[Electronic Information for Libraries, Link (CC-BY)] In 2016, libraries globally were set to spend 30 billion USD on books, journals, databases and other information resources, mostly paid from public funds. So when it comes to using the resources, libraries want fair access for their users, reasonable ability to reuse the material and value for taxpayer money. That’s why EIFL has joined a call by 34 organizations representing education, libraries and an open internet for a better copyright reform for education in Europe. On 7 February 2017, COMMUNIA, a European network that advocates for policies that expand the digital public domain, sent a joint letter to Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) who are currently scrutinizing copyright reform proposals issued by the European Commision in September 2016.
The Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property, the Australian Digital Alliance and Internet NZ are hosting a series of meetings and workshops on user rights in copyright reform in Australia and New Zealand February 13-24. Participants in the events include Michael Geist, Bill Patry, Sang Jo Jong, Kimberlee Weatherall, Rebecca Giblin, Suzy Frankel, Jessica Coates, Heesob Nam, Peter Jaszi, Patricia Aufderheide, Sean Flynn and Meredith Jacob.
Public events on the tour include:
[Communia-Association, Link (CC-0)] As the copyright reform process continues in Europe, it is worth noting the result of an Indian case concerning photocopying and the extent of the educational exception. In 2012, Delhi University and a small photocopy shop named Rameshwari Photocopy Service were sued by Oxford and Cambridge University Presses together with the Taylor & Francis Group. The publishers alleged that the photocopying of substantial excerpts from their publications and issuing or selling them in course packs infringed their copyrights. They also argued that Delhi University should obtain a license from the Indian Reprographic Rights Organization in order to make the copies.
Abstract: Following the publication of the Digital Single Market agenda, it became clear that establishing the place of online intermediaries in the regulatory framework for combating illicit content on the Internet remains one of the key challenges for European regulators. This article looks at the landscape of corresponding enforcement strategies within the European Union and unravels two competing conceptual approaches in relation to the role of online intermediaries.
This sign-on letter is being circulated by the Communia Association. Click here to sign by February 6.
Quality and inclusive education is the cornerstone of securing Europe’s future. We, advocates of quality education in Europe, are contacting you because we are concerned thatthe language of the new education exception proposed in the directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market will alienate institutions, organisations and individuals that provide non-formal or formal education across Europe.
[Joint Statement] On Monday 16th and Tuesday 17th January, representatives of European governments will discuss draft legislation to implement the Marrakesh Treaty in the European Union (EU).
As IFLA and partner organisations have underlined, this is an opportunity to make a real difference to the lives of people with print disabilities – who cannot pick up and read a book in the same way as everyone else – both in Europe and beyond.
We are, however, aware of efforts to undermine the impact of Marrakesh. This will happen if national governments can oblige libraries and others to pay fees to publishers for making use of their Marrakesh rights, or if they are subject to additional, unnecessary, registration or record-keeping requirements. Both IFLA and EIFL have highlighted the risks of such moves.
Paul Keller, Communia Association, Link (CC-0)
December 21, 2016
Last week a number of Europeana organisations representing libraries and other cultural heritage organizations released a joint response to the Commission’s copyright proposals. The paper, issued by LIBER, EBLIDA, IFLA, Public Libraries 2020 and Europeana, deals with those elements of the EU copyright framework that are directly relevant to cultural heritage institutions.
This includes four issues addressed in the Commission’s Proposal for a Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (the exceptions for Text and Data Mining, Education, and Preservation copies, and the measures aimed at improving access to out-of-commerce works), and a number of issues that the Commission’s proposal fails to address, such as on-site access to collections and online document supply.
[Prashant Reddy for IPKat, Link (CC-BY)] Academic publishing houses, OUP and CUP have suffered yet another defeat in their litigation against Delhi University and a photocopy shop when a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court ruled against them in an appeal on December 9, 2016. The crux of the lawsuit was whether the practice of photocopying copyrighted material and compiling them in course-packs was copyright infringement under Indian law. Given that universities and students have been photocopying copyrighted material for several years without any restrictions, the lawsuit had provoked an angry backlash from students and academics – both of whom then organised themselves into an association and intervened in the case.
[Timothy Vollmer, Communia, Link (CC-0)] Today we are publishing the second in a series of position papers dealing with the various parts of the European Commission’s proposal for a Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (see our first paper on the education exception here). Today’s paper deals with the Commission’s proposal to introduce a mandatory exception that would allow research organisations to conduct Text and Data mining for scientific research purposes (you can download a pdf version of the paper here). From our perspective this exception is much too narrowly defined and has the potential to stifle the potential of Text and Data mining as a key enabler of social and scientific progress in Europe. For this reason our paper argues for expanding the proposed exception to allow Text and Data Mining by anyone for any purpose.
[Electronic information for Libraries, Link (CC-BY)] EIFL has compiled a booklet of statements made by librarians and archivists representing thousands of institutions at sessions of WIPO’s Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR).
Titled ‘The internet is global – but copyright exceptions stop at the border. Why we need an international treaty for cross-border access to knowledge’, the booklet includes statements by library and archive organizations made at WIPO SCCR sessions in April 2014, June 2014 and May 2016. WIPO is the main body that sets international copyright law.
Catherine Saez for IP Watch, Link (CC-BY-NC-SA)
The age of digitisation has opened new doors to distribution of information including for libraries and archives. However, librarians and archivists are often confronted with risk of liability for copyright infringement, nationally and in cross-border activities. This week, they asked the World Intellectual Property Organization copyright committee to provide them not only with some exceptions to copyright, but with protection against liability.
The WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) is taking place from 14-18 November. On the SCCR agenda is copyright exceptions and limitations for libraries and archives. On 17 November, librarians and archivists took the floor to explain why an international standard protecting them against liability is indispensable.
[Jorge Gemetto, Creative Commons Uruguay, Link (CC-BY)] Last week, 14 people were convicted by an Uruguayan judge for the crime of making copies of educational resources. The defendants, owners of copy shops located near the University of the Republic (Universidad de la República) in Montevideo, have been sentenced to seven months in prison, although the judge has conditionally suspended the imprisonment. The case began in 2013, when a major police operation shuttered copy shops in the area surrounding the University, confiscated photocopy machines, and detained 32 people.