SCCR 47: Statement by Knowledge Ecology International on copyright limitations and exceptions

On Tuesday afternoon, 2 December 2025, Knowledge Ecology International made the following statement on copyright limitations and exceptions at the 47th session of the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights.


I wanted to comment first on the African Group proposal; we thought it was measured and practical.

The Berne Convention has an Appendix which was negotiated on exceptions relating to use by developing countries and there’s never been a presentation that I’m aware of at the SCCR, to review what’s in the Appendix and whether it worked or didn’t work and if it didn’t work why it didn’t work. It would be important for the Committee to examine the history of the negotiations and the impact on the Appendix.

I also want to draw attention to Article 3 of the Appendix to the Berne Convention where a distinction is made between works of fiction, poetry, drama and music, and for art books, on the one hand and on the other hand works for the natural and physical sciences including mathematics and of technology.

The special treatment for cultural works is important. Today, some of the groups that have spoken against the limitations and exceptions are from the film industry or music industry, and aside from the fact that they all benefit quite a bit from limitation exceptions like, for example, authors benefiting from the mandatory quotation exception in the Berne or some of the other mandatory exceptions in the Berne, they do have compelling stories about the need to ensure that they’re protected, their livelihoods are protected. A distinction between cultural works and other works protected by copyright should be seen as important going forward the AI battles over copyright.

AI services being developed now include agents that are use for a variety of purposes, including in the medical treatment of patients, and they will be instrumental in every aspect of the economy, building and making things work. It’s always been our position that governments should be open to the idea works of science, law or technology be treated differently than works from the creative and cultural industries.