User:Gamaliel/Special desk/FoP

The previous day photographer Nico Trinkhaus had presented a petition containing 480,000 signatures to Julia Reda, the MEP with responsibility for the report, supporting freedom of panorama and calling for its extension to all countries of the European Union. (The petition has since exceeded 550,000 signatures). In the debate itself (video) MEPs spoke frequently of having received hundreds of letters and emails on the subject. Organisations across Europe had also weighed in, including the National Union of Journalists and the British Photographic Council in the UK, representing a coalition of photography organisations, as well as (to give just one example) some of the highest profile museums in Catalonia. Most European-language Wikipedias had been running banner campaigns for the last week before the vote, similar to those on English Wikipedia, co-ordinated through interwiki equivalents of the page Wikipedia:Freedom of Panorama 2015, featuring blacked-out images of buildings and sculptures to warn of the threat.

Whilst there was some confidence before the debate that the Legal Affairs committee text would be removed, expectations were not high for an alternative amendment in support of freedom of panorama, submitted by the Dutch Social-Liberal MEP Marietje Schaake with a number of MEPs especially from ALDE (the group of both Ms Schaake and Jean-Marie Cavada), but also some other groups. Before the debate, the EPP had put out a press release saying that "the four big political groups in the European Parliament (EPP, S&D, ALDE and ECR) support the status quo. For them, Member States should be able to decide the rules on panorama at national level, as is currently the case." Cavada too had attacked Schaake's amendment as upsetting the "political equilibrium", while a staffer in his office "regretted that she forgot for a while that Mr. Cavada is the JURI shadow rapporteur for ALDE." One article, representing a common expectation, wondered if it would be "dead on arrival". But in the event the amendment did better than almost anyone expected, being rejected by 228 votes to 303 – needing only another 40 more MEPs to have switched for it to have succeeded.

Following the vote, the S&D group put out a press release significantly warmer to the idea of extending freedom of panorama than that of the EPP the previous day. The release quoted Mary Honeyball MEP as saying that "Legislation differs greatly between member states on this issue and we did not believe a one-size fits all approach made sense at this time. We support freedom of panorama and European rules to extend it could be looked at in the future. However we need a thorough evaluation of existing national approaches before we do this"; while in the view of her colleague Evelyn Regner MEP "We should extend this freedom, not restrict it - public space should not be privatised."

For himself, the European Commissioner Günther Oettinger made clear his support for freedom of panorama: "We (i.e. the Commission) think the principle should be that a free Europe should also involve the freedom to take photographs of monuments and buildings. This should not be limited. I just want to calm you down on that subject, there is no restriction planned on our part." ... "For me the following principle applies: Whatever people can see with their own eyes as citizens in the public places and streets of Europe, they should be able to photograph with a camera: I make no distinction between the eye and records of the eye via a camera and pictures. So: All this excitement was, at least as the Commission is concerned, unnecessary. We do not intend to follow in this area some of the proposals from the Parliament and the Committee of Experts." Later he added that "Relatively much discussion has been taken up by the topic of freedom of panorama freedom - in my opinion, a pure phantom. We should not engage in phantom debates. Restriction of freedom of panorama was not a Commission idea. It apparently was a misunderstood idea in a specialist Parliament committee, which was not supported today by any person. So we can say here in public that it was a misunderstanding in the Committee, and never the intention of the bulk of MEPs. We do not want to restrict the existing schemes. Freedom of panorama will in future be preserved on the basis of national legislation and not limited on the European level. What that leaves is a smart marketing move by Wikipedia, granted. But from now on back to the essential issues and no more of this Phantom, which is finished with in my opinion."

This appears to be a commitment by Oettinger to stand by existing national legislation – but also to the principle of freedom of panorama, which is not assured by some existing national legislation. It remains to be seen over the next few months whether this tension will be resolved.

Regarding the report as a whole, the most detailed presentation of which can be found on Reda's website, the French collecting society for dramatic authors (SCAD) considered it had been turned into a "Reda anti-report" by the amendments of the Legal Affairs committee. CEPIC, representing European photo libraries, had earlier highlighted some of the ways the report's original proposals had been either "narrowed ... abandoned ... or put out to more evidence gathering" by the committee. SAA, representing screenwriters [1] ... more ...

... reporting round-up including older reports & the register ...

Result:

• Schaake text (positive) rejected by 228 to 303 (surprisingly close)
• Cavada/JURI text (negative) rejected by 40 to 502
• Julia Reda: EU parliament defends Freedom of Panorama & calls for copyright reform
• Petition exceeded 500,000 signatures
• Oettinger
• Debate: [2] transcripts
• Vote: [3] at 13:16:57
• Some debate quotes: see tweets by @Mab
  • Post vote PRs: UKIP, Marietje Schaake, S&D, Afzal Khan (Lab), Catherine Bearder (LD), Alyn Smith (SNP),
• Street photography in Europe — so what just happened?, by User:OwenBlacker on Medium, 10 July 2015.
• From the European Parliament:
  • Copyright reform: promote cultural diversity and ensure access to it, say MEPs, press release, 9 July 2015
  • Copyright 2.0: why existing rules need an update to make them fit for the digital age, article and infographic, 9 July 2015

... now waiting for press coverage

• IPKat round-up
• IPWatch round-up
• EFF
• Communia
• EP press release
• Amateur Photographer
• Politico -- quotes Oettinger.
• AP (via Yahoo)
• Xinhua
• EU Observer
• EurActiv
• Techdirt
• The Register Orlowski
• Telegraph
• Catalan TV, feat Viquipèdia, dramatised with its own buildings blacked out :-)

Older material:

• The bitter fight for Freedom of Panorama, Euronews
• Petition pic
• UK MEPs condemn controversial EU plan to axe Freedom of Panorama, Amateur Photographer
• MEPs gear up to vote on Europe's copyright 'black spot' report, The Register
• Wikipedia: YES! we’ve SAVED the INTERNET again!, The Register
• EPP: Copyright reform: freedom of panorama to remain national issue
• Parliament’s panoramic drama, Politico
• Positions - [4], EP news service
• "Jihadists"
• If you want to keep sharing photos for free, read this by Jimmy Wales. Note The Guardian's correction at the bottom and Wales's false claim that "Wikipedia only uses freely licensed images"