Here you can read the speech delivered by our executive director, Balazs Denes:
According to the communication of the Commission, we are going to have two or three more meetings. And I'm a bit concerned, how much input the Commission can have from all of us and how it will be used.
I'll be brief and only suggest a few things to improve the possible outcome of the stakeholder dialogue.
According to Article 17 (10) of the Directive, we are here for several reasons:
- Users' organizations (and Liberties is considered as one of them) shall have access to adequate information from online content-sharing service providers (OCSSPs) on the functioning of their practices.
- To discuss best practices for cooperation between OCSSPs and rightsholders.
- When discussing best practices, special account shall be taken, of the need to balance fundamental rights and of the use of exceptions and limitations.
What we have been doing here does not fit the requirements I have just recited from the text of the Directive. We, as an organization representing users with special focus on their fundamental rights, don't get in-depth information from the OCSSPs. We also don't get enough information about the licensing agreements on behalf of the rightsholders. Therefore, I would suggest that each of these stakeholders should give us a detailed presentation and let us react to them. If we could get those presentations in writing, that would be also helpful in preparing for the next meeting.
We are also here to discuss best practices, how to balance fundamental rights and exceptions, to understand how we should understand Article 17 (4) a b and c.
To do so, I would like to suggest one more thing. Besides listening to each other, we should also learn more about how the Commission understands the text of Article 17.
It would be great to hear a bit about the scope of the Guideline and what you have perceived so far. If stakeholders were able to comment on the draft Guideline, that would help to elaborate on the best possible solution which takes fundamental rights seriously.