Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
Asaf and Dror - thank you very very much for these inputs. Thank you. Best, Gautam http://social.prathambooks.org/ On 20 June 2011 13:14, Asaf Bartov wrote: > In the meantime, here is some more food for thought: I have asked my former > colleague in Wikimedia Israel, Dror K (CCed above), to share his experience > with attempting to block similar legislation in Israel in 2007, and how he > ended up helping to mitigate it. > I bring his account verbatim below. Hope this helps, > Asaf Bartov > Wikimedia Foundation > > > I am writing this in English, so you could forward it to our colleagues and > friends in India. > > The problem is not simple at all, because it involves international > commitments and pressure. The international copyright treaty, known today as > WIPO Treaty and replacing the former Bern Treaty, demands that parties to > the treaty will abolish the distinction between photographs and other > creative works. See > here: http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/wct/trtdocs_wo033.html#P81_10697 (Article > 9). The former Bern Treaty allowed each country to decide whether it wants > to have a special copyright period for photographs, and set a minimum of 25 > years. India, like most countries, decided to make this distinction and > opted for the minimal requirement of the Bern Treaty. It has all changed > several years ago, when the WIPO Treaty canceled this paragraph of the Bern > Treaty. > > From my experience with handling this issue in Israel - the chances of > changing the legislators' mind about this are slim, because there are > international commitments involved. And yet, two things should be sought and > demanded: (1) that the change will not be retrospective; (2) that it would > not affect state-owned copyrights > > In Israel, after our appeal, the Ministry of Justice agreed to introduce a > paragraph saying that the change was not retrospective (namely, the old > statute applies for pictures taken before the enactment of the new > legislation). The Ministry explained that the history of Zionism and > Israel's struggle for independence (including the first decades of the state > that saw major events and changes in the landscape and population of the > country) requires that photographs from that time be released to the public > domain as planned. The legislators approved that. > > Since India's struggle for independence happened during the same years, this > argument can be used in the Indian case too. The Ministry also suggested a > slight reduction in the copyright period of state-owned works. Since there > are many state-employed photographers, doing various tasks of documentation, > this amendment was important, though we still struggle to make state-owned > works fully free, like in the US. The fact that the UK changed its policy > regarding state-owned copyright is helpful, because the Indian legal system > (like the Israeli) was inherited from the British colonial regime, hence > every legal solution used in the UK is probably feasible in India as well. > > I hope this helps. Best of luck! > > Dror K > > On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 9:37 PM, Gautam John > wrote: >> >> On 19 June 2011 21:57, Pranesh Prakash wrote: >> >> > If one of you could help me draft the letter (I'm looking at you, >> > Gautam), that would be appreciated. >> >> For sure. Will work on this offline and post it here for further action. >> >> Thank you. >> >> Best, >> >> Gautam >> >> http://social.prathambooks.org/ >> >> ___ >> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list >> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > > > > -- > Asaf Bartov > Wikimedia Foundation > > > ___ > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list > Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > > ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
In the meantime, here is some more food for thought: I have asked my former colleague in Wikimedia Israel, Dror K (CCed above), to share his experience with attempting to block similar legislation in Israel in 2007, and how he ended up helping to mitigate it. I bring his account verbatim below. Hope this helps, Asaf Bartov Wikimedia Foundation I am writing this in English, so you could forward it to our colleagues and friends in India. The problem is not simple at all, because it involves international commitments and pressure. The international copyright treaty, known today as WIPO Treaty and replacing the former Bern Treaty, demands that parties to the treaty will abolish the distinction between photographs and other creative works. See here: http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/wct/trtdocs_wo033.html#P81_10697 (Article 9). The former Bern Treaty allowed each country to decide whether it wants to have a special copyright period for photographs, and set a minimum of 25 years. India, like most countries, decided to make this distinction and opted for the minimal requirement of the Bern Treaty. It has all changed several years ago, when the WIPO Treaty canceled this paragraph of the Bern Treaty. >From my experience with handling this issue in Israel - the chances of changing the legislators' mind about this are slim, because there are international commitments involved. And yet, two things should be sought and demanded: (1) that the change will not be retrospective; (2) that it would not affect state-owned copyrights In Israel, after our appeal, the Ministry of Justice agreed to introduce a paragraph saying that the change was not retrospective (namely, the old statute applies for pictures taken before the enactment of the new legislation). The Ministry explained that the history of Zionism and Israel's struggle for independence (including the first decades of the state that saw major events and changes in the landscape and population of the country) requires that photographs from that time be released to the public domain as planned. The legislators approved that. Since India's struggle for independence happened during the same years, this argument can be used in the Indian case too. The Ministry also suggested a slight reduction in the copyright period of state-owned works. Since there are many state-employed photographers, doing various tasks of documentation, this amendment was important, though we still struggle to make state-owned works fully free, like in the US. The fact that the UK changed its policy regarding state-owned copyright is helpful, because the Indian legal system (like the Israeli) was inherited from the British colonial regime, hence every legal solution used in the UK is probably feasible in India as well. I hope this helps. Best of luck! Dror K On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 9:37 PM, Gautam John wrote: > On 19 June 2011 21:57, Pranesh Prakash wrote: > > > If one of you could help me draft the letter (I'm looking at you, > > Gautam), that would be appreciated. > > For sure. Will work on this offline and post it here for further action. > > Thank you. > > Best, > > Gautam > > http://social.prathambooks.org/ > > ___ > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list > Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > -- Asaf Bartov Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
On 19 June 2011 21:57, Pranesh Prakash wrote: > If one of you could help me draft the letter (I'm looking at you, > Gautam), that would be appreciated. For sure. Will work on this offline and post it here for further action. Thank you. Best, Gautam http://social.prathambooks.org/ ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
Dear Gautam, Srikanth, and Ashwin and all, Thank you for your enthusiasm. I don't have a form letter, as I wanted to test the waters first and see if there was interest. If one of you could help me draft the letter (I'm looking at you, Gautam), that would be appreciated. I think it would be best if the letter was sent to the Copyright Office, the Ministry (of HRD, which administers copyright), as well as the sender's MP. I'll try and get an online form through which this could be accomplished soon. However, this will need also to be translated to calls, snail mail (registered post so you get receipt on delivery), and faxes. Regards, Pranesh On Sunday 19 June 2011 01:53 PM, Gautam John wrote: > Yes - we could. > > Pranesh - is there a form letter you have or can we create one so that > we can send it individually? > > Thank you. > > Best, > > Gautam > > http://social.prathambooks.org/ > > > > > On 18 June 2011 23:38, Srikanth Ramakrishnan wrote: >> Pranesh, Gautham, >> By any chance, can we create a Petition about this ? >> --Regards, >> >> >> On 18 June 2011 23:23, Gautam John wrote: >>> >>> Pranesh: >>> >>> Do you have a form letter we could use, please? >>> >>> Something that we could each sign, individually, and send? To whom? By >>> when? >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Gautam >>> >>> http://social.prathambooks.org/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 18 June 2011 23:05, Pranesh Prakash wrote: >>>> Dear all, >>>> I am well aware that there are other issues such as that of copyright >>>> over works by the government and public undertakings. We have raised >>>> this issue in our analysis[1] as well as our formal submission to the >>>> Parliamentary Standing Committee.[2] >>>> >>>> However, it is one thing to get something that is good (broad exception >>>> for government works / or even better: making government works public >>>> domain) which is not even on the table, and preventing an impending >>>> harm: decrease of the public domain in terms of Indian photographs. The >>>> first is a longer term goal than the second. >>>> >>>> Copyright term of photographs is going to increase if folks don't stand >>>> up against it. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Pranesh >>>> >>>> [1]: Analysis: http://goo.gl/Iv69r >>>> [2]: Civil Society submission: http://goo.gl/9Ws3E / Analysis of >>>> Standing Committee's report: http://goo.gl/Fs5WM >>>> >>>> On Saturday 18 June 2011 06:40 PM, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Very contentious issue Pranesh. The issue is not only this - but also >>>>> to insure that any Indian government works be in public domain as well as >>>>> that of a Public Servant when on duty (like in the US - after all it is >>>>> OUR >>>>> govenment and OUR money spent hiring that Public Servant!). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 18:04:07 +0200 >>>>> From: pran...@cis-india.org >>>>> To: wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>> CC: aprabh...@gmail.com; su...@cis-india.org >>>>> Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for >>>>> photographs >>>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> It seems clear that through a new amendment to the Copyright Act, the >>>>> term of copyright of photographs is going to be increased from 25 years >>>>> (which is the minimum required by international copyright law) to 60 >>>>> years *after the death of the photographer* (i.e., copyright term = >>>>> life >>>>> of the photographer + 60 years). >>>>> >>>>> So say a photographer aged 25 clicks a photograph and dies at the age >>>>> of >>>>> 75 (in 2061): >>>>> Under current law the copyright on that photo expires on January 1, >>>>> 2037. >>>>> Under proposed law, copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2122. >>>>> >>>>> The difference: 85 years! >>>>> >>>>> (I hope I've done the math correctly.) >>>>> >>>>> So only your great-grandchildren will be able to upload that pho
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
Yes - we could. Pranesh - is there a form letter you have or can we create one so that we can send it individually? Thank you. Best, Gautam http://social.prathambooks.org/ On 18 June 2011 23:38, Srikanth Ramakrishnan wrote: > Pranesh, Gautham, > By any chance, can we create a Petition about this ? > --Regards, > > > On 18 June 2011 23:23, Gautam John wrote: >> >> Pranesh: >> >> Do you have a form letter we could use, please? >> >> Something that we could each sign, individually, and send? To whom? By >> when? >> >> Thank you. >> >> Best, >> >> Gautam >> >> http://social.prathambooks.org/ >> >> >> >> >> On 18 June 2011 23:05, Pranesh Prakash wrote: >> > Dear all, >> > I am well aware that there are other issues such as that of copyright >> > over works by the government and public undertakings. We have raised >> > this issue in our analysis[1] as well as our formal submission to the >> > Parliamentary Standing Committee.[2] >> > >> > However, it is one thing to get something that is good (broad exception >> > for government works / or even better: making government works public >> > domain) which is not even on the table, and preventing an impending >> > harm: decrease of the public domain in terms of Indian photographs. The >> > first is a longer term goal than the second. >> > >> > Copyright term of photographs is going to increase if folks don't stand >> > up against it. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Pranesh >> > >> > [1]: Analysis: http://goo.gl/Iv69r >> > [2]: Civil Society submission: http://goo.gl/9Ws3E / Analysis of >> > Standing Committee's report: http://goo.gl/Fs5WM >> > >> > On Saturday 18 June 2011 06:40 PM, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >> Very contentious issue Pranesh. The issue is not only this - but also >> >> to insure that any Indian government works be in public domain as well as >> >> that of a Public Servant when on duty (like in the US - after all it is >> >> OUR >> >> govenment and OUR money spent hiring that Public Servant!). >> >> >> >> >> >> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 18:04:07 +0200 >> >> From: pran...@cis-india.org >> >> To: wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> CC: aprabh...@gmail.com; su...@cis-india.org >> >> Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for >> >> photographs >> >> >> >> Dear all, >> >> It seems clear that through a new amendment to the Copyright Act, the >> >> term of copyright of photographs is going to be increased from 25 years >> >> (which is the minimum required by international copyright law) to 60 >> >> years *after the death of the photographer* (i.e., copyright term = >> >> life >> >> of the photographer + 60 years). >> >> >> >> So say a photographer aged 25 clicks a photograph and dies at the age >> >> of >> >> 75 (in 2061): >> >> Under current law the copyright on that photo expires on January 1, >> >> 2037. >> >> Under proposed law, copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2122. >> >> >> >> The difference: 85 years! >> >> >> >> (I hope I've done the math correctly.) >> >> >> >> So only your great-grandchildren will be able to upload that photograph >> >> to Wikipedia. >> >> >> >> As far as I can understand, there has been no positive lobbying on this >> >> front by any photographers. No one has really asked for it. >> >> >> >> We, from the Centre for Internet and Society submitted a 'civil society >> >> submission' (with the backing of 22 organizations) which criticised >> >> this >> >> to the Standing Committee that was examining the amendment. But the >> >> chairman of that committee did not take notice. In effect, the >> >> Standing >> >> Committee heard only rightsholders (and groups, including ours, working >> >> on the exception for persons with disabilities). >> >> >> >> Are people on this list concerned about this? If yes, then we all need >> >> to try to get this particular amendment targetted and struck off when >> >> the amendment gets presented before Parliament in the Mo
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
I'm willing to sgn up. Tell me where! I'll forward to friends too! Warm regards, Ashwin Baindur -- On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Gautam John wrote: > Pranesh, might you have a form letter we can sign, individually, and send? > > Thank you. > > Best, > > Gautam > (handheld) > On Jun 18, 2011 11:07 PM, "Pranesh Prakash" wrote: > > Dear all, > > I am well aware that there are other issues such as that of copyright > > over works by the government and public undertakings. We have raised > > this issue in our analysis[1] as well as our formal submission to the > > Parliamentary Standing Committee.[2] > > > > However, it is one thing to get something that is good (broad exception > > for government works / or even better: making government works public > > domain) which is not even on the table, and preventing an impending > > harm: decrease of the public domain in terms of Indian photographs. The > > first is a longer term goal than the second. > > > > Copyright term of photographs is going to increase if folks don't stand > > up against it. > > > > Regards, > > Pranesh > > > > [1]: Analysis: http://goo.gl/Iv69r > > [2]: Civil Society submission: http://goo.gl/9Ws3E / Analysis of > > Standing Committee's report: http://goo.gl/Fs5WM > > > > On Saturday 18 June 2011 06:40 PM, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: > >> > >> Very contentious issue Pranesh. The issue is not only this - but also to > insure that any Indian government works be in public domain as well as that > of a Public Servant when on duty (like in the US - after all it is OUR > govenment and OUR money spent hiring that Public Servant!). > >> > >> > >> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 18:04:07 +0200 > >> From: pran...@cis-india.org > >> To: wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> CC: aprabh...@gmail.com; su...@cis-india.org > >> Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for > photographs > >> > >> Dear all, > >> It seems clear that through a new amendment to the Copyright Act, the > >> term of copyright of photographs is going to be increased from 25 years > >> (which is the minimum required by international copyright law) to 60 > >> years *after the death of the photographer* (i.e., copyright term = life > >> of the photographer + 60 years). > >> > >> So say a photographer aged 25 clicks a photograph and dies at the age of > >> 75 (in 2061): > >> Under current law the copyright on that photo expires on January 1, > 2037. > >> Under proposed law, copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2122. > >> > >> The difference: 85 years! > >> > >> (I hope I've done the math correctly.) > >> > >> So only your great-grandchildren will be able to upload that photograph > >> to Wikipedia. > >> > >> As far as I can understand, there has been no positive lobbying on this > >> front by any photographers. No one has really asked for it. > >> > >> We, from the Centre for Internet and Society submitted a 'civil society > >> submission' (with the backing of 22 organizations) which criticised this > >> to the Standing Committee that was examining the amendment. But the > >> chairman of that committee did not take notice. In effect, the Standing > >> Committee heard only rightsholders (and groups, including ours, working > >> on the exception for persons with disabilities). > >> > >> Are people on this list concerned about this? If yes, then we all need > >> to try to get this particular amendment targetted and struck off when > >> the amendment gets presented before Parliament in the Monsoon session. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Pranesh > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ___ > >> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list > >> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > > > > -- > > Pranesh Prakash > > Programme Manager > > Centre for Internet and Society > > W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 > > > > ___ > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list > Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > > ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
Pranesh, might you have a form letter we can sign, individually, and send? Thank you. Best, Gautam (handheld) On Jun 18, 2011 11:07 PM, "Pranesh Prakash" wrote: > Dear all, > I am well aware that there are other issues such as that of copyright > over works by the government and public undertakings. We have raised > this issue in our analysis[1] as well as our formal submission to the > Parliamentary Standing Committee.[2] > > However, it is one thing to get something that is good (broad exception > for government works / or even better: making government works public > domain) which is not even on the table, and preventing an impending > harm: decrease of the public domain in terms of Indian photographs. The > first is a longer term goal than the second. > > Copyright term of photographs is going to increase if folks don't stand > up against it. > > Regards, > Pranesh > > [1]: Analysis: http://goo.gl/Iv69r > [2]: Civil Society submission: http://goo.gl/9Ws3E / Analysis of > Standing Committee's report: http://goo.gl/Fs5WM > > On Saturday 18 June 2011 06:40 PM, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: >> >> Very contentious issue Pranesh. The issue is not only this - but also to insure that any Indian government works be in public domain as well as that of a Public Servant when on duty (like in the US - after all it is OUR govenment and OUR money spent hiring that Public Servant!). >> >> >> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 18:04:07 +0200 >> From: pran...@cis-india.org >> To: wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> CC: aprabh...@gmail.com; su...@cis-india.org >> Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs >> >> Dear all, >> It seems clear that through a new amendment to the Copyright Act, the >> term of copyright of photographs is going to be increased from 25 years >> (which is the minimum required by international copyright law) to 60 >> years *after the death of the photographer* (i.e., copyright term = life >> of the photographer + 60 years). >> >> So say a photographer aged 25 clicks a photograph and dies at the age of >> 75 (in 2061): >> Under current law the copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2037. >> Under proposed law, copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2122. >> >> The difference: 85 years! >> >> (I hope I've done the math correctly.) >> >> So only your great-grandchildren will be able to upload that photograph >> to Wikipedia. >> >> As far as I can understand, there has been no positive lobbying on this >> front by any photographers. No one has really asked for it. >> >> We, from the Centre for Internet and Society submitted a 'civil society >> submission' (with the backing of 22 organizations) which criticised this >> to the Standing Committee that was examining the amendment. But the >> chairman of that committee did not take notice. In effect, the Standing >> Committee heard only rightsholders (and groups, including ours, working >> on the exception for persons with disabilities). >> >> Are people on this list concerned about this? If yes, then we all need >> to try to get this particular amendment targetted and struck off when >> the amendment gets presented before Parliament in the Monsoon session. >> >> Regards, >> Pranesh >> >> >> >> >> ___ >> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list >> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > > -- > Pranesh Prakash > Programme Manager > Centre for Internet and Society > W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 > ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
Pranesh, Gautham, By any chance, can we create a Petition about this ? --Regards, On 18 June 2011 23:23, Gautam John wrote: > Pranesh: > > Do you have a form letter we could use, please? > > Something that we could each sign, individually, and send? To whom? By > when? > > Thank you. > > Best, > > Gautam > > http://social.prathambooks.org/ > > > > > On 18 June 2011 23:05, Pranesh Prakash wrote: > > Dear all, > > I am well aware that there are other issues such as that of copyright > > over works by the government and public undertakings. We have raised > > this issue in our analysis[1] as well as our formal submission to the > > Parliamentary Standing Committee.[2] > > > > However, it is one thing to get something that is good (broad exception > > for government works / or even better: making government works public > > domain) which is not even on the table, and preventing an impending > > harm: decrease of the public domain in terms of Indian photographs. The > > first is a longer term goal than the second. > > > > Copyright term of photographs is going to increase if folks don't stand > > up against it. > > > > Regards, > > Pranesh > > > > [1]: Analysis: http://goo.gl/Iv69r > > [2]: Civil Society submission: http://goo.gl/9Ws3E / Analysis of > > Standing Committee's report: http://goo.gl/Fs5WM > > > > On Saturday 18 June 2011 06:40 PM, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: > >> > >> Very contentious issue Pranesh. The issue is not only this - but also to > insure that any Indian government works be in public domain as well as that > of a Public Servant when on duty (like in the US - after all it is OUR > govenment and OUR money spent hiring that Public Servant!). > >> > >> > >> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 18:04:07 +0200 > >> From: pran...@cis-india.org > >> To: wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> CC: aprabh...@gmail.com; su...@cis-india.org > >> Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for > photographs > >> > >> Dear all, > >> It seems clear that through a new amendment to the Copyright Act, the > >> term of copyright of photographs is going to be increased from 25 years > >> (which is the minimum required by international copyright law) to 60 > >> years *after the death of the photographer* (i.e., copyright term = life > >> of the photographer + 60 years). > >> > >> So say a photographer aged 25 clicks a photograph and dies at the age of > >> 75 (in 2061): > >> Under current law the copyright on that photo expires on January 1, > 2037. > >> Under proposed law, copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2122. > >> > >> The difference: 85 years! > >> > >> (I hope I've done the math correctly.) > >> > >> So only your great-grandchildren will be able to upload that photograph > >> to Wikipedia. > >> > >> As far as I can understand, there has been no positive lobbying on this > >> front by any photographers. No one has really asked for it. > >> > >> We, from the Centre for Internet and Society submitted a 'civil society > >> submission' (with the backing of 22 organizations) which criticised this > >> to the Standing Committee that was examining the amendment. But the > >> chairman of that committee did not take notice. In effect, the Standing > >> Committee heard only rightsholders (and groups, including ours, working > >> on the exception for persons with disabilities). > >> > >> Are people on this list concerned about this? If yes, then we all need > >> to try to get this particular amendment targetted and struck off when > >> the amendment gets presented before Parliament in the Monsoon session. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Pranesh > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ___ > >> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list > >> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > > > > -- > > Pranesh Prakash > > Programme Manager > > Centre for Internet and Society > > W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 > > > > > > ___ > > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list > > Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > > > > > > ___ > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list > Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > -- Regards, ME. Wear a Lungi, Support the Movement My infrastructure invasion... plus other images too.. on Wikimedia Commons. http://bit.ly/d50SIq ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
Pranesh: Do you have a form letter we could use, please? Something that we could each sign, individually, and send? To whom? By when? Thank you. Best, Gautam http://social.prathambooks.org/ On 18 June 2011 23:05, Pranesh Prakash wrote: > Dear all, > I am well aware that there are other issues such as that of copyright > over works by the government and public undertakings. We have raised > this issue in our analysis[1] as well as our formal submission to the > Parliamentary Standing Committee.[2] > > However, it is one thing to get something that is good (broad exception > for government works / or even better: making government works public > domain) which is not even on the table, and preventing an impending > harm: decrease of the public domain in terms of Indian photographs. The > first is a longer term goal than the second. > > Copyright term of photographs is going to increase if folks don't stand > up against it. > > Regards, > Pranesh > > [1]: Analysis: http://goo.gl/Iv69r > [2]: Civil Society submission: http://goo.gl/9Ws3E / Analysis of > Standing Committee's report: http://goo.gl/Fs5WM > > On Saturday 18 June 2011 06:40 PM, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: >> >> Very contentious issue Pranesh. The issue is not only this - but also to >> insure that any Indian government works be in public domain as well as that >> of a Public Servant when on duty (like in the US - after all it is OUR >> govenment and OUR money spent hiring that Public Servant!). >> >> >> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 18:04:07 +0200 >> From: pran...@cis-india.org >> To: wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> CC: aprabh...@gmail.com; su...@cis-india.org >> Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for >> photographs >> >> Dear all, >> It seems clear that through a new amendment to the Copyright Act, the >> term of copyright of photographs is going to be increased from 25 years >> (which is the minimum required by international copyright law) to 60 >> years *after the death of the photographer* (i.e., copyright term = life >> of the photographer + 60 years). >> >> So say a photographer aged 25 clicks a photograph and dies at the age of >> 75 (in 2061): >> Under current law the copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2037. >> Under proposed law, copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2122. >> >> The difference: 85 years! >> >> (I hope I've done the math correctly.) >> >> So only your great-grandchildren will be able to upload that photograph >> to Wikipedia. >> >> As far as I can understand, there has been no positive lobbying on this >> front by any photographers. No one has really asked for it. >> >> We, from the Centre for Internet and Society submitted a 'civil society >> submission' (with the backing of 22 organizations) which criticised this >> to the Standing Committee that was examining the amendment. But the >> chairman of that committee did not take notice. In effect, the Standing >> Committee heard only rightsholders (and groups, including ours, working >> on the exception for persons with disabilities). >> >> Are people on this list concerned about this? If yes, then we all need >> to try to get this particular amendment targetted and struck off when >> the amendment gets presented before Parliament in the Monsoon session. >> >> Regards, >> Pranesh >> >> >> >> >> ___ >> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list >> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > > -- > Pranesh Prakash > Programme Manager > Centre for Internet and Society > W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 > > > ___ > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list > Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > > ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
Dear all, I am well aware that there are other issues such as that of copyright over works by the government and public undertakings. We have raised this issue in our analysis[1] as well as our formal submission to the Parliamentary Standing Committee.[2] However, it is one thing to get something that is good (broad exception for government works / or even better: making government works public domain) which is not even on the table, and preventing an impending harm: decrease of the public domain in terms of Indian photographs. The first is a longer term goal than the second. Copyright term of photographs is going to increase if folks don't stand up against it. Regards, Pranesh [1]: Analysis: http://goo.gl/Iv69r [2]: Civil Society submission: http://goo.gl/9Ws3E / Analysis of Standing Committee's report: http://goo.gl/Fs5WM On Saturday 18 June 2011 06:40 PM, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: > > Very contentious issue Pranesh. The issue is not only this - but also to > insure that any Indian government works be in public domain as well as that > of a Public Servant when on duty (like in the US - after all it is OUR > govenment and OUR money spent hiring that Public Servant!). > > > Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 18:04:07 +0200 > From: pran...@cis-india.org > To: wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > CC: aprabh...@gmail.com; su...@cis-india.org > Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs > > Dear all, > It seems clear that through a new amendment to the Copyright Act, the > term of copyright of photographs is going to be increased from 25 years > (which is the minimum required by international copyright law) to 60 > years *after the death of the photographer* (i.e., copyright term = life > of the photographer + 60 years). > > So say a photographer aged 25 clicks a photograph and dies at the age of > 75 (in 2061): > Under current law the copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2037. > Under proposed law, copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2122. > > The difference: 85 years! > > (I hope I've done the math correctly.) > > So only your great-grandchildren will be able to upload that photograph > to Wikipedia. > > As far as I can understand, there has been no positive lobbying on this > front by any photographers. No one has really asked for it. > > We, from the Centre for Internet and Society submitted a 'civil society > submission' (with the backing of 22 organizations) which criticised this > to the Standing Committee that was examining the amendment. But the > chairman of that committee did not take notice. In effect, the Standing > Committee heard only rightsholders (and groups, including ours, working > on the exception for persons with disabilities). > > Are people on this list concerned about this? If yes, then we all need > to try to get this particular amendment targetted and struck off when > the amendment gets presented before Parliament in the Monsoon session. > > Regards, > Pranesh > > > > > ___ > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list > Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l -- Pranesh Prakash Programme Manager Centre for Internet and Society W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
WhereDevilsDare, rightly said, it is our money, the government is elected to represent the people. As a side note: This might be of interest to you: Flickr help states: *Note:* If your login ID is based in Singapore, Hong Kong, India, Korea or with Maktoob.com you will only be able to view safe content based on your local Terms of Service (this means you won’t be able to turn SafeSearch off). If your login ID is based in Germany you are not able to view restricted content due to your local Terms of Service. Is the Government censoring stuff? I feel this could also affect Wikipedia and the Commons. Maybe this could be clubbed with the railways thing from the previous thread? --Regards, On 18 June 2011 22:10, wrote: > Very contentious issue Pranesh. The issue is not only this - but also to > insure that any Indian government works be in public domain as well as that > of a Public Servant when on duty (like in the US - after all it is OUR > govenment and OUR money spent hiring that Public Servant!). > > Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 18:04:07 +0200 > From: pran...@cis-india.org > To: wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > CC: aprabh...@gmail.com; su...@cis-india.org > Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for > photographs > > > Dear all, > It seems clear that through a new amendment to the Copyright Act, the > term of copyright of photographs is going to be increased from 25 years > (which is the minimum required by international copyright law) to 60 > years *after the death of the photographer* (i.e., copyright term = life > of the photographer + 60 years). > > So say a photographer aged 25 clicks a photograph and dies at the age of > 75 (in 2061): > Under current law the copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2037. > Under proposed law, copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2122. > > The difference: 85 years! > > (I hope I've done the math correctly.) > > So only your great-grandchildren will be able to upload that photograph > to Wikipedia. > > As far as I can understand, there has been no positive lobbying on this > front by any photographers. No one has really asked for it. > > We, from the Centre for Internet and Society submitted a 'civil society > submission' (with the backing of 22 organizations) which criticised this > to the Standing Committee that was examining the amendment. But the > chairman of that committee did not take notice. In effect, the Standing > Committee heard only rightsholders (and groups, including ours, working > on the exception for persons with disabilities). > > Are people on this list concerned about this? If yes, then we all need > to try to get this particular amendment targetted and struck off when > the amendment gets presented before Parliament in the Monsoon session. > > Regards, > Pranesh > > -- > Pranesh Prakash > Programme Manager > Centre for Internet and Society > W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 > > > ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing > list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > > ___ > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list > Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > > -- Regards, ME. Wear a Lungi, Support the Movement My infrastructure invasion... plus other images too.. on Wikimedia Commons. http://bit.ly/d50SIq ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
Very contentious issue Pranesh. The issue is not only this - but also to insure that any Indian government works be in public domain as well as that of a Public Servant when on duty (like in the US - after all it is OUR govenment and OUR money spent hiring that Public Servant!). Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 18:04:07 +0200 From: pran...@cis-india.org To: wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org CC: aprabh...@gmail.com; su...@cis-india.org Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs Dear all, It seems clear that through a new amendment to the Copyright Act, the term of copyright of photographs is going to be increased from 25 years (which is the minimum required by international copyright law) to 60 years *after the death of the photographer* (i.e., copyright term = life of the photographer + 60 years). So say a photographer aged 25 clicks a photograph and dies at the age of 75 (in 2061): Under current law the copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2037. Under proposed law, copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2122. The difference: 85 years! (I hope I've done the math correctly.) So only your great-grandchildren will be able to upload that photograph to Wikipedia. As far as I can understand, there has been no positive lobbying on this front by any photographers. No one has really asked for it. We, from the Centre for Internet and Society submitted a 'civil society submission' (with the backing of 22 organizations) which criticised this to the Standing Committee that was examining the amendment. But the chairman of that committee did not take notice. In effect, the Standing Committee heard only rightsholders (and groups, including ours, working on the exception for persons with disabilities). Are people on this list concerned about this? If yes, then we all need to try to get this particular amendment targetted and struck off when the amendment gets presented before Parliament in the Monsoon session. Regards, Pranesh -- Pranesh Prakash Programme Manager Centre for Internet and Society W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
[Wikimediaindia-l] Massive increase in copyright term for photographs
Dear all, It seems clear that through a new amendment to the Copyright Act, the term of copyright of photographs is going to be increased from 25 years (which is the minimum required by international copyright law) to 60 years *after the death of the photographer* (i.e., copyright term = life of the photographer + 60 years). So say a photographer aged 25 clicks a photograph and dies at the age of 75 (in 2061): Under current law the copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2037. Under proposed law, copyright on that photo expires on January 1, 2122. The difference: 85 years! (I hope I've done the math correctly.) So only your great-grandchildren will be able to upload that photograph to Wikipedia. As far as I can understand, there has been no positive lobbying on this front by any photographers. No one has really asked for it. We, from the Centre for Internet and Society submitted a 'civil society submission' (with the backing of 22 organizations) which criticised this to the Standing Committee that was examining the amendment. But the chairman of that committee did not take notice. In effect, the Standing Committee heard only rightsholders (and groups, including ours, working on the exception for persons with disabilities). Are people on this list concerned about this? If yes, then we all need to try to get this particular amendment targetted and struck off when the amendment gets presented before Parliament in the Monsoon session. Regards, Pranesh -- Pranesh Prakash Programme Manager Centre for Internet and Society W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
