LIBE ACTA report amendments

Amendments 1 – 10

Amendment 1 O

Amendement 1 Paragraph 1 Cornelia Ernst O
1. 1. Acknowledges that intellectual property 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;	1. deleted
Comments:

Amendment 2 O

Amendement 2 Paragraph 1 a (new) Simon Busuttil, Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Frank Engel, Zuzana Roithová, Salvador Sedó i Alabart, Csaba Sógor, Axel Voss, Manfred Weber O
	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;
Comments:

Amendment 3 O

Amendement 3 Paragraph 1 b (new) Simon Busuttil, Frank Engel, Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Zuzana Roithová, Salvador Sedó i Alabart, Csaba Sógor, Axel Voss, Georgios Papanikolaou, Manfred Weber O
	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;
Comments:

Amendment 4 O

Amendement 4 Paragraph 2 Zuzana Roithová O
2. Recalls that both the content of previous versions of the agreement as well as the current text together with the level of transparency connected with the negotiations of the agreement have been questioned repeatedly by Parliament;	2. Recalls that the content of previous versions of the agreement together with the level of transparency connected with the negotiations have been questioned repeatedly by Parliament;
Comments:

Amendment 5 O

Amendement 5 Paragraph 2 Dimitrios Droutsas O
2. Recalls that both the content of previous versions of the agreement as well as the current text together with the level of transparency connected with the negotiations of the agreement have been questioned repeatedly by Parliament;	2. Recalls that both the content of previous versions of the agreement as well as the current text together with the level of transparency connected with the negotiations of the agreement have been 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;
Comments:

Amendment 6 O

Amendement 6 Paragraph 3 Sonia Alfano, Stanimir Ilchev, Sophia in 't Veld, Sarah Ludford, Gianni Vattimo, Renate Weber, Alexander Alvaro O
3. Underlines, at the same time, that it is crucial to strike the appropriate balance between enforcement of IPRs and fundamental rights such as freedom of expression, the right to privacy and protection of personal data, the right to due process and recalls the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) as regards this fair balance,	3. Underlines, at the same time, that it is crucial to strike the appropriate balance between enforcement of IPRs and fundamental rights such as freedom of expression, the right to privacy and protection of personal data and confidentiality of communications, the right to due process -notably the presumption of innocence and effective judicial proteciton - and recalls the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) as regards this fair balance;
Comments:

Amendment 7 O

Amendement 7 Paragraph 3 Zuzana Roithová O
3. Underlines, at the same time, that it is crucial to strike the appropriate balance between enforcement of IPRs and fundamental rights such as freedom of expression, the right to privacy and protection of personal data, the right to due process and recalls the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) as regards this fair balance;	3. Underlines, at the same time, that it is crucial to strike the appropriate balance between enforcement of IPRs and fundamental rights such as freedom of expression, the right to privacy and protection of personal data, the right to due process and recalls international treaties, European law and the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) as regards this fair balance;
Comments:

Amendment 8 O

Amendement 8 Paragraph 3a (new) Zuzana Roithová O
	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;
Comments:

Amendment 9 O

Amendement 10 Paragraph 3a (new) Alexander Alvaro, Sarah Ludford O
	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;
Comments:

Amendment 10 O

Amendement 10 Paragraph 3b (new) Zuzana Roithová O
	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 between the enforcement of intellectual property rights and the fundamental rights and interests of the public;
Comments:

Amendments 11 – 20

Amendment 11 O

Amendement 11 Paragraph 3c (new) Zuzana Roithová O
	3c. Points out that fundamental rights are, by nature, based on a number of assumptions1: they are universal, based on rights relating to the personality and on non‑material interests; they are non‑transferable and do not cease; they emanate from the person, are innate and are governed by public law; in this regard, a number of objects protected by intellectual property rights only exhibit some of these characteristics, thus it is necessary to distinguish the use of effective tools to protect such rights, e.g., in the case of life‑saving medicines on the one hand or industrial patents to protect designs on the other, from other interests deriving from other fundamental rights such as, for example, protecting human health;
Comments:

Amendment 12 O

Amendement 12 Paragraph 3d (new) Zuzana Roithová O
	3d. Recalls that ACTA, if adopted, would be equivalent to an international agreement signed by the EU, would be binding upon the European institutions and the Member States and would be an integral part of the EU legal order having direct effect;
Comments:

Amendment 13 O

Amendement 13 Paragraph 3e (new) Zuzana Roithová O
	3e. Points out that, according to European Court of Justice case law, individuals may only rely directly upon the provisions of international agreements signed by the EU when such provisions are, in terms of their content, unconditional and sufficiently precise (i.e., clear and precise obligations have been laid down which are not subject, in their implementation or effects, to the adoption of any subsequent measure); furthermore, the nature and broad logic of the provisions should not preclude their being so relied upon; nevertheless also points out that, where European law features concepts identical to those contained in relevant international agreements, the European provisions must be interpreted, as far as possible, in the light of international law, i.e., taking account of the context in which those concepts are found and the purpose of the relevant provisions of international agreements;
Comments:

Amendment 14 O

Amendement 14 Paragraph 3f (new) Zuzana Roithová O
	3f. Considers that Section 5 'Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in the Digital Environment' is in particular need of greater clarity and coherence, as inaccuracies and incompleteness may result in divergent national rules, and such a fragmented system would act as an obstacle to the internal market, which, in the case of the internet environment, would preclude the wider cross‑border use of the object protected by intellectual property rights;
Comments:

Amendment 15 O

Amendement 15 Paragraph 3g (new) Zuzana Roithová O
	3g. Considers that ACTA does not contain explicit guarantees concerning the protection of sensitive personal information, the right of defence (particularly the right to be heard) or the presumption of innocence;
Comments:

Amendment 16 O

Amendement 16 Paragraph 3h (new) Zuzana Roithová O
	3h. Recalls that according to Article 49 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: ‘no one shall be held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offence under national or international law at the time when it was committed’; points out in this regard that the scope of several provisions set out in Section 4: Criminal Enforcement is ill‑defined;
Comments:

Amendment 17 O

Amendement 17 Paragraph 3i (new) Zuzana Roithová O
	3i. Considers that ACTA does not provide guarantees on preserving the right to respect for private life and communications arising from Article 7 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Comments:

Amendment 18 O

Amendement 18 Paragraph 3j (new) Zuzana Roithová O
	3j. Wonders whether the concepts set out in ACTA, such as the basic principles or the concept of ‘fair process’, are compatible with the concepts set out in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, such as fundamental rights or the right to a fair trial arising from Article 47;
Comments:

Amendment 19 O

Amendement 19 Paragraph 7a (new) Dimitrios Droutsas O
	7a. Reiterates that limitations on the exercise of the rights and freedoms recognised by the Charter must comply with the provisions of the ECHR and with Article 52 of the Charter which prescribe that such limitations be provided for by law, necessary and proportionate to the legitimate aims pursued;
Comments:

Amendment 20 O

Amendement 20 Paragraph 9 Alexander Alvaro, Sarah Ludford, Louis Michel O
9. Recalls that the Commission has decided to refer ACTA to the CJEU on the question of whether ACTA is compatible with Union Treaties, in particular the Charter;	9. Recalls that the Commission has decided to refer ACTA to the CJEU on the question of whether ACTA is compatible with Union Treaties, in particular the Charter, and believes that the Parliament's final position on ACTA should only be taken after the CJEU has given its judgement on this matter;
Comments: