PARLEMENT EUROPÉEN 2009 - 2014 Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 2011/0167(NLE) 21.5.2012 AMENDMENTS 1 - 50 Draft opinion Dimitrios Droutsas (PE480.574v01-00) on the compatibility of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Mexican States, the Kingdom of Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Singapore, the Swiss Confederation and the United States of America with the rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (12195/2011 – C7-0027/2012 – 2011/0167(NLE)) AM\902367EN.doc PE489.544v01-00 EN United in diversity EN AM_Com_NonLegOpinion PE489.544v01-00 2/29 AM\902367EN.doc EN Amendment 1 Cornelia Ernst Draft opinion Paragraph 1 Draft opinion Amendment 1. Acknowledges that intellectual property deleted rights (IPRs) are important tools for the Union in the ‘knowledge economy’ and that adequate enforcement of IPRs is key; recalls that infringements of IPRs harm growth, competitiveness and innovation; points out that ACTA does not create new IPRs, but is an enforcement treaty aimed at tackling effectively IPR infringements; Or. en Amendment 2 Simon Busuttil, Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Frank Engel, Zuzana Roithová, Salvador Sedó i Alabart, Csaba Sógor, Axel Voss, Manfred Weber Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) Draft opinion Amendment 1a. Reiterates that Europe needs an international agreement to step up the fight against counterfeit products as these products are causing billions of Euros of damage every year to European companies, thereby also putting European jobs at risk; notes that in addition, counterfeit products often do not fulfil European safety requirements, posing significant health hazards to consumers; Or. en AM\902367EN.doc 3/29 PE489.544v01-00 EN Amendment 3 Simon Busuttil, Frank Engel, Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Zuzana Roithová, Salvador Sedó i Alabart, Csaba Sógor, Axel Voss, Georgios Papanikolaou, Manfred Weber Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) Draft opinion Amendment 1b. Notes that ACTA must fully respect Union law, especially the Charter and the data protection acquis; reiterates that it is important that ACTA is not open to any interpretation that could lead Member States to infringe the Charter when implementing provisions of ACTA and therefore calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure legal clarity in the provisions of ACTA; Or. en Amendment 4 Zuzana Roithová Draft opinion Paragraph 2 Draft opinion Amendment 2. Recalls that both the content of previous 2. Recalls that the content of previous versions of the agreement as well as the versions of the agreement together with the current text together with the level of level of transparency connected with the transparency connected with the negotiations have been questioned negotiations of the agreement have been repeatedly by Parliament;1 questioned repeatedly by Parliament; ______________ ______________ 1See, for example, EP resolution of 10 March 2010 on the 1See, for example, EP resolution of 10 March 2010 on the transparency and state of play of the ACTA negotiations, transparency and state of play of the ACTA negotiations, P7_TA(2010)0058; P7_TA(2010)0058; The lack of a transparent process for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), declaration of the European Parliament of 9 September 2010 on the lack of a transparent process and potentially objectionable content of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), P7_TA(2010)0317. PE489.544v01-00 4/29 AM\902367EN.doc EN Or. cs Amendment 5 Dimitrios Droutsas Draft opinion Paragraph 2 Draft opinion Amendment 2. Recalls that both the content of previous 2. Recalls that both the content of previous versions of the agreement as well as the versions of the agreement as well as the current text together with the level of current text together with the level of transparency connected with the transparency connected with the negotiations of the agreement have been negotiations of the agreement have been questioned repeatedly by Parliament; questioned repeatedly by Parliament; underlines that in line with Article 218(10) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) Parliament must be immediately and fully informed at all stages of the procedure; takes the view that adequate transparency has not been achieved throughout the negotiations on ACTA; recognises that efforts to inform Parliament have been undertaken by the Commission1, but regrets that the requirement of transparency has been construed very narrowly and only as a result of pressure by Parliament and civil society; ______________ 1 http://ec.europa.eu/trade/tackling-unfair- trade/acta/transparency/ Or. en Amendment 6 Sonia Alfano, Stanimir Ilchev, Sophia in 't Veld, Sarah Ludford, Gianni Vattimo, Renate Weber, Alexander Alvaro Draft opinion Paragraph 3 AM\902367EN.doc 5/29 PE489.544v01-00 EN Draft opinion Amendment 3. Underlines, at the same time, that it is 3. Underlines, at the same time, that it is crucial to strike the appropriate balance crucial to strike the appropriate balance between enforcement of IPRs and between enforcement of IPRs and fundamental rights such as freedom of fundamental rights such as freedom of expression, the right to privacy and expression, the right to privacy and protection of personal data, the right to due protection of personal data and process and recalls the case-law of the confidentiality of communications, the Court of Justice of the European Union right to due process -notably the (CJEU) as regards this fair balance, presumption of innocence and effective judicial proteciton1 - and recalls the case- law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) as regards this fair balance; ______________ 1 See also in this sense the Opinion of the EDPS of 24 April 2012 <http://www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/my Site/shared/Documents/Consultation/Opinions/2012/12- 04-24_ACTA_EN.pdf. Or. en Amendment 7 Zuzana Roithová Draft opinion Paragraph 3 Draft opinion Amendment 3. Underlines, at the same time, that it is 3. Underlines, at the same time, that it is crucial to strike the appropriate balance crucial to strike the appropriate balance between enforcement of IPRs and between enforcement of IPRs and fundamental rights such as freedom of fundamental rights such as freedom of expression, the right to privacy and expression, the right to privacy and protection of personal data, the right to due protection of personal data, the right to due process and recalls the case-law of the process and recalls international treaties1, Court of Justice of the European Union European law2 and the case-law of the (CJEU) as regards this fair balance; Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) as regards this fair balance; ______________ 1In this regard, see Article 7(1) of the TRIPS Agreement and the preambles to the WCT and the WPPT. PE489.544v01-00 6/29 AM\902367EN.doc EN 2See recitals 3, 9 and 31 of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society. In this regard, see point d) of the Opinion of European Academics on Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. http://www.iri.uni- hannover.de/tl_files/pdf/ACTA_opinion_200111_2.pdf (in English); See C-275/06, Promusicae, 200, ECR I- 271 (points 62–68), case C-70/10, Scarlet Extended SA v. Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) (point 44), case C-360/10, Belgische Vereniging van Auteurs, Componisten en Uitgevers CVBA (SABAM) v. Netlog NV (points 42–44) and case C-461/10, Bonnier Audio AB, Earbooks AB, Norstedts Förlagsgrupp AB, Piratförlaget AB, Storyside AB v. Perfect Communication Sweden AB. In this regard, see point d) of the Opinion of European Academics on Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. http://www.iri.uni- hannover.de/tl_files/pdf/ACTA_opinion_200111_2.pdf (in English); See C-275/06, Promusicae, 200, ECR I- 271 (points 62–68), case C-70/10, Scarlet Extended SA v. Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) (point 44), case C-360/10, Belgische Vereniging van Auteurs, Componisten en Uitgevers CVBA (SABAM) v. Netlog NV (points 42–44) and case C-461/10, Bonnier Audio AB, Earbooks AB, Norstedts Förlagsgrupp AB, Piratförlaget AB, Storyside AB v. Perfect Communication Sweden AB. Or. cs Amendment 8 Zuzana Roithová Draft opinion Paragraph 3a (new) Draft opinion Amendment 3a. In this respect stresses that intellectual property rights are themselves among the fundamental rights protected under Article 17(2) of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and under international agreements1; ______________ See, for example, Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 15 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Or. cs AM\902367EN.doc 7/29 PE489.544v01-00 EN Amendment 9 Alexander Alvaro, Sarah Ludford Draft opinion Paragraph 3a (new) Draft opinion Amendment 3a. Notes the safeguards contained in ACTA on privacy, due process and proportionality and the fact that implementation of ACTA in the Union must be subject to and constrained by the requirements of Union and national law on the protection of fundamental rights; Or. en Amendment 10 Zuzana Roithová Draft opinion Paragraph 3b (new) Draft opinion Amendment 3b. Recalls that a number of internal and external limits on intellectual property rights, such as the prevention of unilateral abuse1, contribute to establishing an appropriate balance