Mit der Urheberrechtsreform will die EU die Ansprüche des Urheberrechts an die heutige Zeit anpassen. Heftig umstritten ist Artikel 13 der. Wie verändert die EU Urheberrechtsreform mit Artikel 13 das Internet? Sie steht in der Kritik. Wir haben Experten um ihre Einschätzung. Die umstrittene EU-Urheberrechtsrichtlinie muss bis zum 7. Juni in deutsches Recht umgesetzt werden. Deutschland erklärt in einer.
Abstimmung über Artikel 13: Neues EU-Urheberrecht endgültig beschlossenArtikel 13 des Entwurfes sieht vor, Online-Plattformen mit nutzergenerierten Inhalten dazu zu verpflichten, durch „angemessene und. Besonders die darin enthaltenen Artikel 11 (mit einem europaweiten Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverlage) und Artikel 13 werden heftig kritisiert. Laut Artikel. Damit ist der Weg für die Reform nun frei. Zuvor hatte bereits das Europa-Parlament zugestimmt. Die EU-Länder haben nun rund zwei Jahre Zeit.
Europa Artikel 13 Navigation menu VideoArtikel 13: Wer entscheidet übers europäische Urheberrecht? - ARTE Journal Hunderttausende sind im Frühjahr gegen die EU-Urheberrechtsreform auf die Straße gegangen. Die CDU hatte damals als Beruhigungspille. Mit der Urheberrechtsreform will die EU die Ansprüche des Urheberrechts an die heutige Zeit anpassen. Heftig umstritten ist Artikel 13 der. Wie verändert die EU Urheberrechtsreform mit Artikel 13 das Internet? Sie steht in der Kritik. Wir haben Experten um ihre Einschätzung. Noch immer umstritten ist Artikel 17 der EU -Richtlinie, der ursprüngliche Artikel Darin ist zwar der Einsatz von Uploadfiltern nicht.
Europa Artikel 13 URL Europa Artikel 13 wohl nicht nur rein zufllig die des Anbieters. - Was regelt Artikel 13?Timm Online Regeln zur Veröffentlichung von Ergänzungen findest Du unter netzpolitik.
Based on trends, issues, discussion with authorities, ENISA selects and dives into specific topics, typically times per year.
Sometimes a deep-dive results just in an internal working paper or a technical presentation for the Article 13a group. Please use the ENISA website for a full overview of ENISA publications on telecom security.
To support the MS with the implementation of Article 13a cross border and annual summary reporting, ENISA developed an incident reporting tool which can be used by the national authorities.
For the public we provide detailed information about reported incidents in the ENISA visual tool for reported incidents at the ENISA website. Data Privacy Statement for the reporting tool - CIRAS.
For easy reference, here is a link to the complete EU legal framework for electronic communications, which incorporates the reform. Article 13a can be found on page Der ein oder andere "Insider" wurde auch auf einer der zahlreichen Demonstrationen als Demo-Schild verwendet.
Für viele Gegner der EU-Urheberrechtsreform sind Artikel 13 und der Upload-Filter eine Gefahr für Memes. Ob die "Insider-Witze" der Netzgemeinde wirklich verschwinden könnten ist umstritten.
Wir haben für euch unsere Lieblingsmemes zu Artikel 13 zusammengefasst. Ein neuer Gesetzentwurf für das Leistungsschutzrecht sorgt wieder für Ärger.
Bilder und Memes könnten dadurch in Zukunft winzig werden. Das Warten hat ein Ende: Heute, am April stimmt der Europäische Rat ab Uhr über die EU-Urheberrechtsreform und den Artikel 13 ab.
Die Abstimmung könnt ihr hier via Live-Stream verfolgen. Hier zeigt die Debattenkultur im Internet: Upload-Filter sind wirklich sinnvoll - ein Kommentar.
Die Folgen für EU-Nutzer könnten bis zum Ausschluss von der Plattform reichen. Für die umstrittene Urheberrechtsreform der EU mit Artikel 11 und 13 wurde das Datum für die Abstimmung im EU-Rat bekannt gegeben.
Der tagende Minister-Rat lässt jedoch bei Gegner der Reform erstaunte Gesichter zurück. Bei der Abstimmung über Änderungen der EU-Urheberrechtsreform im Europäischen Parlament haben Abgeordnete falsch abgestimmt.
Ein Mitglied der schwedischen Delegation fand eine sehr kuriose Antwort auf den Vorwurf. März stimmte das Europäische Parlament über die Urheberrechtsreform ab.
Die Reform mit Artikel 11 und Artikel 13 wurde angenommen. Es wurde ein Termin zur Abstimmung über die EU-Urheberrechtsreform bekannt gegeben.
Die Debatte um Artikel 13, Artikel 11 und die Upload-Filter steuert somit auf ihr Finale zu. In January EFSA sent back to the Commission for further clarification more than 2, claims which were vague, not properly described, whose conditions of use had not been spelled out, or whose scope or health relationship were unclear.
In November , EFSA received feedback with additional information from the Member States. In light of the experience gained from the evaluation of health claims, the NDA Panel provides guidance to stakeholders on the scientific requirements and general principles for the evaluation of health claims.
In addition, EFSA has combined the references for around 3, health claim entries into consolidated reference lists.
Due to their large number, references have been published in five parts. This compilation of references includes all references submitted for those main health claim entries which the Commission has asked EFSA to prioritise during evaluation.
Part 1: ID number 1 — 6. Skip to main content. These pages include information on the referral written in public-friendly language in a question-and-answer format, key facts and all documents related to the referral.
For safety-related referrals, it also includes information on how the public can submit data to be considered as part of the assessment and on whether a public hearing is taking place.
For all referrals, the Agency announces their conclusion in the CHMP meeting highlights or the CMDh meeting highlights. Information on Article 20 procedures was previously published as part of the European public assessment report for the medicine concerned.
For Article 20 procedures starting from July , information is available under referrals. Skip to main content. Menu Medicines Medicines Search Download What we publish and when Medicines under evaluation National registers Medicines for use outside the EU.
Veterinary regulatory Overview Research and development Marketing authorisation Post-authorisation. Committees How the committees work CHMP CVMP PRAC COMP HMPC CAT PDCO Working parties and other groups.
About us What we do Who we are How we work Annual reports and work programmes History of EMA Careers Procurement Support to research Contact Legal Glossary Search tips FAQs Brexit: UK withdrawal from EU.
Human regulatory Overview Research and development Marketing authorisation Post-authorisation Herbal products. Referral procedures. There are a number of reasons why a referral may be started, ranging from concerns over the safety of a class of medicine to disagreements among Member States on the use of the medicine: safety-related referrals are assessed by the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee PRAC and then either by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use CHMP or, for nationally authorised medicines, by the Coordination Group for Mutual Recognition and Decentralised Procedures - Human CMDh ; all other referrals on human medicines are assessed by the CHMP only.
Draft Article 13 of the draft replaces the " mere conduit " exemption from copyright infringement from for-profit " online content sharing service providers" with a new, conditional exemption to liability.
These conditions are an implementation of "effective and proportionate measures", as claimed by service providers, to "prevent the availability of specific [unlicensed] works identified by rightsholders", acting "expeditiously" to remove them, and demonstrating that "best efforts" have been made to prevent their future availability.
The article also extends any licenses granted to content hosts to their users, as long as those users are not acting "on a commercial basis".
The article directs member states to consider the size of the provider, the amount of content uploaded, and the effectiveness of the measures imposed "in light of technological developments".
It also mandates an appeals process,  and requires content hosts to share "information on the use of content" with the content's owner, the lack of which has been a point of contention in the past.
Draft Article 13's provisions target commercial web hosts which "store and give the public access to a large number of works or other subject-matter uploaded by its users which [they] organise and promote for profit-making purposes".
The proposal makes explicit that this does not include private cloud storage services, non-profit encyclopedias such as Wikipedia , nor non-profit educational or scientific repositories.
Draft Article 13b requires websites which "automatically reproduce or refer to significant amounts of copyright-protected visual works" to "conclude fair and balanced licensing agreements with any requesting rightholders [ sic ]".
Draft Article 13 was named Article 17 in the final trilogue draft issued in February and approved by the European Parliament and Council.
As a whole, draft articles Directive Articles in the working version of the Directive, improve the bargaining position of authors and performers, even though it set out systems that were weaker than some existing ones in member states.
Associations of authors had proposed a "rights reversion mechanism" which would allow cancelling a copyright transfer agreement proven to be disadvantageous.
Other passages of the proposal attempt to clarify the legal status of orphan works and certain common activities by libraries. Prior to the Trilogue negotiations, Article 12a proposed granting sports event organisers copyright over recordings of their events.
As of 21 March , MEPs have signed in support of the directive, while have agreed to vote against it.
In , support in the European Parliament was led by the European People's Party group and the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats , the parliament's two largest groups.
Major national parties in support include Germany's ruling Christian Democratic Union and their coalition partners the Social Democratic Party , the United Kingdom's ruling Conservative Party and opposition Labour Party , and Poland's main opposition party, Civic Platform.
The directive's rapporteur , Axel Voss , is German MEP and a member of the EPP. He points out that content filtering technology has been in use on YouTube for a decade without having ever sparked an "anti-censorship campaign",  and accuses "big [internet] platforms" of mounting a "fake news campaign".
Google are trying to prevent that from happening". Other opponents include a large number of smaller parties at either end of the political spectrum.
It has been rumoured that during the European Council 's private vote to approve its negotiating position in March the ambassadors of Germany, Finland, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Belgium and Hungary either abstained from voting or voted against the proposal.
The day before the Parliament vote, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reported that Germany may have caved in to support the Directive at the last minute in exchange for France's approval of the controversial Nord Stream 2 project, a natural gas pipeline from Russia.
In , Human Rights Watch and Reporters Without Borders were among the signatories of an open letter opposing Article The Italian Wikipedia ,    later followed by others including the Spanish ,   Estonian , Latvian , Polish ,   French , and Portuguese editions,  "blacked-out" its pages for readers on 3—5 July , while the English Wikipedia added a banner asking readers in Europe to contact their representatives in the European Parliament.
Google which operates the Google News aggregation site which would be affected has opposed the directive since its first inception in , when they argued that the proposals would "turn the internet into a place where everything uploaded to the web must be cleared by lawyers".
The Computer and Communications Industry Association , a trade association that represents Google and other large technology companies, is a principal funder of the Copyright for Creativity organisation, a coalition that led the "Save Your Internet" campaign opposing the directive.
More than academics have criticised the directive, emphasising concerns about the effectiveness of Article 11's impact on the readership of online publication and of Article 13's obligations on service providers that will "benefit big players".
The proposal is generally supported by academic publishers including the International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers.
The European Council for Doctoral Candidates and Junior Researchers opposes the proposal on the grounds that Article 13's exemption for non-commercial groups does not cover all scientific repositories, and cites the Horizon project as an example of commercial work in the sector.
They also generally agree with the claims of other opponents. Publishing trade bodies similarly claim that a "bad-faith" "misleading campaign", is being carried out.
They specifically name Wikipedia and Google as orchestrators,      claiming that Wikipedia and other platforms engaged in "inacceptable [ sic ] misleading campaigns [ The publishers argue that licensed content providers such as Spotify and Netflix are also negatively affected by the current copyright regime, which they say benefits user-driven platforms such as YouTube owned by the parent company of Google and Facebook.
While some publishers support the proposal, European Innovative Media Publishers, a publishing industry lobbying organisation, was founded in specifically to oppose Article Some newspapers in support of the directive pejoratively label some of those opposed as "the largest, richest corporate entities in the world".
In the letter, they cite existing state support for struggling news media and argue that it should instead be provided by the "internet giants" which have been "siphoning off" advertising revenue.
Critical accounts of the proposal were published in the summer of by major newspapers in Austria,  France,  Germany,   Ireland,  Italy,   Poland,  Spain,  and Slovakia.
The International Federation of Journalists , a union, complained about late amendments which made remuneration of journalists dependent on "contractual arrangements" and "laws on ownership".
While describing the proposals as "an achievement for authors overall" and "good news for the industry and for authors in some sectors", they described the amendments as "bad for journalism and bad for Europe" and called on the EU to "decide wisely and reject any discriminatory provisions".
A representative from a company that makes content filters states that their wide introduction as while result from article 13 will likely hurt new music artists by limiting their ability to share what they create.
Individuals who have publicly opposed the law include comedian Stephen Fry ; author Neil Gaiman ;  Tim Berners-Lee , creator of the World Wide Web ; and Vint Cerf , co-inventor of the Internet protocol suite.
In , the European Court of Justice ruled that existing EU law "must be interpreted as precluding a national court from issuing an injunction against a hosting service provider which requires it to install a system for filtering The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights raised concerns that the proposal was incompatible with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
In a public letter, special rapporteur, David Kaye , argued that the proposal's reluctance to pin down precise obligations on content hosts created "significant legal uncertainty" inconsistent with the covenant's requirement that any restrictions on freedom of expression be "provided by law".
He concluded that this could lead to "pressure on content sharing providers to err on the side of caution". Kaye also criticised the lack of "prior judicial review" inherent in the system, and the similarly extrajudicial nature of its appeals process.
The letter also raised concerns regarding the lack of protection for non-profit groups,  although such groups had been excluded from the proposal's provisions prior to its publication.
Articles 11 and 13 of the draft Directive, prior to Trilogue negotiations and since moved to Articles 15 and 17 in the final, passed version, have drawn a great deal of attention and opposition.
Article 11, referred to as the " link tax ", generated concerns that less information and fewer resources would be available through search engines.
Germany with the ancillary copyright for press publishers law and Spain tested a link tax: it was considered a "complete disaster" which cost them millions of euros.
As a result, they felt, many small media companies in Europe would eventually be forced to shut down due to a lack of online exposure and revenue.
Article 13, colloquially called the "upload filter" provision, has faced widespread criticism over the possibility that it could have a " chilling effect " on online expression, as it would force most web services to stop users uploading copyrighted content without authorization, or else the service would risk being held liable for infringements of its guidelines.
The controversy over Article 13 has led Internet pioneers including Tim Berners-Lee , Vint Cerf , Jimmy Wales , and Mitch Kapor to warn that "Article 13 takes an unprecedented step towards the transformation of the Internet from an open platform for sharing and innovation, into a tool for the automated surveillance and control of its users.
The media lawyers Christian Solmecke and Anne-Christine Herr reported in their analysis of the negotiated compromise that it inherits the duty to use an upload filter because no other technique exists to fulfil the requirements of the law.
They point out alternative solutions to extract enhanced license fees from an online provider without restricting the rights of private users by filtering all uploads—i.
Critics have also noted the issue of false positives within such systems, and their inability to account for copyright limitations such as fair dealing and parody leading, they state, to a " meme ban".
Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act OCILLA —a component of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act DMCA —as a form of extortion , by placing false copyright claims on a user's content until they pay a ransom aiming to have the account taken down unless they pay , or doxxing by means of the requirement to include personal contact information when performing a counterclaim under this law.
The CEO of YouTube, Susan Wojcicki , warned that the legislation "poses a threat to both your livelihood and your ability to share your voice with the world", and that under Article 13, the site may — even on content it does have a license to host — be required to clear every possible copyright associated with a video or be prevented from streaming it within the EU, and do the same at scale for every piece of video uploaded by users.
A Change. A number of public protests have been held in opposition to the proposed directive, mainly concerning Article 11 and European wide protests on 23 March saw tens to hundreds of thousands of people marching.
German news media gave reports of attendance, with one report describing "several hundred participants", another "over ", and a third "" based on police reports.
After the European People's Party tried to move the vote on the directive ahead to circumvent the planned protests on 23 March ,   demonstrations were organised at short notice in ten German cities, including Berlin, between 5 and 9 March Smaller prior EU-wide events occurred in August  and January Several European websites, including the European versions of Wikipedia , Twitch , and Reddit , disabled some or many of the features on their websites on 21 March as a means to protest and raise awareness of the pending vote and encourage users to contact their appropriate national body to affect the vote.
This was similar to action taken on 18 January by numerous websites to protest similar laws proposed in the United States.
The European Parliament claimed that "MEPs have rarely or even never been subject to a similar degree of lobbying", and that there have been prior "lobbying campaigns predicting catastrophic outcomes, which have never come true".
Lobbying in favour of the proposed directive was directed toward the EU itself and was much less visible to the public.
The large media groups and publishers have had much greater contact between their lobbyists and MEPs than the technology industry. The EU Commission , in a since withdrawn blog post , stated that those who opposed the directive were a "mob".
Some commentators stated years of intense lobbying served to "crowd out other voices and successfully distort the public debate", and that "toxic" discussions were harming "healthy dialogue".
Before the vote on the directive, a vote was held on whether to consider amendments, which would have allowed the possibility of separating Articles 11 and 13 into separate votes.
The proposal fell short by 5 votes. It was reported after the fact that 13 MEPs had requested that their votes be changed, since they voted incorrectly due to alleged confusion over the order of voting.This is the workspace for the ECASEC, the Article 40, former Article 13A Expert Group. Below you can find a history of the group and the latest versions of the Article 13a guidelines. Members of the group use this space to access dedicated tools, the reporting tool, the issue tracker, drafts under consultation, etc. 4/15/ · Hier wurden Artikel 11 und Artikel 13 inzwischen jedoch in Artikel 15 und Artikel 17 umbenannt. Am März stimmten von Abgeordnete, für und gegen die Reform. 36 Abgeordnete des. Artikel 11 sieht die Einführung eines Tierheim Solingen vor. Zuvor hatte bereits das Europa-Parlament zugestimmt. Das Bundesjustizministerium führt nun bis zum September eine erste öffentliche Konsultation durch. Aldi Ersatzkarte Aktivieren E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht.