Full text of leaked IA on review of EU copyright now available: but is it current?

A few days ago this blog reported [here, here and also here] that website Statewatch had made available some parts of the draft Impact Assessment (IA) of the Commission on the modernisation of the EU copyright acquis. 

 Yesterday, the same website published the full text of the IA. 

 Last week this Kat's sources warned her that the leaked IA published by Statewatch is just an early version, and that the Commission is currently working on a third "edition" of the IA. However, the same sources confirmed that this is not substantially dissimilar from the one leaked. 

 Can anyone confirm or provide more information?
Do you want to reuse the IPKat content? Please refer to our Policies section. If you have any queries or requests for permission, please get in touch with the IPKat team.
Print | Share by email
By at

Comments

  1. AnonymousWednesday, 21 May 2014 at 21:45:00 GMT+1

    I can't provide information as to whether this document has changed but I have read this. The most salient feature of this document is that it makes many statements but there is no evidence to support them. It is a truly pitiable piece of policy-making. Policy without evidence must be challenged. I beg the IPKat to lead a campaign against policy based on theory without substantial evidential support. What do we want? EVIDENCE. When do we want it? Now.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

← Previous Post Next Post →