[By popular demand, we have created a French version of the Fair Use/Fair Dealing Handbook] Plus de 40 pays, qui comptent plus du tiers de la population mondiale, ont inscrit des dispositions d’usage loyal ou d’utilisation équitable dans leur législation sur le droit d’auteur. Ils sont dans toutes les régions du monde et à tous les niveaux de développement. La vaste diffusion de l’usage loyal et de l’utilisation équitable fait qu’il n’existe pas de fondement pour bloquer l’adoption encore plus généralisée de ces doctrines, avec les avantages que leur flexibilité représente pour les auteurs, les éditeurs, les consommateurs, les sociétés de technologie, les bibliothèques, les musées, les établissements d’enseignement et les gouvernements.
[Updated on April 3, 2013, to include Liberia.] More than 40 countries with over one-third of the world’s population have fair use or fair dealing provisions in their copyright laws. These countries are in all regions of the world and at all levels of development. The broad diffusion of fair use and fair dealing indicates that there is no basis for preventing the more widespread adoption of these doctrines, with the benefits their flexibility brings to authors, publishers, consumers, technology companies, libraries, museums, educational institutions, and governments.
Today I’m releasing a paper on foreign ownership of firms in IP intensive industries. Here is a summary of the paper:
For decades, U.S. domestic and foreign IP policy has been predicated on the assumption that U.S. firms dominated both domestic and foreign markets for IP products. In an effort to evaluate the standing of U.S. firms in IP intensive industries, this paper identifies the “nationality” of the leading firms in several important IP industries. The paper finds that for many industries, this assumption of U.S. dominance is no longer correct. This suggests that at times, IP policies adopted by Congress and the Executive Branch may benefit foreign corporations at the expense of U.S. consumers.
The controversy in the United States over the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) has profound implications for the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement. The SOPA debate underscores the importance of striking the proper balance in intellectual property laws to promote creativity and innovation. It demonstrates that over-protection can stifle free expression and the effective operation of the Internet as a medium of communication and commerce not only within a jurisdiction, but also extraterritorially. Additionally, the debate reveals the ability of the Internet community to mobilize quickly to defeat policies that it believes threaten its existence. TPP negotiators should understand the SOPA experience to avoid repeating its mistakes.