The Digital Economy Bill was published on Friday 21 November. Naturally, the most controversial clauses are the ones addressing the graduated ("three strikes") response (Clauses 4 to 16). Note also, though, Clause 17 (authorising the copyright law to be changed "for the purpose of preventing or reducing the infringement of copyright by means of the internet, if it appears to the Secretary of State appropriate to do so having regard to technological developments that have occurred or are likely to occur."), Clause 42 (dealing with orphan works and other extended licensing systems), Clause 43 (increasing the penalties for certain criminal copyright infringements to £50,000 per offence) and Clause 44 (extending the public lending right scheme provisions of the Copyright Act to cover audio books and e-books).
Monday, 30 November 2009
"Viviane Reding pide una única ley de «copyright» para toda Europa"
"La Unión Europea quiere un único modelo de protección de los derechos de autor, en contra de los 27 que existen ahora en los 27 países europeos. La comisaria de Sociedad de la Información, Viviane Reding, aseguró ayer que es algo vital para luchar con más eficacia contra los retos que ha abierto internet. "Guttemberg llevó a cientos de miles lo que estaba reservado a decenas. Internet ha llevado lo que estaba al alcance de miles a millones. Tiene sus ventajas, pero tenemos que encontrar formas de proteger los derechos de autor porque sin recompensa no hay creatividad", afirmó Reding. "No queremos imponer ningún modelo, pero sí crearemos un sistema de copyright europeo al que, esperemos, todos los países se vayan adheriendo poco a poco", señaló."
Source: http://www.lainformacion.com/
Dutch questions to the ECJ in connection to the InfoSoc Directive
In Stichting de Thuiskopie v Opus Supplies Deutschland GmbH the Dutch Supreme Court recently referred two questions to the Court of Justice of the European Communities for a preliminary ruling. The questions concern the concepts of ‘fair compensation’ and ‘three-step-test’ in the context of the Information Society Directive. The questions are as follows:
"(i) Does Directive 2001/29/EC, more specifically article 5(2)(b) and (5), provide any bases for answering the question of who should be considered under national law the person entitled to receive the ‘fair compensation’ referred to in article 5(2)(b)? And, if so, which?
(ii) If there is a direct purchase in which the buyer is domiciled in a Member State other than the one of the seller, does article 5(5) of the Directive then require the interpretation of national law in such a broad manner that, at least in one of the countries involved in the direct purchase, the ‘fair compensation’ referred to in article 5(2)(b) is owed by a commercially acting debtor?".
Pirate Bay related decision
In November this year, a decision by a Norwegian District Court concluded that there were no grounds for ordering internet service supplier Telenor to block internet access to The Pirate Bay. According to the IPKat:
“In June 2009 the music and film industry filed a petition for a preliminary injunction requiring Telenor to block its customers’ access to The Pirate Bay. The Asker og Bærum District Court delivered its decision 6 November in favour of Telenor. The court concluded that Telenor did not unlawfully contribute to copyright infringements that take place by its customers’ use of The Pirate Bay. Accordingly, the court held that that there was no legal basis for ordering Telenor to block access to the website. Telenor has repeatedly emphasized that it does not support infringements that take place through use of The Pirate Bay. On the contrary, Telenor co-operates closely with rights holders by establishing solutions for legal downloads and streaming of content. The case did not concern the question of whether customers of Telenor infringed copyright by using The Pirate Bay, but whether Telenor - by granting access to The Pirate Bay -- committed an illegal act. ... In its assessment the court emphasized the unfortunate consequences of imposing blocking obligations on internet service providers. The decision is not yet legally in force. The music and film industry are considering appealing against the decision.”
“In June 2009 the music and film industry filed a petition for a preliminary injunction requiring Telenor to block its customers’ access to The Pirate Bay. The Asker og Bærum District Court delivered its decision 6 November in favour of Telenor. The court concluded that Telenor did not unlawfully contribute to copyright infringements that take place by its customers’ use of The Pirate Bay. Accordingly, the court held that that there was no legal basis for ordering Telenor to block access to the website. Telenor has repeatedly emphasized that it does not support infringements that take place through use of The Pirate Bay. On the contrary, Telenor co-operates closely with rights holders by establishing solutions for legal downloads and streaming of content. The case did not concern the question of whether customers of Telenor infringed copyright by using The Pirate Bay, but whether Telenor - by granting access to The Pirate Bay -- committed an illegal act. ... In its assessment the court emphasized the unfortunate consequences of imposing blocking obligations on internet service providers. The decision is not yet legally in force. The music and film industry are considering appealing against the decision.”
Copyright in the digital age
The UK Intellectual Property Office and the Department for Business Innovation and Skills recently announced their strategy for Copyright in the digital age. They state:
“The aim of copyright is to encourage authors’ creativity and make their works available widely. It is a global system that provides incentives for authors and investors, while allowing access to works for educators, researchers, cultural institutions and users of all sorts, both in business and in the home. Copyright engenders strong emotions. It is about authors’ livelihoods and recognition and about financial rewards for rights holders. But it is also about access to the copyright works which are essential to our values, our cultures and to the way we spend our work and our leisure time. This work looks ahead to how copyright can tackle the challenges of the digital age, drawing on previous work including Digital Britain and the Gowers Review of Intellectual Property, on international perspectives including the European Commission’s and on
discussions and submissions from stakeholders.
The value of copyright
The last 300 years have seen an unprecedented explosion in the cultural, scientifi c and historical material available to scholars, business people and private citizen. Financial and societal rewards to creators and investors have helped continue to fuel the engine of creativity. Copyright has been in the background of much of this activity. Now, creative industries are a vital part of the UK’s economy: around 6.4% of GDP. The internet has brought wider access to a broader range of works than ever before. But this has brought to the fore existing tensions between incentives for authors, publishers and investors and the desire for access to works by a wide range of users. Copyright faces fresh challenges in the digital age. These challenges are global and many of them require international agreement to be addressed fully.
Findings from the Copyright Strategy
Investigation led by the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) over the course of the last year found that:
• For the first time, individual citizens have the means to create, use and distribute copyright works through digital technology. People want to make use of these opportunities but in doing so it is almost inevitable that they will violate copyright. This mismatch of expectations is significant because neither the law nor people’s attitudes is easy to change.
• Copyright is also complex for users. Much of this complexity can be addressed by rights holders and how they administer their rights. This would
have many advantages over changes to the law, which can be slow and risks adding to rather than reducing complexity.
• Making non-commercial use less onerous for consumers, for example by removing the need to seek permission and make payment for personal use of individual copyright works, would help tackle the “mismatch of expectations” problem. But fair compensation for rights holders would be required. Action at a European level would be necessary.
• Processes for licensing copyright works need to be improved. The Government has already brought forward proposals in the Digital Britain Report, which noted problems with access to “orphan works” and the potential benefits of extended collective licensing in tackling some of these problems. Non-compulsory registration systems may also help rights holders manage their rights more effectively.
• Creative industries face real challenges in monetising content. Firms must continue to evolve products and services to offer consumers something they value at prices they are prepared to pay. Education and enforcement can support these efforts but cannot tackle infringement of copyright on their own.
Actions and recommendations
Based on these findings, the Government’s intentions are:
• for authors of copyright works; to support fair treatment through new model contracts and clauses and fair returns for use of their work by improving education about and enforcement of rights;
• for rights holders; to help secure a viable future by encouraging the development of new business models, modernising the licensing process and maintaining support for education about and enforcement of rights;
• for consumers; to allow them to benefit from the digital age by seeking to legitimise non-commercial use of legitimately-purchased copyright works and improving access to ‘orphan works’ such as out-of-print books;
• for educators and researchers; to support them by improving access to works, resolving issues around copyright and contract and ensuring exceptions to copyright are right for the digital age; and
• for businesses and other users; to work towards a simpler copyright system by, improving the copyright licensing process and encouraging the development of new business models.
This means:
• UK action to improve access to orphan works, enable extended collective licensing, encourage the development of model contracts and clauses, and tackle P2P file-sharing; and
• A willingness on the Government’s part to consider European action that provides commonsense rules for private, non-commercial use of copyright material that will give consumers much more freedom to do what they want (such as creating mash-ups) and make clear what they cannot do."
“The aim of copyright is to encourage authors’ creativity and make their works available widely. It is a global system that provides incentives for authors and investors, while allowing access to works for educators, researchers, cultural institutions and users of all sorts, both in business and in the home. Copyright engenders strong emotions. It is about authors’ livelihoods and recognition and about financial rewards for rights holders. But it is also about access to the copyright works which are essential to our values, our cultures and to the way we spend our work and our leisure time. This work looks ahead to how copyright can tackle the challenges of the digital age, drawing on previous work including Digital Britain and the Gowers Review of Intellectual Property, on international perspectives including the European Commission’s and on
discussions and submissions from stakeholders.
The value of copyright
The last 300 years have seen an unprecedented explosion in the cultural, scientifi c and historical material available to scholars, business people and private citizen. Financial and societal rewards to creators and investors have helped continue to fuel the engine of creativity. Copyright has been in the background of much of this activity. Now, creative industries are a vital part of the UK’s economy: around 6.4% of GDP. The internet has brought wider access to a broader range of works than ever before. But this has brought to the fore existing tensions between incentives for authors, publishers and investors and the desire for access to works by a wide range of users. Copyright faces fresh challenges in the digital age. These challenges are global and many of them require international agreement to be addressed fully.
Findings from the Copyright Strategy
Investigation led by the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) over the course of the last year found that:
• For the first time, individual citizens have the means to create, use and distribute copyright works through digital technology. People want to make use of these opportunities but in doing so it is almost inevitable that they will violate copyright. This mismatch of expectations is significant because neither the law nor people’s attitudes is easy to change.
• Copyright is also complex for users. Much of this complexity can be addressed by rights holders and how they administer their rights. This would
have many advantages over changes to the law, which can be slow and risks adding to rather than reducing complexity.
• Making non-commercial use less onerous for consumers, for example by removing the need to seek permission and make payment for personal use of individual copyright works, would help tackle the “mismatch of expectations” problem. But fair compensation for rights holders would be required. Action at a European level would be necessary.
• Processes for licensing copyright works need to be improved. The Government has already brought forward proposals in the Digital Britain Report, which noted problems with access to “orphan works” and the potential benefits of extended collective licensing in tackling some of these problems. Non-compulsory registration systems may also help rights holders manage their rights more effectively.
• Creative industries face real challenges in monetising content. Firms must continue to evolve products and services to offer consumers something they value at prices they are prepared to pay. Education and enforcement can support these efforts but cannot tackle infringement of copyright on their own.
Actions and recommendations
Based on these findings, the Government’s intentions are:
• for authors of copyright works; to support fair treatment through new model contracts and clauses and fair returns for use of their work by improving education about and enforcement of rights;
• for rights holders; to help secure a viable future by encouraging the development of new business models, modernising the licensing process and maintaining support for education about and enforcement of rights;
• for consumers; to allow them to benefit from the digital age by seeking to legitimise non-commercial use of legitimately-purchased copyright works and improving access to ‘orphan works’ such as out-of-print books;
• for educators and researchers; to support them by improving access to works, resolving issues around copyright and contract and ensuring exceptions to copyright are right for the digital age; and
• for businesses and other users; to work towards a simpler copyright system by, improving the copyright licensing process and encouraging the development of new business models.
This means:
• UK action to improve access to orphan works, enable extended collective licensing, encourage the development of model contracts and clauses, and tackle P2P file-sharing; and
• A willingness on the Government’s part to consider European action that provides commonsense rules for private, non-commercial use of copyright material that will give consumers much more freedom to do what they want (such as creating mash-ups) and make clear what they cannot do."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
