[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [Ecommerce] CPTech views on proposed WIPO broadcast/cablecast/webcast treaty
JeffH., and all fellow members or other interested parties,
WIPO has been trying and with some success, flexing
it's muscles in directions that are not in the interest
of those it purports to serve. They have been a matter of
some interest to a few members here on various other
forums or fora. Mostly however as you rightly point
out WIPO is a servant of big business interests.
Jeff Holt wrote:
> At-large,
>
> This is a definite topic on which I would agree with this Civil Society
> Coalition and the CPTech are quite right... The WIPO needs to be put on
> a short leash.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Jeff Holt
> Jefftttt@txucom.net
> www.tejas-info-services.com
>
>
> > Statement of Manon A. Ress to the WIPO Standing Committee on
> Copyright,
> > regarding the proposed Broadcast/Cablecast/Webcast Treaty
> >
> > Geneva
> > June 23, 2003
> >
> > My name is Dr. Manon A. Ress, and I am here on behalf of the Civil
> > Society Coalition. I would like to thank the Standing Committee for
> > accepting the CSC as an observer. The CSC is a coalition of a number
> of
> > different NGOs that are interested in intellectual property policy.
> Our
> > mission is to enhance the transparency of policy making on IP issues,
> > and to represent the views of consumers in particular and more
> generally
> > the public. Today I provide the views of the Consumer Project on
> > Technology, which is one of the members of the CSC. CPTech will
> address
> > the proposed Broadcast Treaty.
> >
> > 1. CPTech's first concern is that the proposed treaty would extend
> > broadcast rights from the 20 years in the TRIPS and the Rome
> Convention
> > to 50 years. We oppose this extension of the term. We note that the
> > broadcaster right is an additional layer over that enjoyed by
> creators,
> > and we see no public interest that would be advanced by extending this
> > layer of protection for an addition 30 years. Indeed, this will shrink
> > the public domain, and harm the public.
> >
> > 2. CPTech is also concerned that the proposals to extend
> > broadcasters rights to "webcasters" has the potential to vastly expand
> > the ability of persons to assert rights over material that should be
> in
> > the public domain. One key issue concerns the definition of
> webcasting.
> > We note that the definition is different in important respects from
> the
> > definition for cable or broadcasting. The technology of the Internet
> is
> > complex, and we are concerned that this new instrument would be used
> to
> > exercise rights in areas that currently not considered protectable.
> >
> > We would like to know if such Internet activities such as
> > * the operation of listserves,
> > * peer to peer networks,
> > * the distribution of text documents, or more generally
> > * posting materials that are available for download and
> then
> > archived
> >
> > would be covered by the treaty, for example. We recognize that
> > proponents of the treaty have tried to present the webcasting
> extention
> > as a type of parity. However, it may be quite difficult to justify
> > different levels of protection for the same types of materials
> > distributed over the Internet, and the last thing we want is to see
> this
> > new layer of protection extended into areas where there is (a) no
> need,
> > and (b) a potential to harm the public and the shrink the availability
> > of public domain materials on the Internet. .
> >
> > 3. We are also concerned about the proliferation of new digital
> > rights management obligations, and believe that before WIPO creates
> yet
> > another treaty obligation in this areas, it would be appropriate to
> > evaluate the impact of the existing obligations, and to take an
> > inventory of issues that concern the public. In particular, we are
> > concerned about the impact of such measures on:
> > 1. privacy
> > 2. innovation,
> > 3. consumer convenience and perceived value,
> > 4. the ability to archive materials,
> > 5. the public rights under the various exceptions to rights
> > such as the rights of the blind or both non- commercial and commercial
> > fair use rights, and
> > 6. the relationship between new digital rights management
> > systems and the framework for recognizing and enforcing non-negotiated
> > mass market contracts that are embeded in documents or web page
> servers.
> >
> > To this end, we propose that WIPO Schedule a meeting in 2004 to
> > discuss consumer and other public perspectives on digital rights
> > management schemes. Also, there should be an effort to examine the
> > thorny but very important problem of exports when rights are exercised
> > under varioius copyright or DRM exceptions provisions, a problem
> already
> > indentified by the blind, and which is a major issue accross the
> > Internet. Finally, there should be more attention to the issue of the
> > aggressive use of mass market non-negotiated licenses to curtail
> public
> > rights beyond that which is provided for by copyright laws.
> >
> > Thank You.
> >
> > Manon A. Ress
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 131k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
Pierre Abelard
===============================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de