Manon Ress's blog

WIPO SCCR24: TPMs, Contracts, new articles

ARTICLE F1 OBLIGATIONS CONCERNING TECHNOLOGICAL MEASURES

Member States shall ensure that beneficiaries of the exception provided by Article C have the means to enjoy the exception where technological protection measures have been applied to a work.

SCCR 24: Focus is on "primary mission" of authorized entities

During the three hours of informal negotiations, I am told the discussions focused on among the definition, the first paragraph regarding "authorized entity"

[in SCCR23/7 Auhtorized entities]

means a governmental agency, a non-profit entity or non-profit organization that has as one of its activities to assist persons with print disabilities by providing them with services relating to education, training, adaptive reading, or information access needs, in accordance with national law.

WIPO SCCR24: still on "definitions" behind closed doors

The WIPO SCCR 24 delegates are still meeting behind closed doors (no NGOS and no streaming nor recording). I heard they are still talking about the definitions (see below) and that the 5pm plenary is delayed. Yesterday and this morning we heard quite a bit about "works" and "authorized entity". If they agreed on these maybe they are now arguing over the meaning of "reasonable price for developed countries" and "reasonable price for developing countries"

SCCR/23/7 ORIGINAL: English DATE: December 16, 2011

ARTICLE A DEFINITIONS

For the purposes of these provisions

Quick Update on WIPO SCCR 24 Meeting on The treaty for People with Disabilities

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.

Zimbabwe: Mr. Chair transparency is key to everything

Late morning at WIPO SCCR 24 meeting regarding the treaty for people with disabilities.
The US is asking now to go into "informal" discussions.

WIPO SCCR24 What is an "authorized entity" and what is the fight about?

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:

The European Orphan Works Directive: a missed opportunity?

Earlier this month, the European Parliament and the European Commission released a new compromise text on orphan works.

The Compromise Text is available here:
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/12/st10/st10953.en12.pdf

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

Applauding WIPO Webcast and Video-on-Demand

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.

US Copyright Office 17 priorities

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."

The 16 page document is available here
Comments should be sent to registerofcopyrights@copyright.gov

Here's a quick outline:

3 Studies

France gets an A+ from the US for its anti-consumer intellectual property related policies

hillary_sarkozy_250x250.jpg
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 WIPO

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.

Positive agenda on copyright, at the WIPO SCCR

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

KEI statement in opposition to the OECD draft text on the Principles of Internet Policy Making

On June 29, while the OECD civil society group CSISAC (80+ NGOs) debated the text of a high level statement on the Principles of Internet Policy Making, I sent this missive to the group discussing the text, expressing KEI's opposition to the draft statement.

KEI comments on USTR 2011 Special 301 Review

KEI's comments on the USTR 2011 Special 301 Review are available here.

For further background on the 301 process, see: http://keionline.org/ustr/special301

The EU proposal for increasing access?

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:

Syndicate content