Difference between revisions of "Gallo report plenary vote campaign"

From La Quadrature du Net
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 3: Line 3:
<big><big><big>NO Private Copyright police in Europe!</big></big></big>
<big><big><big>NO Private Copyright police in Europe!</big></big></big>
<big><big><big>STOP a dogmatic vision of filesharing!</big></big></big>
<big><big><big>STOP a dogmatic vision of filesharing!</big></big></big>
<big><big><big>STOP that trends towards always more enforcement!</big></big></big>
<big><big><big>STOP that trend towards always more enforcement!</big></big></big>
== What? ==
== What? ==

Revision as of 11:25, 4 July 2010

RED ALERT! take 5 minutes to help counter dogmatic copyright enforcement

NO Private Copyright police in Europe! STOP a dogmatic vision of filesharing! STOP that trend towards always more enforcement!


The Gallo report

The "Gallo report" is an initiative report (non-legislative text) initiated by the French EPP Member of the European Parliament Marielle Gallo, on "on enforcement of intellectual property rights in the internal market". It has been adopted in the JURI committee (committe for legal affairs), and will be voted in plenary on July 8th.

Gallo report:

  • amalgamates a vague notion of "online IPR infringements" (including non-commercial ones) with physical goods counterfeiting (that poses real threat to consumers health and safety);
  • calls for more repression in the name of dogmatic vision of a terrible prejudice caused by filesharing, when the US Government Accountability Office recently declared that industry figures were all inflated, and many studies prove that the prejudice is minimal or inexistent.
  • calls for "non-legislative" means of combating filesharing. Such "non-legislative.. (fair trial)
  • generally calls for more repression, including calling for a new criminal enforcement directive (IPRED2), when no impact assessment has been made of the previous enforcement directive (IPRED) so far.

The rapporteur, Marielle Gallo, made sure that any amendment calling for a distinction between for-profit and non-for-profit filesharing was rejected during the vote in JURI committee.

The alternative proposal to Gallo report