Reposted with author’s permission from ipbrief.net
A panel at the 5th Global Congress on Intellectual Property discussed the current global efforts surrounding copyright reform. The panel focused on current and future laws relating to copyrighted works in libraries, museums, and archives in several countries.
There are certain areas of law in which a “one-size-fits-all” approach is not enough on its own. Although there are current global copyright laws that have been enacted through treaties and other agreements, there are unique concerns for which a more national approach is warranted. The U.S. has its own ideas about copyright protections, which can be vastly different than those of other countries. Most of the world treaties require ratifying members to have a minimal level of copyright protection in order to enjoy the benefits of the agreement. This allows individual countries flexibility in the finer details to protect their copyrights according to their preferences. As long as the minimal requirements are satisfied, members are within their rights to police copyright on a national level based on their own preferences. However, many developing countries have difficulty reforming copyright laws due to instability and internal conflicts within those countries.
The balance between copyright protections for the creator and the public interest in not stifling creativity is always fluctuating. This has led to the creation of different legal doctrines, such as fair use and fair dealing. Libraries, museums, and archives are among several other institutions that benefit from the creation of these types of doctrines.
American University’s Washington College of Law hosted the 5th Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest. A workshop led by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) entitled “Out of the Stacks: A World Tour of Library, Archive, and Museum Copyright Reform” featured a panel, which discussed current and future copyright reform efforts in several countries. The panel highlighted laws that lack clarity or are inadequate to meet modern needs. Many advocated for efforts to create provisions that are essential to libraries, museums, archives, and other cultural heritage institutions. Without these provisions, many of these institutions are unable to provide access to certain copyrighted works, which the public has come to enjoy.
Jean Dryden, a consultant for the International Council of Archives at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), highlighted several North American reform efforts. In the United States, she mentioned the Music Modernization Act, which would bring pre-1972 sound recordings under federal law. The bill passed the House on Tuesday night and awaits President Trump’s signature. In Canada, where Dryden is based, a reform resulted in an amended 2012 act, which is currently being reviewed. She notes ongoing litigation in Canadian courts regarding fair dealing in education and highlighted several treaties, including NAFTA, in which Canada experienced negotiation difficulties with the United States and Mexico, before eventually settling upon a new agreement.
Teresa Hackett, Program Manager at the Electronic Information for Libraries (EIFL), has analyzed efforts within Africa, Post-Soviet countries, South-East Asia, and other developing countries, many of which are attempting to address gaps or ambiguities in older laws. Several countries ratified the Marrakesh Treaty, in which there is a noticeably quicker reform process compared to countries that have not ratified the Treaty. Hackett points to the fact that reforms occurring in countries with the Marrakesh Treaty as a foundation have a process of two years or more whereas countries not using the Treaty have a process of at least five to ten years.
There is, perhaps, some merit to Hackett’s observation, evidenced by Paul Keller, Chairman of Kennisland, who has observed current reform efforts in the European Union. The EU is not using the Marrakesh Treaty and is currently in a chaotic process, in which several different stakeholders are attempting to lobby lawmakers to include provisions that are favorable to them. There are two different drafts of the law in consideration, each containing different provisions. Keller expressed frustration with the lack of clarity surrounding out-of-commerce works, where a gray zone has developed, leading many institutions to question whether they need a license or whether they qualify for an exception. Neither licenses nor exceptions are used due to this unclarity. Keller worries about the future outlook for EU copyright reform efforts given the upcoming elections. He believes in the next four months, the EU will either have made a decision, or he fears that the elections will halt the process.
Both Evelin Heidel, a member of Creative Commons for Argentina, and Mariana Valenta, Director at InternetLab, discussed reform efforts in Argentina and Brazil respectively. Heidel , highlights the open process by which museums, libraries, and archives are allowed to submit petitions regarding needed changes. Heidel points to government issues that are making it harder to address copyright concerns and the lack of central ministries to help advance reform discussions. Valente shares a similar experience in Brazil, in which she states the copyright reform effort is nonexistent due to instability in the Brazilian government. Valente believes the most important issues in Brazil currently are copies for preservation, to which no current exceptions apply, and to orphan works, to which no real guidelines for institutions exist. The copies for preservation and orphan works affect many works in museums.
The panelists included Jean Dryden (ICA), Teresa Hackett (EIFL), Paul Keller (Kennisland), Evelin Heidel (CC Argentina), and Mariana Valente (InternetLab). For more information, please, click on the provided hyperlinks.
