Translation of "activité en qualité d'auteur unique " (French → English) :

22. Stresses that copyright is an important economic basis for creativity, employment and innovation, as well as the guarantor of cultural diversity, and that it is essential to enable Europe’s creative and cultural industries to compete on a global scale; stresses that further efforts are needed in the field of copyright to strike a balance between all key actors, and that any revision of copyright law should ensure adequate protection that fosters investment and growth in the creative and cultural sector, whilst removing legal uncertainties and inconsistencies that adversely affect the functioning of the Digital Single Market (DSM); urges the Commission to review, where necessary, the regulatory framework for copyright in order to achie ...[+++]ve a better access to creative content for European citizens, and to stimulate European researchers, educational establishments, cultural heritage institutions and the creative sector to adapt their activities to the digital world; underlines that appropriate remuneration must be paid by those who profit from the exploitation of copyright-protected works, and that any solutions in this regard should not discourage the use of legal providers; recalls that digital technologies have redefined the value chain in the cultural sector, mostly to the benefit of intermediaries and often to the detriment of creators; asks the Commission to investigate the extent and impact of such changes and to propose measures to improve the remuneration of authors and artists at European level; stresses that any revised provisions should be future-proof and technologically neutral, evidence based and carefully assessed in line with the Commission’s objective of better regulation, while taking into account the differences between the digital and analogical environments;

23. Recognises that commercial copyright infringing activities pose a serious threat to the functioning of the digital single market and to the development of the legal offer of diversified cultural and creative content online;

Fourth plea in law, alleging that the Regulation manifestly violates the principle of proportionality laid down in Article 5 (4) TEU insofar as: first, the impact assessment was devoid of link between quantitative data and the conclusions which were purely based on ‘qualitative’ arguments; second, it manifestly failed to take account of the plant breeding sector as being severely and distinctly impacted due to the fact that genetic resources are the very essence of the sector, and not merely an ancillary part of its activities; third, the Regulation imposes manifestly disproportionate restrictions of Article 16 of the EU Charter; four ...[+++]th, it imposes a de facto eternal obligation on the plant breeding sector to record and keep information on their activities; finally, less onerous measures are available, as is illustrated by the ‘International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture’.

In particular, the Commission should be empowered to: update the list of characteristics in the Annexes; establish the frequency of the compilation of the statistics, the rules for flagging data as contributions to European totals only (CETO), the first reference year for the compilation of the results, and the breakdown of results, in particular the classifications to be used and the combination of the size classes; update the periods of time for the transmission of data; adapt the breakdown of activities and products to amendments or revisions of the statistical classification of economic activities in the European Community (NACE) and classification of products by activity (CPA); a ...[+++]dopt measures on the basis of the evaluation of pilot studies; change the lower limit for the reference population in Annex VIII; and establish criteria for the evaluation of quality.