The Gowers Review is available here.
I haven't gone through it yet - but these recommendations seem interesting...
Flexibility
Recommendation 8: Introduce a limited private copying exception by 2008 for format shifting for works published after the date that the law comes into effect. There should be no accompanying levies for consumers.
Recommendation 9: Allow private copying for research to cover all forms of content. This relates to the copying, not the distribution, of media.
Recommendation 10a: Amend s.42 of the CDPA by 2008 to permit libraries to copy the master copy of all classes of work in permanent collection for archival purposes and to allow further copies to be made from the archived copy to mitigate against subsequent wear and tear.
Recommendation 10b: Enable libraries to format shift archival copies by 2008 to ensure records do not become obsolete.
Recommendation 11: Propose that Directive 2001/29/EC be amended to allow for an exception for creative, transformative or derivative works, within the parameters of the Berne Three Step Test.
Recommendation 12: Create an exception to copyright for the purpose of caricature, parody or pastiche by 2008.
Recommendation 13: Propose a provision for orphan works to the European Commission, amending Directive 2001/29/EC.
Recommendation 14a: The Patent Office should issue clear guidance on the parameters of a ‘reasonable
Recommendation 14b: The Patent Office should establish a voluntary register of copyright; either on its own, or through partnerships with database holders, by 2008.
Recommendation
15: Make it easier for users to file notice of complaints procedures relating to Digital Rights Management tools by providing an accessible web interface on the Patent Office website by 2008.
Recommendation 16: DTI should investigate the possibility of providing consumer guidance on DRM systems through a labelling convention without imposing unnecessary regulatory burdens.
Recommendation 17: Maintain policy of not extending patent rights beyond their present limits within the areas of software, business methods and genes.
search’ for orphan works, in consultation with rights holders, collecting societies, rights owners and archives, when an orphan works exception comes into being.
One thing caught my eye straight off. The limited private copying exception - despite the lack of an immediate levy requirement - is not as generous or simple as it seems, since it is only prospective. See Section 4.72. The theory seems to be that rights owners will factor the economic value of private copying into their products in the future, but can't do so for the past. The Report suggests that collecting societies pick up the pieces from the past. There has never been levy in the UK. It's not immediately apparent how this could work. Will there be some kind of levy for the legacy works? The main recommendation would seem to explicitly suggest not. So how are the collecting societies supposed to collect? What effect will the current levy review in the EU have on all of this?
Questions indeed.
HK
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment