The User Rights track of the Fourth Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest, to take place in Delhi, India, December 15-17, 2016, seeks research contributions. The User Rights track will focus on how law and policy can play a key role in breaking down barriers to full participation in the digital economy through expansions of user rights — the rights of users to access, use and transform digital content to further social, economic, cultural and political purposes. User rights can be found in diverse fields of law, including in human rights (e.g. the right to freedom of expression and opinion, the right to participate in cultural heritage, the right to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress, the right to privacy, the right to health), in limitations and exceptions and enforcement policies in intellectual property laws, in net neutrality and other communication industry regulation, in consumer and competition protection, in privacy rights — including those related to the capturing of user data, in contracts and terms of service, and through other laws that protect the rights of users of the digital economy and the content shared through it.
The Association of Research Libraries has a new issue brief on fair use in text and data mining. The brief describes the role and usefulness of text and data mining, a short background on fair use, and analysis of fair use, including eight cases that support the use of fair use in text and data mining.
This brief is available here.
[Cross posted from brandonbutler.info] Yesterday an exciting new (free!) book was published to provide expert advice on a wide range of issues relevant to anyone who cares about (and especially those who care for) sound recordings. The ARSC Guide to Audio Preservation was made under the auspices of the Association for Recorded Sound Collections and the Council on Library and Information Resources with funding from the Library of Congress. I have two contributions about the legal dimensions of this important work.
[Cross posted from brandonbutler.info, Link, (CC-BY)] Wednesday was day two of the Washington, D.C. portion of the triennial rule making to determine whether breaking digital locks that block copying from DVDs, Blu-ray, and other digital media should be allowed in a series of defined cases. There was also a series of hearings in Los Angeles, CA, last week to address some of the proposals with mostly West Coast-based proponents and opponents. There were some intriguing rays of hope in Wednesday’s hearing in DC.
The Senate and House Reports on the Trade Promotion Authority bills working through Congress include important, albeit limited, steps toward endorsing balanced intellectual property norms in trade policy.
The Senate report, released today, states:
[Reposted from Communia, Link] We are publishing today our position paper on copyright reform in Europe (PDF), as a statement in the ongoing debate that focuses on the reform of the Information Society Directive.
In preparation for my role in warming up for Noam Chomsky on WORTFM Madison Wisconsin today, I put together this FAQ on the TPP ISDS leak and intellectual property policy concerns. As with all our posts, this is a CC-By product — please feel free to use or adapt for other purposes with attribution.
What is the core concern with ISDS?
[U.S. Copyright Office press release, Link] Register of Copyrights Maria A. Pallante today announced the launch of the U.S. Copyright Office’s Fair Use Index, which is designed to provide the public with searchable summaries of major fair use decisions. The Index was undertaken in support of the 2013 Joint Strategic Plan on Intellectual Property Enforcement prepared by the U.S. Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator within the Executive Office of the President.
This presentation is in the IP room. But my message is for the IP team to be talking to the ISDS folks next door. The reason is that there is an increasingly urgent need revise the EU and US ISDS templates to protect IP policy decisions from the ISDS chapters of trade agreements. Both the US and EU have been tinkering with their models of late. But both revised models fail to ensure a key domestic sovereignty protection that has been the core of international IP law for 130 years – the exclusive use of state-to-state dispute resolution for enforcement of international IP commitments.
I released a statement earlier today opining that the today’s leak of the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) chapter proposed for the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement (available at https://wikileaks.org/tpp-investment/WikiLeaks-TPP-Investment-Chapter.pdf) would give new rights to private companies to challenge limitations and exceptions to copyrights, patents, and other intellectual property rights in unaccountable international arbitration forums. This note gives further background and analysis supporting that statement.
Briefing Paper by the Science Europe Working Group on Research Data
Editor: Christoph Bruch. (Link) (CC-BY)
The steadily-growing amount of digitally-available research data and publications enables researchers to search and analyse these sources with the help of special software. The application of such text and data (content) mining techniques (TDM) is not limited to research. In fact, most users of the internet use them on a daily basis via companies offering search engine services. The use of TDM techniques beyond those employed by search engines is already of great importance in some research fields (for example bio-genetics, linguistics) and interest in these technologies is growing rapidly.
Last week I expressed my shock in seeing that the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement proposes to expand (or at least clarify) the ability of corporations to challenge intellectual property limitations and exceptions in so called investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) tribunals. One source of that surprise came from my recollection of repeated meetings with USTR negotiators who assured me and others that ISDS forums were not intended to provide a means to challenge intellectual property limitations and exceptions.