"IP Management: Copyright in the Digital Age": a webinar

"IP Management: Copyright in the Digital Age" is the title of a forthcoming Oxfirst webinar conducted by Bruce Lehman, taking place on Monday 1 December 2014 at 15:00 GMT​. For many IP folk, Bruce is indelibly associated with registered IP rights since he was Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office for half a decade back in the 1990s, but he has a long and distinguished involvement with copyright: from 1974 to 1983, as Counsel to the Committee on the Judiciary of the U.S. House of Representatives, he was the Committee's principal legal counsel on copyright matters, in which capacity, he advised it during the process of consideration and final passage of the 1976 Copyright Act. According to Oxfirst:

This talk examines modern copyright in the context of historical practice, with a particular focus on the EU and the WIPO copyright treaties, as well as on the global implications for current digital and multi-national copyright issues. Mobile technologies, social media, on-demand services, internet streaming, and user-created content have become the norm across the internet and all over the world. The global nature of these industries and technologies has brought new opportunities and challenges that transcend traditional borders and cultural barriers. At the same time, there is an asymmetry between countries with robust cultural and innovation economies and countries with emerging economies. The former boast strong copyright enforcement and economic incentives [this is true, but they also boast better techniques for infringing or circumventing copyright and the technical means of protecting it], while the latter lack a well-developed system or even a market from which copyright-related stakeholders can benefit. This dichotomy signals an urgent need to reexamine our national and international copyright principles, laws, and treaties. We must help and incentivize creators to protect and promote their work, domestically and abroad [this blogger appreciates this sentiment, but wonders what evidence exists as to whether the present uncertainty and free-for-all has failed to incentivise creators, particular now that we are so accustomed to the phenomenon of user-generated content. Worth discussion?].

The webinar is free, but space is limited. Click here to register.

Article links for a digital day

In the wake of the cyber attack on ACS:Law and the leaking of personal details of thousands of suspected illegal downloaders and file shares, an update on the Ministry of Sounds’ actions against individual actions in the UK here http://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-lawyers-face-ddos-before-pivotal-court-decision-101002/ and actions by filmmakers in the USA here http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20018358-261.html

And a useful review of the recent Digital Music Summit at Belmont University titled “Music industry fights clashing digital battles” with comments from record label associations the IFPI and the RIAA and some different views from consumer champions EFF, amongst others:
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20101003/BUSINESS01/10030328/Music-industry-fights-clashing-digital-battles

Copyright, Friend and Foe when Accessing Knowledge

Access to Knowledge, it’s one issue where you will generally find copyright law lounging smack dab in the middle.  Sometimes copyright is friendly to the surrounding circle, like old Uncle Bob at the campfire, delighting the audience with wonderful tales of giving people access to works through fancy tricks like fair dealing.  Other times, copyright is more like a lion surrounded by warriors, roaring, teeth bared, snarling at anyone trying to gain access to its domain.

One might think that being able to tell Uncle Bob from an attacking lion would be easy, but not necessarily.  And likewise with, it is not always easy to tell when copyright is helping people get access to knowledge, and when it’s impeding that access.  Enter Consumers International and the 2nd Edition of Access to Knowledge, a Guide for Everyone (144pg pdf).

This internationally compiled book explains how copyright law and other areas such as net neutrality, border enforcement and patent law affect people’s access to resources around the world.  The book also discusses ideas for changes to intellectual property law that could help improve access to knowledge and current in-place systems that grant access, such as the public domain.

There’s a neat section in chapter one (p. 21) that explains how the different players, governments, inter-governmental organizations, consumer groups, etc., interact to create the landscape of accessible knowledge.  And in chapter 2, Brazil receives a bit of attention for the country’s forward-thinking laws prohibiting the destruction of fair use via technical protection methods. 

Readers following the ACTA debates may be interested in pages 57-59.  Those unfamiliar with Access to Knowledge can check out the FAQ section and glossary in the appendix.

Access to Knowledge A Guide for Everyone is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, which means you can print out fancy copies you want, give them away, even sell them, without a problem; Uncle Bob won’t bite.

Photo by author: Masai Lion Hunt exhibit at the Milwaukee Public Museum with author’s friends and family reenacting the exhibit.  More exhibit reenactions here.

Copyright - the UK IPO's way ahead

Yesterday, the UK IPO and BIS announced their strategy for
Copyright in the digital age. The full paper is here - it explains that it draws on previous work [to which some might add that the IPO is retreading the same ground again]. Anyway, the key findings (as annotated by the author) are as follows:

"The 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. [and that means that we, the Government, don't have to carry the can for it] 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 [and that means we can kick this one into the long grass too].

• 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 [and that will be down to rights owners not government, either - do I detect a theme developing here?]

• 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. [this one wins the "no sh*t Sherlock award for stating the obvious] 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; [is this a commitment to do anything about education or enforcement, or just a statement of good intentions?]

• 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; [ditto]

• 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 fi le-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.

There are a total of 51 pages of this paper, but a cynic might conclude that it contains nothing new.