Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 15:30:00 -0500
Again, forwarded from the cni-copyright list:
Statement of Civil Society Coalition (CSC) on Limitations and Exceptions
WIPO SCCR
November 22, 2005
CSC welcomes the work by the SCCR on the issue of limitations and
exceptions to copyright and related rights and notes the leadership
of Chile in putting this topic on the agenda.
It is the view of many academic experts and stakeholders that the
limitations and exceptions to rights of copyright holders are
essential if the copyright regime is to be consistent with the public
interest, human rights, and the promotion of new creative activity.
Limitations and exceptions to copyright are areas where the right-
owne rights do not extend, or are limited.
These limits and exceptions are important for consumers and also for
persons who seek to create new works or promote access to works
including through new technologies.
The session yesterday focused needed attention on the important
problems facing libraries schools and persons with handicaps
including the blind. But of course these issues are much broader and
concern everyone who seeks access to knowledge.
Consider two areas that involve new technologies. Today millions of
persons including virtually everyone in this room makes extensive use
of Internet search engines include services run by companies such as
Google, Yahoo, AltaVista or Microsoft, to mention a few. These for-
profit entities make copies of billions of copyrighted works from
Internet web site without prior licenses from the owners of the
copyrights. The works are put into large databases, which then
allow the public, including you and me, to search for all sorts of
information by using key words.
Most of us take for granted the use of these search engines, and use
them all the time. But these search engines can only exist if we
consider what they do to be consistent with national copyright laws,
in particular with the limitations and exceptions to the exclusive
rights of copyright owners.
Today Google is involved in a very important dispute over a new
service called Google Print. Google wants to scan millions of books,
many out of print or otherwise nearly impossible to find, and to
allow the public to search the text of these books using key-words.
Google then would make available small parts of the text, and provide
information about where one could buy the entire work, or sections of
the work, either in print or electronic form.
What Google seeks to do is a great service for the public and a great
benefit to authors who can more easily connect with readers.
Sales of works under Google Print would only be with the permission
of the copyright owners and Google allows all copyright owners to
remove books from the database if they do not want to participate.
But Google Print is under attack from publishers, who want to make
Google first seek permission before
including books into their databases.
The Google Print case is extremely important. It not only raises
questions about the new service, involving books, but also the older
service -- the one that searches web pages -- which millions of
persons use every day, and depend upon for access to knowledge.
Search Engines like Good, AltaVista, Yahoo, or MSN Search would be
far different, and far less useful, if they only included works for
which the search engine first obtained prior approval. This is
clear to everyone.
WIPO should commission a study, and have an information session on
the limitations and exceptions that are essential for modern search
engine services, including but not limited to Google Print. These
efforts should investigate the impact on the public of different
legal regimes, and in particular, consider the role of limitations
and exceptions in promoting investment into services that promote
access to works, including so called "orphaned" works.
WIPO is an appropriate body to address these issues, because it
involves the need for global standards that promotes access to
knowledge.
Another area where new technologies are quite important are the cases
where digital works can be protected by technical protection measures
- called TPMs -- and Digital Rights Management schemes -- called DRMs.
The evidence today is that TPMs/DRMs is being used to redefine
consumer rights, and to radically change the public's right of access
to works under traditional copyright law ---leading to higher prices,
less access and problems that we are only beginning to understand.
Think about what is at stake. All of the traditional limitations and
exceptions for educators, libraries, the blind, news organizations,
can be undone by tough TPM and DRM laws. Works can be protected
beyond copyright terms, and lost forever once the technologies and
keys to unlock them are no longer available. Works that everyone
used to be able to own will now only be available for rent for very
limited and sometimes temporary uses.
WIPO is an appropriate body to study the impact of TPM and DRM
Technologies on the public because these are global issues. TPM and
DRM standards are designed to work in many countries. The decisions
about the TPM and DRM architecture and use concern us all.
These two examples illustrate why it is so important for WIPO to
begin discussions on a global treaty on Access to Knowledge (the A2K
Treaty).
---------------------------------
James Love, CPTech / www.cptech.org / mailto:[email protected] /
tel. +1.202.332.2670 / mobile +1.202.361.3040
#############################################################
Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at
<https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
---
You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
[email protected]
