PetitionOnline.ie
Browse Petitions Search Contact the petition author Contact Us Languages Manage your signatures Confirm your signature with a code Log in
Start a Petition

Report a petition

EUROPEAN WRITERS' OPEN LETTER

Petitions express opinions. Disagreeing with a petition, or thinking it is pointless, is not grounds for a report, and such reports are closed automatically. Report a petition only if it breaks the law or our Community Guidelines, for example hate speech, defamation of a person or organisation, publishing private information, or fraud. We do not check whether the claims in a petition are true; the author is responsible for them.

This report goes to the people who run this website, not to the petition author or to any authority. If you have a question or feedback for the author, send them a message.

Why are you reporting this?
What is wrong with the name?
Please tell us in the text field below what makes you think so.

Petitions express opinions. Disagreeing with a petition, or thinking it is pointless, is not grounds for a report, and we do not remove petitions because people oppose them.

If you send this, your disagreement is recorded and the report is closed automatically with no action; the decision is sent to your email address. If the content breaks the law or our Community Guidelines, choose that option above instead.

You can also start your own petition or contact the author.

Is the false claim about you, your organisation, or another identifiable person or organisation?

Which passage is false? You can click several sentences in the petition text, and tell us for each what is true. This is optional.

Sentences next to each other are joined into one claim. Click a sentence again to remove it.

EUROPEAN WRITERS' OPEN LETTER

EUROPEAN WRITERS' OPEN LETTER TO THE EU AUTHORITIES (October, 22nd 2015)

Copyright spells authors' rights

Let us speak plainly: we writers do not understand the EU’s insistence on “reforming” copyright/authors’ rights in Europe.

The European Commission has chosen the wrong target in attacking authors’ rights in order to encourage the emergence of a “Digital Single Market”, when it is precisely authors’ rights that are the essential condition for creating works of literature. Undermining them would be to stem the source of the digital book market before it even properly takes off. Diluted authors’ rights means impoverished literature.

Authors’ rights are not an obstacle to the circulation of works. The authorisation of translation rights enables works to be translated into all languages and disseminated in all countries. The real obstacles to dissemination are economic, technological and fiscal, and it is monopolies, proprietary formats and tax fraud that should really be the object of any reform.

In adopting an extensively amended version of Julia Reda’s report, the European Parliament reaffirmed loud and clear the importance of protecting authors’ rights, and of preserving the increasingly precarious economic stability of the creative industries. Regrettably, at the same time, it rashly left the door open to a whole array of exceptions to authors’ rights – exceptions that could be created, expanded, made compulsory and standardised by the Commission, flying in the face sometimes of national solutions that already fulfil the needs of readers and other users.

How is the proliferation of exceptions to authors’ rights supposed to promote the creation of works? After how many exceptions (libraries and archives, e-lending, research and education purposes, text and data mining, transformative uses, out-of-print and orphan works etc.) will the exception become the rule and authors’ rights the exception?

Authors’ rights are vital for us because they mean we have financial and moral rights over our work. Authors’ rights are the foundation on which our European literature has been built; they are a source of economic wealth for our countries, and of job creation; protecting them guarantees financing for creativity and the sustainability of the entire book chain; they are the basis for our remuneration. In allowing us to reap the fruits of our work, they guarantee our freedom and our independence. We do not want to return to the days of patronage, or to live on potential public subsidies: we want to make our living from the exploitation of our works. Writing is a profession, not a pastime.

Authors’ rights have permitted the democratisation of the book over the past few centuries, and in the future they will enable the development of digital works and their distribution to the widest audience. A legacy of the past, authors’ rights are a modern tool, compatible with the use of new technologies.

It is crucial to stop pitting authors against readers. Literature would not exist without writers; it serves no purpose without readers. Writers are fundamentally open to the changes and developments of the world in which they live. They defend freedom of thought, freedom of expression and the freedom to create more vociferously and passionately than anyone. They are in favour of sharing ideas and knowledge, that is their raison d’être. They are readers first and foremost.

We European writers call on the European authorities to abandon plans to extend or increase the scope of exceptions and limitations to authors’ rights. The assurance of some form of “compensation” is no substitute for the income earned from the commercial exploitation of our works, especially as authors are already suffering from a growing material precariousness. We call on the European authorities to fight against the temptation of an illusory “everything for free”, which will only benefit the major distribution platforms and other content providers. We call on the European authorities to help us obtain a fairer share of the value of books, especially in the digital sphere, as well as to prohibit abusive clauses in contracts and to combat the pirating of our works effectively.

The freedom to create and the vitality of European culture are also dependent on you.

(Translation: Ros Schwartz, Vice-Chair, the Translators Association)

First signatures : Lidia Jorge, Valentine Goby, Yannis Kiourtsakis, Pierre Lemaitre, Erri de Luca, Robert Mc Liam Wilson, Eirikur Örn Norddahl, Marie Sellier

We do not check whether the claims in a petition are true; the author is responsible for them. If you send this, it is recorded and the report is closed automatically with no action; the decision is sent to your email address.

You can start your own petition with the information you believe is correct, or contact the author.

A false claim about an identifiable person or organisation is defamation, and we do act on that.

Continue: report defamation

Who is the content about?
Is the person the content is about a politician, a decision-maker or another public figure?
What does the content criticise?

Public criticism of how a politician or decision-maker acts in a public role is allowed, also when the events are old. That a matter is old is not in itself a ground for removal. We can still act on a false claim about the person or on otherwise unlawful content.

If the matter is old or no longer current, it is best to contact the petition author directly. The author can remove the petition for any reason; we cannot.

Is the person the content is about a politician, a decision-maker or another public figure?
What does the content criticise?

Public criticism of how a politician or decision-maker acts in a public role is allowed, also when the events are old. That a matter is old is not in itself a ground for removal. We can still act on a false claim about the person or on otherwise unlawful content.

If the matter is old or no longer current, it is best to contact the petition author directly. The author can remove the petition for any reason; we cannot.

We do not check whether the claims in a petition are true; the author is responsible for them. We act on a false claim when it concerns an identifiable person or organisation. If you simply disagree with the claim, you can start your own petition or contact the author.

Click the false sentences in the petition text.

Which passage exactly is hate speech? Click the sentences in the petition text.

Which passage exactly calls for violence? Click the sentences in the petition text.

Which passage exactly glorifies or incites terrorism? Click the sentences in the petition text.

Which passage exactly harasses or bullies someone? Click the sentences in the petition text.

Which passage exactly reveals private information? Click the sentences in the petition text.

Which passage exactly accuses someone of a crime? Click the sentences in the petition text.

Which passage exactly calls for the death penalty or torture? Click the sentences in the petition text.

Sentences next to each other are joined into one claim. Click a sentence again to remove it.

EUROPEAN WRITERS' OPEN LETTER

EUROPEAN WRITERS' OPEN LETTER TO THE EU AUTHORITIES (October, 22nd 2015)

Copyright spells authors' rights

Let us speak plainly: we writers do not understand the EU’s insistence on “reforming” copyright/authors’ rights in Europe.

The European Commission has chosen the wrong target in attacking authors’ rights in order to encourage the emergence of a “Digital Single Market”, when it is precisely authors’ rights that are the essential condition for creating works of literature. Undermining them would be to stem the source of the digital book market before it even properly takes off. Diluted authors’ rights means impoverished literature.

Authors’ rights are not an obstacle to the circulation of works. The authorisation of translation rights enables works to be translated into all languages and disseminated in all countries. The real obstacles to dissemination are economic, technological and fiscal, and it is monopolies, proprietary formats and tax fraud that should really be the object of any reform.

In adopting an extensively amended version of Julia Reda’s report, the European Parliament reaffirmed loud and clear the importance of protecting authors’ rights, and of preserving the increasingly precarious economic stability of the creative industries. Regrettably, at the same time, it rashly left the door open to a whole array of exceptions to authors’ rights – exceptions that could be created, expanded, made compulsory and standardised by the Commission, flying in the face sometimes of national solutions that already fulfil the needs of readers and other users.

How is the proliferation of exceptions to authors’ rights supposed to promote the creation of works? After how many exceptions (libraries and archives, e-lending, research and education purposes, text and data mining, transformative uses, out-of-print and orphan works etc.) will the exception become the rule and authors’ rights the exception?

Authors’ rights are vital for us because they mean we have financial and moral rights over our work. Authors’ rights are the foundation on which our European literature has been built; they are a source of economic wealth for our countries, and of job creation; protecting them guarantees financing for creativity and the sustainability of the entire book chain; they are the basis for our remuneration. In allowing us to reap the fruits of our work, they guarantee our freedom and our independence. We do not want to return to the days of patronage, or to live on potential public subsidies: we want to make our living from the exploitation of our works. Writing is a profession, not a pastime.

Authors’ rights have permitted the democratisation of the book over the past few centuries, and in the future they will enable the development of digital works and their distribution to the widest audience. A legacy of the past, authors’ rights are a modern tool, compatible with the use of new technologies.

It is crucial to stop pitting authors against readers. Literature would not exist without writers; it serves no purpose without readers. Writers are fundamentally open to the changes and developments of the world in which they live. They defend freedom of thought, freedom of expression and the freedom to create more vociferously and passionately than anyone. They are in favour of sharing ideas and knowledge, that is their raison d’être. They are readers first and foremost.

We European writers call on the European authorities to abandon plans to extend or increase the scope of exceptions and limitations to authors’ rights. The assurance of some form of “compensation” is no substitute for the income earned from the commercial exploitation of our works, especially as authors are already suffering from a growing material precariousness. We call on the European authorities to fight against the temptation of an illusory “everything for free”, which will only benefit the major distribution platforms and other content providers. We call on the European authorities to help us obtain a fairer share of the value of books, especially in the digital sphere, as well as to prohibit abusive clauses in contracts and to combat the pirating of our works effectively.

The freedom to create and the vitality of European culture are also dependent on you.

(Translation: Ros Schwartz, Vice-Chair, the Translators Association)

First signatures : Lidia Jorge, Valentine Goby, Yannis Kiourtsakis, Pierre Lemaitre, Erri de Luca, Robert Mc Liam Wilson, Eirikur Örn Norddahl, Marie Sellier

Click the false sentences in the petition text.

Which passage exactly is hate speech? Click the sentences in the petition text.

Which passage exactly reveals private information? Click the sentences in the petition text.

Which passage exactly is terrorist or extremist content? Click the sentences in the petition text.

Sentences next to each other are joined into one claim. Click a sentence again to remove it.

EUROPEAN WRITERS' OPEN LETTER

EUROPEAN WRITERS' OPEN LETTER TO THE EU AUTHORITIES (October, 22nd 2015)

Copyright spells authors' rights

Let us speak plainly: we writers do not understand the EU’s insistence on “reforming” copyright/authors’ rights in Europe.

The European Commission has chosen the wrong target in attacking authors’ rights in order to encourage the emergence of a “Digital Single Market”, when it is precisely authors’ rights that are the essential condition for creating works of literature. Undermining them would be to stem the source of the digital book market before it even properly takes off. Diluted authors’ rights means impoverished literature.

Authors’ rights are not an obstacle to the circulation of works. The authorisation of translation rights enables works to be translated into all languages and disseminated in all countries. The real obstacles to dissemination are economic, technological and fiscal, and it is monopolies, proprietary formats and tax fraud that should really be the object of any reform.

In adopting an extensively amended version of Julia Reda’s report, the European Parliament reaffirmed loud and clear the importance of protecting authors’ rights, and of preserving the increasingly precarious economic stability of the creative industries. Regrettably, at the same time, it rashly left the door open to a whole array of exceptions to authors’ rights – exceptions that could be created, expanded, made compulsory and standardised by the Commission, flying in the face sometimes of national solutions that already fulfil the needs of readers and other users.

How is the proliferation of exceptions to authors’ rights supposed to promote the creation of works? After how many exceptions (libraries and archives, e-lending, research and education purposes, text and data mining, transformative uses, out-of-print and orphan works etc.) will the exception become the rule and authors’ rights the exception?

Authors’ rights are vital for us because they mean we have financial and moral rights over our work. Authors’ rights are the foundation on which our European literature has been built; they are a source of economic wealth for our countries, and of job creation; protecting them guarantees financing for creativity and the sustainability of the entire book chain; they are the basis for our remuneration. In allowing us to reap the fruits of our work, they guarantee our freedom and our independence. We do not want to return to the days of patronage, or to live on potential public subsidies: we want to make our living from the exploitation of our works. Writing is a profession, not a pastime.

Authors’ rights have permitted the democratisation of the book over the past few centuries, and in the future they will enable the development of digital works and their distribution to the widest audience. A legacy of the past, authors’ rights are a modern tool, compatible with the use of new technologies.

It is crucial to stop pitting authors against readers. Literature would not exist without writers; it serves no purpose without readers. Writers are fundamentally open to the changes and developments of the world in which they live. They defend freedom of thought, freedom of expression and the freedom to create more vociferously and passionately than anyone. They are in favour of sharing ideas and knowledge, that is their raison d’être. They are readers first and foremost.

We European writers call on the European authorities to abandon plans to extend or increase the scope of exceptions and limitations to authors’ rights. The assurance of some form of “compensation” is no substitute for the income earned from the commercial exploitation of our works, especially as authors are already suffering from a growing material precariousness. We call on the European authorities to fight against the temptation of an illusory “everything for free”, which will only benefit the major distribution platforms and other content providers. We call on the European authorities to help us obtain a fairer share of the value of books, especially in the digital sphere, as well as to prohibit abusive clauses in contracts and to combat the pirating of our works effectively.

The freedom to create and the vitality of European culture are also dependent on you.

(Translation: Ros Schwartz, Vice-Chair, the Translators Association)

First signatures : Lidia Jorge, Valentine Goby, Yannis Kiourtsakis, Pierre Lemaitre, Erri de Luca, Robert Mc Liam Wilson, Eirikur Örn Norddahl, Marie Sellier

We use this to acknowledge your report and to tell you the outcome.
I am reporting
What are you asking for? You can choose more than one.
May we forward your request to the petition author? The author can remove the petition for any reason, and may respond to the request sooner than our moderators.
May we forward your request to the petition author? The author can remove the petition for any reason, and may respond to the request sooner than our moderators.
May we forward your request to the petition author? The author can remove the petition for any reason, and may respond to the request sooner than our moderators.

Reported petitions are reviewed by our team to determine if they violate our Terms of Service or Community Guidelines.