(1)

Documents produced by public sector bodies of the Member States constitute a vast, diverse and valuable pool of resources that can benefit the knowledge economy.

(2)

Directive 2003/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 on the re-use of public sector information (3) establishes a minimum set of rules governing the re-use and the practical means of facilitating re-use of existing documents held by public sector bodies of the Member States.

(3)

Open data policies which encourage the wide availability and re-use of public sector information for private or commercial purposes, with minimal or no legal, technical or financial constraints, and which promote the circulation of information not only for economic operators but also for the public, can play an important role in kick-starting the development of new services based on novel ways to combine and make use of such information, stimulate economic growth and promote social engagement. However, this requires a level playing field at Union level in terms of whether or not the re-use of documents is authorised, which cannot be achieved by leaving it subject to the different rules and practices of the Member States or the public sector bodies concerned.

(4)

Allowing re-use of documents held by a public sector body adds value for the re-users, for the end users and for society in general and in many cases for the public body itself, by promoting transparency and accountability and providing feedback from re-users and end users which allows the public sector body concerned to improve the quality of the information collected.

(5)

Since the first set of rules on re-use of public sector information was adopted in 2003, the amount of data in the world, including public data, has increased exponentially and new types of data are being generated and collected. In parallel, we are witnessing a continuous evolution in technologies for analysis, exploitation and processing of data. This rapid technological evolution makes it possible to create new services and new applications, which are built upon the use, aggregation or combination of data. The rules adopted in 2003 no longer keep pace with these rapid changes and as a result the economic and social opportunities offered by re-use of public data risk being missed.

(6)

At the same time, Member States have now established re-use policies under Directive 2003/98/EC and some of them have been adopting ambitious open data approaches to make re-use of accessible public data easier for citizens and companies beyond the minimum level set by that Directive. To prevent different rules in different Member States acting as a barrier to the cross-border offer of products and services, and to enable comparable public data sets to be re-usable for pan-European applications based on them, a minimum harmonisation is required to determine what public data are available for re-use in the internal information market, consistent with the relevant access regime.

(7)

Directive 2003/98/EC does not contain an obligation concerning access to documents or an obligation to allow re-use of documents. The decision whether or not to authorise re-use remains with the Member States or the public sector body concerned. At the same time, Directive 2003/98/EC builds on national rules on access to documents and allowing re-use of documents is therefore not required under that Directive where access is restricted (for example, national rules restrict access to citizens or companies who prove a particular interest in obtaining access to documents) or excluded (for example, national rules exclude access because of the sensitive nature of the documents based, inter alia, on grounds of national security, defence, public security). Some Member States have expressly linked the right of re-use to a right of access, so that all generally accessible documents are re-usable. In other Member States, the link between the two sets of rules is less clear, and this is a source of legal uncertainty.

(8)

Directive 2003/98/EC should therefore be amended to lay down a clear obligation for Member States to make all documents re-usable unless access is restricted or excluded under national rules on access to documents and subject to the other exceptions laid down in this Directive. The amendments made by this Directive do not seek to define or to change access regimes in Member States, which remain their responsibility.

(9)

Taking into account Union law and the international obligations of Member States and of the Union, particularly under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, documents for which third parties hold intellectual property rights should be excluded from the scope of Directive 2003/98/EC. If a third party was the initial owner of the intellectual property rights for a document held by libraries, including university libraries, museums and archives and the term of protection of those rights has not expired, that document should, for the purpose of this Directive, be considered as a document for which third parties hold intellectual property rights.

(10)

Directive 2003/98/EC should apply to documents the supply of which forms part of the public tasks of the public sector bodies concerned, as defined by law or by other binding rules in the Member States. In the absence of such rules the public tasks should be defined in accordance with common administrative practice in the Member States, provided that the scope of the public tasks is transparent and subject to review. The public tasks could be defined generally or on a case-by-case basis for individual public sector bodies.

(11)

This Directive should be implemented and applied in full compliance with the principles relating to the protection of personal data in accordance with Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (4). In particular, it is worth noting that, according to that Directive, the Member States should determine the conditions under which the processing of personal data is lawful. Furthermore, one of the principles of that Directive is that personal data must not be processed further to collection in a way incompatible with the specified, explicit and legitimate purposes for which those data were collected.

(12)

Directive 2003/98/EC should be without prejudice to the rights, including economic and moral rights that employees of public sector bodies may enjoy under national rules.

(13)

Moreover, where any document is made available for re-use, the public sector body concerned should retain the right to exploit the document.

(14)

The scope of Directive 2003/98/EC should be extended to libraries, including university libraries, museums and archives.

(15)

One of the principal aims of the establishment of the internal market is the creation of conditions conducive to the development of Union-wide services. Libraries, museums and archives hold a significant amount of valuable public sector information resources, in particular since digitisation projects have multiplied the amount of digital public domain material. These cultural heritage collections and related metadata are a potential base for digital content products and services and have a huge potential for innovative re-use in sectors such as learning and tourism. Wider possibilities for re-using public cultural material should, inter alia, allow Union companies to exploit its potential and contribute to economic growth and job creation.

(16)

There are considerable differences in the rules and practices in the Member States relating to the exploitation of public cultural resources, which constitute barriers to realising economic potential of those resources. As libraries, museums and archives continue to invest in digitisation, many already make their public domain content available for re-use and many are actively seeking out opportunities to re-use their content. However, as they operate in very different regulatory and cultural environments, the practices of cultural establishments in exploiting content have developed in disparate ways.

(17)

Since the differences in national rules and practices or the absence of clarity hinder the smooth functioning of the internal market and the proper development of the information society in the Union, minimum harmonisation of national rules and practices on the re-use of public cultural material in libraries, museums and archives should be undertaken.

(18)

The extension of the scope of Directive 2003/98/EC should be limited to three types of cultural establishments – libraries, including university libraries, museums and archives, because their collections are and will increasingly become a valuable material for re-use in many products such as mobile applications. Other types of cultural establishments (such as orchestras, operas, ballets and theatres), including the archives that are part of those establishments, should remain outside the scope because of their ‘performing arts’ specificity. Since almost all of their material is covered by third-party intellectual property rights and would therefore remain outside the scope of that Directive, including them within the scope would have little effect.

(19)

Digitisation is an important means of ensuring greater access to and re-use of cultural material for education, work or leisure. It also offers considerable economic opportunities, allowing for an easier integration of cultural material into digital services and products, thus supporting job creation and growth. These aspects were underlined in, amongst others, the European Parliament’s resolution of 5 May 2010 on ‘Europeana — the next steps’ (5), the Commission Recommendation 2011/711/EU of 27 October 2011 on the digitisation and online accessibility of cultural material and digital preservation (6), and the Council conclusions of 10 May 2012 on the digitisation and online accessibility of cultural material and digital preservation (7). These documents define the way forward for dealing with the legal, financial and organisational aspects of digitising Europe’s cultural heritage and bringing it online.

(20)

To facilitate re-use, public sector bodies should, where possible and appropriate, make documents available through open and machine-readable formats and together with their metadata, at the best level of precision and granularity, in a format that ensures interoperability, e.g. by processing them in a way consistent with the principles governing the compatibility and usability requirements for spatial information under Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE) (8).

(21)

A document should be considered to be in a machine-readable format if it is in a file format that is structured in such a way that software applications can easily identify, recognise and extract specific data from it. Data encoded in files that are structured in a machine-readable format are machine-readable data. Machine-readable formats can be open or proprietary; they can be formal standards or not. Documents encoded in a file format that limits automatic processing, because the data cannot, or cannot easily, be extracted from them, should not be considered to be in a machine-readable format. Member States should where appropriate encourage the use of open, machine-readable formats.

(22)

Where charges are made by public sector bodies for the re-use of documents, those charges should in principle be limited to the marginal costs. However the necessity of not hindering the normal running of public sector bodies that are required to generate revenue to cover a substantial part of their costs relating to the performance of their public tasks or of the costs relating to the collection, production, reproduction and dissemination of certain documents made available for re-use should be taken into consideration. In such cases, public sector bodies should be able to charge above marginal costs. Those charges should be set according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria and the total income from supplying and allowing re-use of documents should not exceed the cost of collection, production, reproduction and dissemination, together with a reasonable return on investment. The requirement to generate revenue to cover a substantial part of the public sector bodies’ costs relating to the performance of their public tasks or of the costs relating to the collection, production, reproduction and dissemination of certain documents, does not have to be a legal requirement and may stem, for example, from administrative practices in Member States. Such a requirement should be regularly reviewed by the Member States.

(23)

Libraries, museums and archives should also be able to charge above marginal costs in order not to hinder their normal running. In the case of such public sector bodies the total income from supplying and allowing re-use of documents over the appropriate accounting period should not exceed the cost of collection, production, reproduction, dissemination, preservation and rights clearance, together with a reasonable return on investment. For the purpose of libraries, museums and archives and bearing in mind their particularities, the prices charged by the private sector for the re-use of identical or similar documents could be considered when calculating a reasonable return on investment.

(24)

The upper limits for charges set in this Directive are without prejudice to the right of Member States to apply lower charges or no charges at all.

(25)

Member States should lay down the criteria for charging above marginal costs. In this respect, Member States, for example, may lay down such criteria in national rules or may designate the appropriate body or appropriate bodies, other than the public sector body itself, competent to lay down such criteria. That body should be organised in accordance with the constitutional and legal systems of the Member States. It could be an existing body with budgetary executive powers and under political responsibility.

(26)

In relation to any re-use that is made of the document, public sector bodies may impose conditions, where appropriate through a licence, such as acknowledgment of source and acknowledgment of whether the document has been modified by the re-user in any way. Any licences for the re-use of public sector information should in any event place as few restrictions on re-use as possible, for example limiting them to an indication of source. Open licences available online, which grant wider re-use rights without technological, financial or geographical limitations and relying on open data formats, should play an important role in this respect. Therefore, Member States should encourage the use of open licences that should eventually become common practice across the Union.

(27)

The Commission has supported the development of an online Public Sector Information scoreboard with relevant performance indicators for the re-use of public sector information in all the Member States. A regular update of this scoreboard will contribute to the exchange of information between the Member States and the availability of information on policies and practices across the Union.

(28)

The means of redress should include the possibility of review by an impartial review body. That body could be an already existing national authority, such as the national competition authority, the national access to documents authority or a national judicial authority. That body should be organised in accordance with the constitutional and legal systems of Member States and should not prejudge any means of redress otherwise available to applicants for re-use. It should however be distinct from the Member State mechanism laying down the criteria for charging above marginal costs. The means of redress should include the possibility of review of negative decisions but also of decisions which, although permitting re-use, could still affect applicants on other grounds, notably by the charging rules applied. The review process should be swift, in accordance with the needs of a rapidly changing market.

(29)

Competition rules should be respected when establishing the principles for re-use of documents avoiding as far as possible exclusive agreements between public sector bodies and private partners. However, in order to provide a service in the public interest, an exclusive right to re-use specific public sector documents may sometimes be necessary. This may be, inter alia, the case if no commercial publisher would publish the information without such an exclusive right. In order to take this concern into account Directive 2003/98/EC authorises, subject to a regular review, exclusive arrangements where an exclusive right is necessary for the provision of a service in the public interest.

(30)

Following the extension of the scope of Directive 2003/98/EC to libraries, including university libraries, museums and archives, it is appropriate to take into account current divergences in the Member States with regard to digitisation of cultural resources, which could not be effectively accommodated by the current rules of that Directive on exclusive arrangements. There are numerous cooperation arrangements between libraries, including university libraries, museums, archives and private partners which involve digitisation of cultural resources granting exclusive rights to private partners. Practice has shown that such public-private partnerships can facilitate worthwhile use of cultural collections and at the same time accelerate access to the cultural heritage for members of the public.

(31)

Where an exclusive right relates to digitisation of cultural resources, a certain period of exclusivity might be necessary in order to give the private partner the possibility to recoup its investment. That period should, however, be limited in time and as short as possible, in order to respect the principle that public domain material should stay in the public domain once it is digitised. The period of an exclusive right to digitise cultural resources should in general not exceed 10 years. Any period of exclusivity longer than 10 years should be subject to review, taking into account technological, financial and administrative changes in the environment since the arrangement was entered into. In addition, any public private partnership for the digitisation of cultural resources should grant the partner cultural institution full rights with respect to the post-termination use of digitised cultural resources.

(32)

In order to take due account of contracts and other arrangements which grant exclusive rights and which were concluded before the entry into force of this Directive, appropriate transitional measures should be established to protect the interests of the parties concerned where their exclusive rights do not qualify for the exceptions authorised under this Directive. Those transitional measures should allow for the parties’ exclusive rights to continue to exist until the end of the contract or, for open-ended contracts or contracts of a very long duration, to continue to exist for a sufficiently long period to allow the parties to take appropriate measures. Those transitional measures should not apply to contracts or other arrangements concluded after the entry into force of this Directive but before the application of national measures transposing this Directive, in order to avoid situations whereby contracts or other long-term arrangements which do not comply with this Directive are concluded so as to circumvent future national transposition measures to be adopted. Contracts and other arrangements concluded after the entry into force of this Directive but before the date of application of national transposition measures should therefore comply with this Directive as from the date of application of national measures transposing this Directive.

(33)

Since the objectives of this Directive, namely to facilitate the creation of Union-wide information products and services based on public sector documents, to ensure the effective cross-border use of public sector documents on the one hand by private companies, particularly by small and medium-sized enterprises, for added-value information products and services, and on the other hand by citizens to facilitate the free circulation of information and communication, cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States and can therefore, by reasons of the pan-European scope of the proposed action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principles of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.

(34)

This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, including the protection of personal data (Article 8) and the right to property (Article 17). Nothing in this Directive should be interpreted or implemented in a manner that is inconsistent with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

(35)

It is necessary to ensure that the Member States report to the Commission on the extent of the re-use of public sector information, the conditions under which it is made available and the redress practices.

(36)

The Commission should assist the Member States in implementing this Directive in a consistent way by issuing guidelines, particularly on recommended standard licences, datasets and charging for the re-use of documents, after consulting interested parties.

(37)

Directive 2003/98/EC should therefore be amended accordingly,

(1)

Article 1 is amended as follows:

(2)

The following points are added to Article 2:

(3)

Article 3 is replaced by the following:

(4)

In Article 4, paragraphs 3 and 4 are replaced by the following:

(5)

Article 5 is replaced by the following:

(6)

Article 6 is replaced by the following:

(7)

Article 7 is replaced by the following:

(8)

In Article 8, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

(9)

Article 9 is replaced by the following:

(10)

Article 11 is amended as follows:

(11)

Article 13 is replaced by the following: