Manon Ress's blog
Today is day 5 of the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights which for over 2 years has been discussing the first ever treaty that would involved a limitation to copyright, in these case to benefit blind people as well as people with other disabilities. It is day 2 of plenary discussions regarding the treaty for people with disabilities.
Late morning at WIPO SCCR 24 meeting regarding the treaty for people with disabilities.
The US is asking now to go into "informal" discussions.
Today the discussion on the definition of "authorized entity" has started. It is one of the important and technical issues that could make a treaty good or bad, useful or ineffective.
An "authorized entity" or AE is the institution that provides the works in accessible format to the people with visual impairments who are the beneficiaries of the future treaty. Depending on how broad or narrow or inclusive v. restrictive the definition gets to be by the end of the negotiation, access is conditioned.
Some of the questions this morning:
Earlier this month, the European Parliament and the European Commission released a new compromise text on orphan works.
The Compromise Text is available here:
KEI sees the text as a step backwards for access to knowledge. The proposed directive makes far too many compromises, is too limited in terms of the beneficiaries and uses of works, and creates complicated, burdensome and costly procedures and record keeping requirements.
Background on earlier EU consultations
Clearly WIPO could teach a few things to many agencies --other UN bodies but also for example the office of the US Trade Representatives-- regarding transparency and accessibility for all stakeholders.
Register of Copyrights Maria A. Pallante has made public the "priorities and special projects" of the US Copyright Office from October 2011 to October 2013. The ambitious work plan sets 17 priorities in the areas of copyright policy and administrative practices, and 10 special projects "to improve the quality and efficiency of the U.S. Copyright Office’s services."
Here's a quick outline:
|Hillary Clinton and Nicolas Sarkozy, March 14, 2011|
|President Obama and Mark Pekala, June 6, 2009, Paris|
France gets an A+ from the US for its anti consumer intellectual property related policies
KEI comments to UK Consultation on limitations and exceptions for persons with print disabilities under discussion at WIPOSubmitted by Manon Ress on 6. September 2011 - 15:20
The proposal for a WIPO treaty for persons who are blind or have other disabilities moved forward at the last SCCR meeting in June 2011, when a wide collection of high income and Latin American countries endorsed a joint paper that could serve as a basis for a diplomatic conference. The fact that Brazil, the US and the EU were among the countries endorsing the paper was very significant.
As part of the American University hosted Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the public Interest, I participated in a panel on the positive agenda for intellectual property. These are notes from my talk.
Presentation by Manon Anne Ress, Knowledge Ecology International
August 26, 2011, at American University in Washington, DC
The EU position came out in a proposal for a Joint Recommendation with 9 articles in 11 pages. It is hard to believe but it is worst than the US proposal and it is even worst than nothing. It is an outrageous "roll back" recommendation. It does make clear who's the boss in the commission. The publishers apparently. Their proposal is bold. Here's a quick read:
KEI critical of Canada's Bill C-32 provisions on export of accessible works for persons with disabilitiesSubmitted by Manon Ress on 12. June 2010 - 6:19
A new copyright bill in Canada includes extensive provisions about the export of accessible works for persons with a “print disability.” The good news is that they embrace a reasonably good definition of disabilities covered. It goes down hill from there.
The Chapter FIVE (Institutional Arrangements) of ACTA is short. In less than 4 pages (pp 33-36) the negotiators "hereby establish" and "Oversight Steering Committee" (the OSC). Of course all of this chapter can be revisited later (see footnote 73) but let's examine what is proposed now.
Why would blind people get less than the Olympic Committee? Choosing between Convention, Recommendation and DeclarationSubmitted by Manon Ress on 22. March 2010 - 17:24
When I first heard David Mann representing the World Blind Union at the information session of November 2003 SCCR, call for the "creation of international agreements which would allow the unhindered transfer of accessible material created in one country to blind and partially sighted people in another country", I did not know that this issue had been the subject of a WIPO/UNESCO report in 1983, which had then proposed Model Provisions Concer