In the latest report from the South Africa copyright amendment bill process (see below), the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee suggested that it may be taking its fair use proposal off the table.
In the past three versions of the bill, it has contained a proposal to adopt a hybrid open general exception for either “fair use” or “fair dealing.” That proposal was supported by many academic and civil society organizations, and by an expert submission of the Global Expert Network on Copyright User Rights. http://infojustice.org/b13-comments But notes from the most recent committee meeting conclude that the copyright exception provisions in the bill might be limited to “address the issues of hearing-impaired people, librarians and museum staff, and the Department of Trade and Industry would select a third issue, but one that was not contentious so that the legislation could be fast-tracked.” (see below).
An event has been organized by Denise Nicholson at University of Witwatersrand to discuss the current state of the bill. Click here to R.S.V.P. or review the agenda. At the event, Professor Sean Flynn will release the latest PIJIP report – The User Rights Database: Measuring the Impact of Copyright Balance – which finds that 1) more open user rights environments are associated with higher firm revenues in information industries, including software, and computer systems design, and 2) more open user rights environments are not associated with harm to industries known to rely upon copyright protection, such as publishing and entertainment.
Copyright Amendment Bill: Subcommittee Deliberations
18 April 2018
Chairperson: Ms C Theko (ANC)
Meeting Summary
Documents handed out: Key issues raised by stakeholders per policy area on the Copyright Amendment Bill 2017 – Department of Trade and Industry[awaited];
DTI – Key Policy proposals
DTI – Copyright Review Commission Report presentation
Copyright Review Commission Report 2011
Draft terms of reference of the Subcommittee
Regulation of Collecting Societies
The subcommittee met to address some of the outstanding issues to be included in the Copyright Bill. The pace of the draft legislation had been extremely slow, especially considering the fact that the legislation was seeking to address recommendations made by the Farlam Copyright Review Commission presented in 2012.
The Content Advisor summarised progress made in the three previous meetings of the subcommittee.
Members agreed that the pace was too slow.
The Department of Trade and Industry made a presentation on the background to the Copyright Bill but was interrupted by the Chairperson who asked the Department to move forward and not to repeat presentations made previously. A discussion followed, led by a new Member of the subcommittee, in which it was suggested that DTI was going into too much detail. The time for in-depth detailed consideration of issues was over. The legislative process was too slow and far too detailed while older artists were dying as paupers. The Department should address all the issues by creating a problem statement for each issue and then providing a solution to the problem, having consulted with the legal advisors. Finally, the Department of Trade and Industry should present the proposed wording for that specific clause in the Bill. The Department was providing excellent explanations and detail, but it was time to cut to the chase and complete the work at hand. The subcommittee should address the problem statement and then address issues of implementation.
Based on the recommendations of CRC, the country needed to have an effective model for collecting royalties as there were gaps in the implementation of royalty collections and artists were suffering. Comment from the public was that freedom of association had to be guaranteed, which would not be the case if individuals had to become a member of a particular collection society as envisaged in the Bill. Each collecting society was to perform a function in a specific area. The Department of Trade and Industry proposed to resolve the legitimate concerns about restricting freedom of association by allowing individuals to opt for signing a contract with someone who would take care of their royalties and other interests. Fees to be charged by societies and for the signing of contracts were to be similar to avoid discrimination against those who chose not to join a society. The timing was not appropriate to impose a restriction on the functions of each collecting society or the principle of ‘one industry, one union’. However, all societies would have to register with the Companies and Intellectual Properties Commission that would then take on the function of monitoring those societies. The current tribunal was to be revised as that was quicker than establishing a new tribunal and it would attend specifically to copyright issues. The Farlam Commission proposal of a 50/50 division of royalties between artists and recording companies would be included in the legislation in order to break the deadlock that had resulted in court battles and the withholding of artists’ royalties.
Three issues were to be added to the recommendations of the Farlam Commission. The current legislation would, therefore, also address the issues of hearing-impaired people, librarians and museum staff, and the Department of Trade and Industry would select a third issue, but one that was not contentious so that the legislation could be fast-tracked.
The Chairperson instructed the Department of Trade and Industry to submit a document addressing each item from the Farlam Commission, as well as the additions, in the manner discussed in the subcommittee meeting by the following day. The Department of Arts and Culture was to be invited to future meetings to ensure that the Department was onboard with the proposed legislative changes.
