  18

Proposal for a directive

Recital 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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.

(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 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  19

Proposal for a directive

Recital 18

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(18) The Commission should 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.

(18) The Commission should assist the Member States in implementing the Directive in a consistent way by 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  20

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 2 – point 6

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) 'machine-readable' means that digital documents are sufficiently structured for software applications to identify reliably individual statements of fact and their internal structure.’

(6) 'machine-readable' means that digital documents are structured so that software applications can, in a technology-neutral manner, extract individual data which are of interest.’

Amendment  21

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 3 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1) Subject to paragraph (2) Member States shall ensure that documents 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.

(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  22

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 3

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 3 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(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  23

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 4 – paragraph 2

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) At the end of paragraph 4, the following wording is added:

(2) Paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

‘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.

4. Any negative decision shall contain a reference to the means of redress in case the applicant wishes to appeal the decision. The means of redress shall include a reference to the possibility of review by an authority in the Member States.

Amendment  24

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 5

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 5 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. In paragraph 1, the words ‘through electronic means’ are replaced by ‘in machine-readable format and together with their metadata.’.

1. Paragraph 1 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  25

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 6 – paragraph 1

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 and dissemination.’

(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  26

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 6 – paragraph 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) Paragraph 1 shall not apply to:

 

(a) exceptional cases in which public sector bodies need to make a profit in order to cover a large part of the costs they have incurred in carrying out their public remit;

 

(b) libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives.

Justification

In the event of commercial re-use, public sector bodies should be permitted to levy charges which cover costs in order to meet the outlay incurred in forwarding the data and avoid deleterious effects on the quality of public-sector information and on capacity to invest. To some extent, libraries (including university libraries), museums and archives have to finance their own operations. If this revenue were lost, large deficits would arise in the Member States’ budgets for culture.

Amendment  27

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 6 – paragraph 1

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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  28

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 6 – paragraph 2

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 4

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) The existing text of Article 6 becomes 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 income derived from supplying and from authorising re-use of these documents shall not exceed the cost of collection, production, reproduction, provision and dissemination, while allowing a reasonable return on investment which accords with the performance of the public remits of the bodies and institutions. 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  29

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

2a. The following paragraph shall be inserted :

 

‘4a. Member States shall have a responsibility to appoint an authority which is suitable and possesses the right expertise to review compliance with the criteria for calculating charges referred to in paragraph 4.’

Amendment  30

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 6 – paragraph 3

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 5

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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  31

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 7

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 7

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7) In Article 7 (Transparency), the words ‘over and above the marginal costs or’ are inserted after ‘calculation of charges’.

(7) In Article 7 (Transparency), the 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  32

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 8 – paragraph 1

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 8 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

‘Public sector bodies may allow re-use without conditions or may impose conditions, such as 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.’

Public sector bodies may allow re-use of documents without conditions or may impose conditions, 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  33

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 9

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 9

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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.’

Member States shall make practical arrangements to facilitate searches for documents available for re-use throughout the Union, such as asset lists of main documents with relevant metadata, accessible preferably in technology-neutral, machine-readable format, and portal sites that are linked to asset lists.’

Justification

It is worthwhile to introduce cross-lingual search functions, and they are already provided voluntarily. However, in view of the financial situation of the public sector, introducing a general requirement always to provide such search options in other European languages as well would entail disproportionately high costs.

Amendment  34

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 9 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 11 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(9a) In Article 11, paragraph 2is 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  35

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 9 b (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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.’

Amendment  36

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 10

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 11 – paragraph 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10) In Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements), the following sentence is added at the end of paragraph 3:

(10) In Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements) paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:

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].’

‘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 paragraphs 2 or 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  37

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 12 – introductory part

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 13 - paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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:

(12) In Article 13(1)(Review) the words "1 July 2008" are replaced by [5 years after the date of entry into force of this directive] and the following paragraph is added:

Amendment  38

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 12

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 13 – paragraph 2a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

‘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).’

(2a) ‘Member States shall submit a 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).’

Justification

It is not clear what purpose compulsory annual reporting would serve, as no changes are likely to occur within a single year in the factors which would be subject to the reporting requirement, and it would impose a disproportionate additional burden on public bodies.

PROCEDURE

Title

Amendment of Directive 2003/98/EC on re-use of public sector information

References

COM(2011)0877 – C7-0502/2011 – 2011/0430(COD)

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

ITRE

15.12.2011

 

 

 

Opinion by

       Date announced in plenary

CULT

15.12.2011

Rapporteur

       Date appointed

Sabine Verheyen

24.1.2012

Discussed in committee

27.3.2012

29.5.2012

 

 

Date adopted

10.7.2012

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

21

5

2

Members present for the final vote

Malika Benarab-Attou, Lothar Bisky, Piotr Borys, Jean-Marie Cavada, Santiago Fisas Ayxela, Lorenzo Fontana, Mary Honeyball, Petra Kammerevert, Morten Løkkegaard, Emma McClarkin, Emilio Menéndez del Valle, Katarína Neveďalová, Doris Pack, Chrysoula Paliadeli, Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid, Marietje Schaake, Marco Scurria, Emil Stoyanov, Hannu Takkula, László Tőkés, Helga Trüpel, Marie-Christine Vergiat, Sabine Verheyen, Milan Zver

Substitute(s) present for the final vote

Ivo Belet, Nessa Childers, Nadja Hirsch, Iosif Matula, Mitro Repo

Substitute(s) under Rule 187(2) present for the final vote

Evžen Tošenovský


OPINION of the Committee on Legal Affairs (11.10.2012)

for the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2003/98/EC on re-use of public sector information

(COM(2011)0877 – C7-0502/2011 – 2011/0430(COD))

Rapporteur: Marielle Gallo

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The proposal for a directive is part of the Digital Agenda for Europe. Public sector information can be used in the development of new digital products and services and is a vast source of growth potential that has not been sufficiently exploited by Member States.

The rapporteur welcomes the timeliness of the Commission proposal, given that the Internet is no longer seen as a source of information and knowledge, but by many as a source of data.

As regards the content of the proposal, the rapporteur wishes to draw attention to the following points:

1. Scope of the directive

Documents which are not accessible due to personal data protection reasons should be excluded from the scope of the directive.

2. Definitions

In order to facilitate its re-use, public sector information should be made available in technology-neutral and machine-readable formats. Efforts should be made to ensure that, as far as possible, specific technology is not needed to process the documents.

3. Charges

The issue of charges is key to the success of the re-use of public sector information. If the charges are set too high, the development of new digital products and services will be cost-prohibitive for businesses, particularly start-ups and SMEs. However, some public sector bodies derive part of their revenue from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights.

The rapporteur is aware that a balance needs to be struck between these two objectives - increasing the re-use of public information, on the one hand, and financing the public service tasks of certain bodies, on the other hand. The rapporteur proposes maintaining the possibility for certain public bodies and libraries, museums and archives to charge amounts that exceed the marginal costs involved in reproducing information and making it available, on the basis of objective, transparent and verifiable criteria and subject to the approval of the national authority competent to supervise the re-use of public sector information.

4. Independent authority responsible for supervising the re-use of public sector information

Lastly, the rapporteur takes the view that a new administrative authority does not need to be created to supervise the re-use of public sector information. Member States can designate an existing authority to successfully carry out this role.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Legal Affairs calls on the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments into its report:

Amendment  1

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(7) Directive 2003/98/EC should therefore lay down a clear obligation for Member States to make all generally available documents re-usable. This obligation should not apply to documents which, in accordance with existing access rules in the Member States, are not accessible, or which are covered by the exceptions provided for in this Directive.

Amendment  2

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(7a) 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  3

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(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, or to public service broadcasting bodies.

Amendment  4

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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, 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).

(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).

Amendment 5

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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.

(12) Where charges are made for the re-use of documents, they should be set according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria that ensure equal treatment. They should in principle be limited to the marginal costs involved in reproducing documents and making them available. However, the fact that some public bodies may generate revenue to cover a substantial part of their costs relating to the performance of their public tasks from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights should notably be taken into consideration. Those bodies and also libraries, museums and archives, should be able to levy charges that exceed the marginal costs involved in reproducing documents and making them available and provide a reasonable return on investment. The charges should be set according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria that ensure equal treatment. 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  6

Proposal for a directive

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(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, 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.

Justification

In order to eliminate proliferation of licenses and persisting and emerging differences between Member States in the exploitation of public sector information, licensing of PSI metadata should follow lisencing standards as established by e.g. Europeana, see 12 September Europeana Press Release at http://goo.gl/inTkj.

Amendment  7

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(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 authorities competent on the re-use of public sector information. Member States should determine which authorities are competent to supervise the re-use of public sector information.

Amendment  8

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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.

(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 authority competent to supervise 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  9

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 1 – point 1 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(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  10

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 1 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point e

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

'(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 ;’

'(e) documents held by educational and research establishments, 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  11

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 1 – point 3 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(3a) In paragraph 2, the following point is added:

 

'(fa) documents which, in accordance with Member State law, are not accessible for personal data protection reasons.'

Amendment  12

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 2 – paragraph 6

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6. 'machine-readable' means that digital documents are sufficiently structured for software applications to identify reliably individual statements of fact and their internal structure;

6. ‘machine-readable’ means that digital documents are structured in such a way that software applications can, in a technology-neutral manner, identify reliably and extract the relevant data;

Amendment  13

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 4 – point 2

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) At the end of paragraph 4, the following wording is added:

(2) Paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

'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.'

'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 impartial review body, such as the national competition authority, the national access to documents authority or the national judicial authority, that has the authority to investigate complaints regarding the re-use of public sector documents and whose decisions must be considered binding by the public sector body concerned.'

Amendment   14

Proposal for a directive

Article 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 revenue from the exploitation of their intellectual property rights to cover a substantial part of their costs relating to the performance of their public tasks or a particular activity insofar as it falls within their public tasks and represents a substantial part of these tasks, public sector bodies may be allowed to charge for the re-use of documents over and above the marginal costs.'

Amendment  15

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 6 – point 1

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

'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.'

'3. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, libraries (including university libraries), museums, 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 on the basis of objective, transparent and verifiable criteria and subject to the approval of the authority referred to in Article 4(4).'

Amendment  16

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 9

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 9

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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.

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

Amendment  17

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 10

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 11 paragraph 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

10. In Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements), the following sentence is added at the end of paragraph 3:

10. Article 11 (Prohibition of exclusive arrangements) is amended as follows:

 

(1) The following paragraph is inserted :

 

'2a. Notwithstanding paragraph 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  18

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – point 10 – point 1 a (new)

Directive 2003/98/EC

Article 11 – paragraph 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(1a) 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].'

'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 [10 years after entry into force of the Directive].'

PROCEDURE

Title

Amendment of Directive 2003/98/EC on re-use of public sector information

References

COM(2011)0877 – C7-0502/2011 – 2011/0430(COD)

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

ITRE

15.12.2011

 

 

 

Opinion by

       Date announced in plenary

JURI

15.12.2011

Rapporteur

       Date appointed

Marielle Gallo

19.12.2011

Discussed in committee

9.7.2012

18.9.2012

 

 

Date adopted

11.10.2012

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

20

2

0

Members present for the final vote

Luigi Berlinguer, Sebastian Valentin Bodu, Giuseppe Gargani, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Gerald Häfner, Sajjad Karim, Klaus-Heiner Lehne, Antonio Masip Hidalgo, Bernhard Rapkay, Evelyn Regner, Francesco Enrico Speroni, Rebecca Taylor, Alexandra Thein, Rainer Wieland, Cecilia Wikström, Tadeusz Zwiefka

Substitute(s) present for the final vote

Piotr Borys, Eva Lichtenberger, József Szájer, Axel Voss

Substitute(s) under Rule 187(2) present for the final vote

Sylvie Guillaume, Salvatore Tatarella


PROCEDURE

Title

Amendment of Directive 2003/98/EC on re-use of public sector information

References

COM(2011)0877 – C7-0502/2011 – 2011/0430(COD)

Date submitted to Parliament

12.12.2011

 

 

 

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

ITRE

15.12.2011

 

 

 

Committee(s) asked for opinion(s)

       Date announced in plenary

IMCO

15.12.2011

CULT

15.12.2011

JURI

15.12.2011

LIBE

15.12.2011

Not delivering opinions

       Date of decision

LIBE

28.2.2012

 

 

 

Rapporteur(s)

       Date appointed

Ivailo Kalfin

27.1.2012

 

 

 

Discussed in committee

19.6.2012

17.9.2012

9.10.2012

 

Date adopted

29.11.2012

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

46

4

0

Members present for the final vote

Josefa Andrés Barea, Zigmantas Balčytis, Ivo Belet, Bendt Bendtsen, Jan Březina, Reinhard Bütikofer, Maria Da Graça Carvalho, Giles Chichester, Jürgen Creutzmann, Pilar del Castillo Vera, Dimitrios Droutsas, Vicky Ford, Gaston Franco, Adam Gierek, Norbert Glante, Fiona Hall, Edit Herczog, Kent Johansson, Romana Jordan, Krišjānis Kariņš, Lena Kolarska-Bobińska, Judith A. Merkies, Angelika Niebler, Jaroslav Paška, Vittorio Prodi, Miloslav Ransdorf, Herbert Reul, Jens Rohde, Paul Rübig, Amalia Sartori, Salvador Sedó i Alabart, Francisco Sosa Wagner, Patrizia Toia, Catherine Trautmann, Ioannis A. Tsoukalas, Claude Turmes, Marita Ulvskog, Vladimir Urutchev, Alejo Vidal-Quadras

Substitute(s) present for the final vote

Antonio Cancian, Ioan Enciu, Roger Helmer, Jolanta Emilia Hibner, Bernd Lange, Zofija Mazej Kukovič, Alajos Mészáros, Vladimír Remek, Silvia-Adriana Ţicău, Henri Weber

Substitute(s) under Rule 187(2) present for the final vote

Keith Taylor

Date tabled

7.12.2012

Last updated: 5 June 2013Legal notice