Translation

contact->fiscal_code
Fiscal Code
0/110
Key English Lithuanian State
contact->fiscal_code Fiscal Code
contact->presentation GOIPE is a no-profit association according to art. 36 of Italian civil code made especially for the purpose of organizing European Citizen Initiatives.
This "Freedom to share" ECI has been officially submitted to the European Commission by citizens from eight European countries:
creative-commons->text Creative Commons License
creative-commons->url http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
home->hero->text We need one million signatures. We will start collecting them on November 15th, 2020. <strong>Join us now!</strong>
home->hero->action Subscribe
home->hero2->text <strong>Legalize Filesharing!</strong><br>We are coming together from across Europe to call on the European Commission to adopt copyright rules that are fair to creators and users.
home->hero2->action Sign here!
home->cta Support the Freedom to Share European Citizens' Initiative
home->widget->steps Join us!
home->official_text->title Read the official text of the initiative
home->official_text->body Our initiative calls for the adoption of a legislative act providing for a waiver of copyright, related rights, and sui generis database rights for natural persons sharing files via digital networks for personal use and non-profit purposes.
home->take_action->title Take action
home->take_action->body Spread this initiative with your friends and contacts: write to them, spread the communication materials, talk to them, etc.
home->donate->title Donate
home->donate->open_collective Donate to our collective
Key English Lithuanian State
act->content <p>Spread this inititative with your friends and contacts: write them, spread the communication materials, talk to them, etc.</p>
<p>Get in touch with us and contribute to the organization and spreading of the campaign in your country coordinating with other campaigners: <a href="#proca_dialog" data-turbolinks="false">subscribe!</a></p>
<p>Help to translate: <a href="https://l10n.rio.hn/projects/freedom-to-share/web/">Weblate</a></p>
<p>Support the campaign making a donation:</p>
act->title Take action now!
contact->fiscal_code Fiscal Code
contact->presentation GOIPE is a no-profit association according to art. 36 of Italian civil code made especially for the purpose of organizing European Citizen Initiatives.
This "Freedom to share" ECI has been officially submitted to the European Commission by citizens from eight European countries:
creative-commons->text Creative Commons License
creative-commons->url http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
eci->description->body To legalise sharing – via digital networks, for personal use and non-profit purposes – of files containing works and other material protected by copyright, related rights and sui generis database rights, with a view to striking a balance between the rights of authors and other rightholders and the universal right to science and culture.
eci->description->title Description
eci->name Name of the European Citizen Initiative
eci->official_text <p>Our initiative calls for the adoption of a legislative act providing for a waiver of copyright, related rights, and sui generis database rights for natural persons sharing files via digital networks for personal use and non-profit purposes.</p><p>File-sharing came into existence in 1999, with the advent of Napster. Over the years, technology has made distributed (or peer-to-peer) file sharing ever more efficient (e.g., Gnutella, Freenet, BitTorrent).</p><p>From the outset, the main rightsholder companies have opposed the use of sharing technologies for works and other material subject to copyright, related rights, and sui generis database rights, and current legislation is broadly in line with their wishes.</p><p>However, one question remains: is it fair for copyright, related rights, and sui generis database rights to prevent the sharing of works and other material?</p><p>Copyright, related rights, and sui generis database rights should help towards fostering the dissemination of culture, innovation, and social progress.</p><p>Current legislation bans the sharing of files containing works and other material subject to copyright, related rights, and sui generis database rights and seriously curtails the freedom of access to science and culture enshrined in Article 27(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.</p><p>This issue is of even greater relevance today, since the adoption of Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market.</p><p>The Directive has the opposite effect. On the one hand, Article 17 makes it easier for online content sharing service providers to obtain authorization to disseminate protected content, thereby facilitating their role as privileged intermediaries and encouraging their practices of technical control and citizen profiling. On the other hand, file sharing remains banned.</p><p>This initiative calls for citizens to be allowed to share files directly via peer-to-peer networks for them to have access to science and culture without being subject to checks and profiling. EU legislation enabling this would be perfectly compatible with international law if rightsholders were given fair compensation.</p><p>People and fundamental rights must be at the heart of political and legislative decisions. It is, therefore, necessary to change the current rules governing the sharing of files containing works and other material protected by copyright, related rights, and sui generis database rights in order to enable the potential for freedom and social, cultural, and economic development offered by digital networks.</p>
<p>Šia iniciatyva raginama priimti teisėkūros procedūra priimamą aktą, kuriuo būtų numatyta, kad fiziniams asmenims, kurie per skaitmeninius tinklus asmeniniam naudojimui ir ne pelno tikslais dalijasi rinkmenomis, nebūtų taikomos autorių teisės, gretutinės teisės ir sui generis duomenų bazių teisės.</p><p>Keitimasis rinkmenomis prasidėjo 1999 m., kai pradėjo veikti tinklas „Napster“. Einant metams paskirstytasis keitimasis rinkmenomis (angl. peer-to-peer) tapo dar veiksmingesnis (pvz., tinklai „Gnutella“, „Freenet“, „BitTorrent“ ir kt.).</p><p>Nuo pat pradžių pagrindinės įmonės teisių turėtojos nepritarė, kad keitimosi rinkmenomis technologijos būtų naudojamos kūriniams ir kitai medžiagai, kuriai taikomos autorių teisės, gretutinės teisės ir sui generis duomenų bazių teisės. Dabartiniai teisės aktai iš esmės atitinka šių įmonių lūkesčius.</p><p>Vis dėlto lieka vienas klausimas: ar teisinga, kad autorių teisės, gretutinės teisės ir sui generis duomenų bazių teisės užkerta kelią keitimuisi kūriniais ir kita medžiaga?</p><p>Autorių teisės, gretutinės teisės ir sui generis duomenų bazių teisės turėtų padėti skatinti kultūros, inovacijų ir socialinės pažangos sklaidą.</p><p>Pagal galiojančius teisės aktus draudžiama dalytis rinkmenomis, kuriose yra autorių teisių, gretutinių teisių ir sui generis duomenų bazių teisių saugomų kūrinių ir kitos medžiagos, o tai stipriai apriboja laisvę turėti prieigą prie mokslo ir kultūros turinio, kuri įtvirtinta Visuotinės žmogaus teisių deklaracijos 27 straipsnio 1 dalyje.</p><p>Po to, kai 2019 m. balandžio 17 d. buvo priimta Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos direktyva (ES) 2019/790 dėl autorių teisių ir gretutinių teisių bendrojoje skaitmeninėje rinkoje, šis klausimas tapo dar aktualesnis.</p><p>Ši direktyva veikia paradoksaliai: viena vertus, pagal jos 17 straipsnį turinio dalijimosi internetu paslaugų teikėjams lengviau gauti leidimą platinti saugomą turinį; taip jiems paprasčiau atlikti savo kaip privilegijuotų tarpininkų vaidmenį ir taikyti techninės kontrolės ir piliečių profiliavimo praktikas. Kita vertus, keistis rinkmenomis tebedraudžiama.</p><p>Šia iniciatyva siekiama, kad piliečiams būtų leista tiesiogiai keistis rinkmenomis per peer-to peer tinklus, kad jie be patikrinimų ir profiliavimo turėtų prieigą prie mokslo ir kultūros turinio. Tai leidžiantis ES teisėkūros procedūra priimamas aktas visiškai atitiktų tarptautinę teisę, jei teisių turėtojams būtų mokama teisinga kompensacija.</p><p>Būtina pasiekti, kad politiniai ir teisėkūros sprendimai pirmiausia orientuotųsi į žmones ir pagrindines teises.</p><p>Todėl svarbu pakeisti dabar galiojančias taisykles, taikomas keitimuisi rinkmenomis, kuriose yra autorių teisių, gretutinių teisių ir sui generis duomenų bazių teisių saugomų kūrinių ir kitos medžiagos ir taip atskleisti laisvės ir skaitmeninių tinklų teikiamo socialinio, kultūrinio ir ekonominio vystymosi potencialą.</p>
faq->acronym FAQ
faq->entries->are-you-against-authors->body Not at all. We want to update copyright so that it's compatible with modern reality and people's preferences. We believe modern technology is an opportunity for authors, not a problem. We also believe that it's harmful for authors to depend on and support very unfair and unpopular status quo of copyright laws. Some authors might be appreciated and know by people much more thanks to file sharing.
faq->entries->are-you-against-authors->title Are you against authors?
faq->entries->are-you-against-digital-platforms->body No, if they do not abuse of their power to control and profile people. The various internet services which have come to dominate the digital distribution of culture can be a net positive because they make distribution more efficient. Disintermediation can also reduce the amount of money wasted on middlemen who do not produce any additional culture. However, we don't see why giant centralised internet services run by few multinationals should be in control of culture in the digital era. Efforts like article 17 in directive 790/2019 ("upload filters") were misguided, and will inevitably fail, because they failed to attack the root problem.
faq->entries->are-you-against-digital-platforms->title Are you against digital platforms?
faq->entries->are-you-against-rightsholders->body No, as long as they pursue the stated objectives of copyright (and author rights), that is the promotion of culture and social progress. Majors lost an opportunity when they attacked Napster in the early 2000; they could have sided with it and gained a free money machine. Instead they missed a decade and now they depend on royalties from Spotify, Apple, etc. for their survival. Our proposal is an opportunity for collecting societies, publishers, record labels and other rightsholders too.
faq->entries->are-you-against-rightsholders->title Are you against rightsholders?

Loading…

No matching activity found.

Browse all component changes

Glossary

English Lithuanian
No related strings found in the glossary.

Source information

Key
contact->fiscal_code
String age
4 months ago
Source string age
4 months ago
Translation file
locales/lt.yml, string 1