DAY 1 (12/7/15) SCCR 31 Re Definitions
This is the text the member states are dicussing this afternoon:
For the purposes of this Treaty:(a) “signal” means an electronically generated carrier capable of transmitting a broadcast or
cablecast encrypted or not which carries the programmed output of a broadcasting organization.ALTERNATIVE A
(b) (1) “broadcasting” means the transmission by wireless means for reception by the
public of sounds or of images or of images and sounds or of the representations thereof, such
transmission by satellite is also “broadcasting”; transmission of encrypted signals is
“broadcasting” where the means for decrypting are provided to the public by the broadcasting
organization or with its consent.(2) ”cablecasting” means the transmission by wire for reception by the public of sounds
or of images or of images and sounds or of the representation thereof. Transmission by wire of
encrypted signals is “cablecasting” where the means for decrypting are provided to the public by
the cablecasting organization or with its consent.ALTERNATIVE B
(b) “broadcasting” means the transmission either by wireless means or any other means for
reception by the public of sounds or of images or of images and sounds or of the representation
thereof; such transmission by satellite is also “broadcasting”; transmission of encrypted signals
is “broadcasting” where the means for decrypting are provided to the public by the broadcasting
organization or with its consent.(c) “broadcasting organization” [and “cablecasting organization”] means the legal entity that
takes the initiative for packaging, assembling and scheduling and has the legal and editorial
responsibility for the transmission, irrespective of the technology used, to the public of its
broadcast [or cablecast]. It is understood that for the purpose of this Treaty, entities which
deliver their program output exclusively by means of a computer network do not fall under the
definition of a “broadcasting organization”.(d) (1) “retransmission” means the transmission by any means of a broadcast [/cablecast] by
any other entity than the original broadcasting [/cablecasting] organization, whether
simultaneous or delayed.(2) “near simultaneous retransmission” means a transmission that is delayed only to the
extent necessary to accommodate time differences or to facilitate the technical transmission of
the broadcast [/cablecast].
[(e) “pre-broadcast” means a transmission prior to broadcast [/cablecast] that a broadcasting
[/cablecasting] organization intends to include in its programme schedule and which is not
intended for direct reception by the public.]
Here are the interventions by the EU, Performers and KEI:
>> EU: Thank you. Just one comment, we apologize for taking the floor again on the same issue, but it is also important to remember, we of course may have a definition of signal if this will be useful for the text. But even if we don’t have this definition, it does not mean that our protection that we are working on here is not based on signal, because in the definitions of broadcasting and cablecasting, we are always referring to a transmission.
So in our view, this also indicates that we are talking about signal. We are talking about protection that is given to a transmission. Just to put this on the table as well because we wouldn’t like to have this discussion, but if we don’t have a definition of a signal, when we don’t have a signal-based treaty, which is, which would not be true.
As far as we said before we are very open to discussion on what, first of all, we need a definition of signal, and if such definition is indeed needed, we would be very much for authenticity either using the terms in other documents like in Brussels convention, or just talk here about carrier that is capable of transmitting broadcast or cablecast, and not enter into other terms. Thank you
>> CHAIR: Thank you very much for that explanation. We have reached a point where several comments have been made regarding the need to first further consider, if we really need here a definition of signal. I just recall that it was here to invite you for this what has happened, a discussion on it, and the understanding of the signal-based approach.
But a conclusion could be to eliminate the definition if it does not help, considering that we have another set of definitions that might be enough for the text treaty language.
And then, if we think that it is needed, as I said, we have the options to go back to the Brussels definition, that has been said, or to take a more simple definition that was contained in document 27/2/Rev, which refers to the signal, either one or the other one that is contained in this document, and some question regarding which stream carries the output of the broadcasting organization which seems to not to add value, but cause confusion that of course there is now a increasing view that should be removed or the definition to make it simple.
So I have collected all of these views and in this sense, and just regarding this point of definition of signal, I will hear AFM.
>> AFM: On behalf of musician performers throughout North America, I wanted to speak in support of the option proffered by the United States, which includes the addition of a definition of the term, program, and the modification of the term, signal.
We believe that this proposal was worthy of very earnest consideration by the Member States, and we hope that such an exploration will occur this week. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
>> CHAIR: Thank you very much for your comment. KEI is requesting the floor. You have it.
>> KEI: Thank you very much. I wanted to say that we were happy to hear the United States proposals on the text, in particular the idea that the definition, they have definition of program and that it’s narrowed to say that it’s authorized for transmission by the rightholder. I think that is helpful.
There is an issue we have with that, and that is that in some cases people release information under creative comments licenses which does authorize the right holder in that case to transmit it. But it’s, the terms under which the creative comments license may be, may be designed to promote very broad access. So we have to think about that definition.But generally speaking, I think that is very helpful to have that in there. Then the United States […] also proposed the definition of signal be narrowed, and you mentioned for reception for the public. But I believe that the actual proposal by the United States was for the direct reception by the public.
I think that is an important idea to keep in there. In some cases it’s hard for us to evaluate some of the definitions because as United States said in its opening statement, there are a lot of other issues which were not presented. We presented sort of some, but for example, in looking at the rights and some of the definitions, we are left kind of wondering, South Africa mentioned that they wanted the, earlier, they wanted to include the signal and the content that is sort of embedded in the signal in some way. So all these issues about the term or is it perpetual, does it disappear at a certain point, those are a bit of mysteries to us but of huge consequence to the people that might be affected by the.
So I wanted to mention that we are fairly confused about the mechanics of this on some of those issues. But I did want to say that we thought that the proposal by the United States to narrow it to, for the direct reception by the public in terms of the definition of the signal was helpful.
We also agree with the U.S. proposal to have something in there along the lines of, that is authorized for transmission by the rightholder which also to some extent may go to the issue of some public domain material, although even there, we are still confused. Thank you.
[…] Chair: Well, you see this is a tool that has been useful in order to clarify, one, the need of the definition of signal, secondly, the chance to refer to Brussels’ definition of signal adding a definition of program which relates to some sort of authorization, as to rights activity undertaken by the broadcasters, and then the chance to have a very short and simple definition of signal as it has been stated in the previous documents that are shown on the screen, or taking the Chair’s text definition with the modifications that have been suggested to make it more simple, and if necessary, adding — removing the extreme that we said which carries the program output of the broadcasting organization, and thinking if we would add to such definition the extreme for direct reception by the public.
So this is a set of issues that we are undertaking now. I think that they deserve analysis and comments. I invite you to do so during the coffee break that is waiting for you outside, and we will use this ten minutes in order to come back, and probably go to the following definition which is broadcasting and cablecasting.>> CHAIR: Thank you to my friends from KEI, and I think that hopefully, we will try to solve that confusion by the further comments of Member States.