Discussion:Telecoms Package compromise-amendments 080912

AM4 and the determination of lawful content

If on one hand it establishes that services providers are not entitled to determine what is a lawful content, service or application, one the other hand, the task of determining what must be considered as lawful shall be the "task of relevant authorities of the member state". Such "relevant authorities" can be of any type and not necessarily judicial authorities. Only the judge should be deemed to qualify a content, service or application. In this context the proposed amendment should make a direct reference to the judge by replacing the term "relevant authorities" by "judicial powers"

This reference to relevant authorities is even less clear as next amendment (AM5) states that "In order to address public interest issues with respect to the use of communications services, and to encourage protection of the rights and freedoms of others, the relevant national authorities should be able to produce and have disseminated, with the aid of providers, public interest information related to the use of communications services". In this context "relevant authorities are bodies engaged in sending warnings to customers regarding copyright infringement.

AM5 and 3 strikes approach

By enabling "relevant authorities" to transmit information to customers regarding "public interest warnings regarding copyright infringement, other unlawful uses and dissemination of harmful content" this amendment is establishing the basis for sending warnings to the public which is a necessary step in order to implement a 3 strikes approach.