Canada Set to Endorse the Concept of a WIPO Treaty for the Blind

 

 All rights reserved by World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)

During a meeting with stakeholders convened by Industry Canada on November 16, 2012 concerning the forthcoming Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR/25) meeting in Geneva November 19 to 23, 2012,  participants received some welcome news.

In response to a specific question that I asked, it was confirmed that Canada will endorse the concept that there should be a treaty for the visually impaired, i.e. the “blind”. A treaty, of course, will in principle be more effective amongst those countries that ratify or accede to it than a "soft law" declaration or other type of document that could be little more than a politically correct gesture. The USA has been ambivalent and has vacillated on this issue. The EU has opposed a treaty. Naturally, Canada’s ultimate support will depend on the content of a treaty – but the important breakthrough is that Canada will endorse the goal of getting one.

This is also, hopefully, a sign that Canada will begin to reclaim its profile, independence and influence in WIPO, all of which has been in decline for many years and for many reasons. Canada needs to be a credible player in all international fora dealing with IP, and WIPO is the oldest, largest and most specialized. Canada may have less economic and political clout on the international stage than the USA, EU, and certain other countries. But Canada is still a G8 country and one that can make a very constructive contribution both in its own interest and for the general betterment of many around the world, including the blind, those who are in developing countries, and those who are in countries that might wish to reclaim their IP sovereignty. There are other signs elsewhere that Canada is beginning to participate more actively on the international stage, where it was once a very influential honest broker with positive results for itself and the rest of the world.

Canada has much to be proud of by way of example. In 2012 alone, Canada has seen new copyright legislation (Bill C-11)  that has some excellent and exemplary aspects and the magnificent landmark "pentalogy" from the Supreme Court of Canada. There is immense interest in these developments in other countries. Naturally, the Canadian delegation should proudly put these developments on the record at WIPO, which will help the cause of better legislation and jurisprudence elsewhere. We shall look forward to seeing appropriate reference and explanation of these milestones reflected in the Report from the WIPO meeting in due course.

And hopefully, by standing up and being counted in plenary meetings as well as in the corridors, Canada will help move the USA, EU and other power players to do the right thing for the blind.

It is intolerable that efforts are being made by some content owners, collectives and even countries, in this digital age, to hinder rather than to promote, the wonderful new possibilities of access to knowledge and culture. The blind have to struggle and invariably do so with great dignity to do so many things that sighted persons take for granted. The world should do its best to enable and empower them with new technology and helpful legal regimes.

HPK

How WIPO Treaty Ratification - and not Bill C-32 - would Double the blank media levies ("taxes") in Canada

Michael Geist has a blog today about the potential political debate concerning an “iPod tax” and how Bill C-32 would have supposedly doubled the "iPod tax"  due to the national treatment requirements of the 1996 WIPO WPPT treaty. I've been writing about this for years and have testified about it to a Parliamentary Committee, and its gratifying to see some of these points being repeated in the government document that Michael exposes and in his own blog.

However, it is incorrect to suggest that “... it is worth noting that Bill C-32, the Conservatives own copyright bill, would likely have doubled the fees that Canadians pay on blank CDs.”

Bill C-32 itself would not have resulted in the doubling the dwindling levy proceeds, which now effectively come only from blank CDs. The “doubling” would only result from a subsequent separate decision to actually ratify the WPPT and the then inevitable issuance of a statement by the Minister pursuant to s. 85 of the Copyright Act that would cause foreign “makers” and “performers” to be considered “eligible” for reciprocal payments. This would require recognition in turn by the Copyright Board in a new tariff, which the Board would doubtless not hesitate to provide - assuming that that blank CDs would still be considered to be an “audio recording medium” - which is probably not the case, but would need to be vigorously contested, given the Board’s past decisions.

Indeed, it is well understood that, while this and the previous Governments both wished their bills to be “WIPO Ready”, any decision to actually ratify the 1996 treaties might need to await the demise or significant reworking of the levy scheme precisely in order to avoid the “doubling” aspect and the arithmetically inevitable major royalty outflow, which could serve no useful purpose whatsoever for Canadian interests and would thus potentially be an acute embarrassment to whatever government were to be in power at the time. 

HK

Breaking Blogging Deployments in London and Geneva

The ever reliable, recondite, and renowned IPKat blog has important and timely news on two fronts that will affect not only IP bloggers but practitioners, jurists, academics, government officials, international agency officials and diplomats dealing with IP throughout the world.

The first announcement is nothing but good news. The IPKat has honoured Dr. Francis Gurry, the distinguished Director General of WIPO, with an appointment as the seventh IPKat, to be known as the Gurrykat. The requirements for appointment as an IPKat blogger are highly confidential. However, it is clearly the case that only seven persons have ever met these stringent qualifications. Dr. Gurry’s record, however, is clearly unique and beyond question. Although the IPKat has circumscribed his mandate rather precisely, presumably for at least as long as he will be on probation, we can only hope to eventually look forward to frequent tweets and detailed blogs, especially during and immediately following annual General Assembly Meetings and doubtlessly increasingly frequent Diplomatic Conferences.

Indeed, optimism about Dr. Gurry’s blogging and tweeting abilities is very high. As a relatively young man born in 1951, it is expected that he will quickly master the technology required for successful blogging and tweeting. According to several reliable sources, there is absolutely no truth to the rumours that he may have been born in 1915 rather than 1951. The source of any confusion on this point may be tracable to a typo arising from the clumsy use of an early version of a Blackberry by a former WIPO official.

All pundits are agreed that Dr. Gurry’s contribution as an IPKat blogger will be fully synergistic and complementary to the vision statement as described by the senior IPKat himself, Prof. Jeremy Phillips:

    Prima facie it seems surprising that the Director General of a United Nations agency should be prepared to expose his thoughts to the robust forum of thought which is the intellectual property blogosphere. In retrospect, however, one can see why Dr Gurry would have agreed. While he is a career diplomat who respects the rules and conventions which that role demands, those close to his office say that he has in recent months been seen to have been showing signs of being a visionary in his field, a role that is difficult to fulfill within what the IPKat and Merpel would regard as the chafing confines and stifling etiquette of the diplomatic environment in which he discharges his official functions.

Given Dr. Gurry’s many and magnificent achievements to date, there is every hope that he can rise to the standards expected of other illustrious members of the IPKat litter.

On a more sombre and apparently unrelated front, it seems the WIPO has finally begun the inevitable and essential task of oversight of blogs that may be having a negative impact of the world of IP. The IPKat is reporting, based in turn upon reports from the extremely reliable and esteemed William Mew, Editor of IP Watch, that:

 ...the WIPO Council has approved in outline the establishment of a two-tier “watch-list”: there would be an “A-List” of intellectual property weblogs which are considered to be potentially harmful to the intellectual property environment and a “B-List” of those which are seen as being positively detrimental to the aims and objectives of rights protection.

It seems that one of the first targets for designation on the “A-List” will be this very blog. Mr. Mew is reporting that a WIPO spokesperson --who asked not to be identified by name --  explained that neither list has yet been ratified, but possible blogs for inclusion on the “A-List” include yours truly Howard Knopf’s Excess Copyright (this very blog itself), which "is known to have targeted the much-admired United States ‘301 reports’." As to candidature for the “B List”, the IPKat reports that Mr. Mew has learned that:

Favourites for inclusion on the “B-List” are the Lessig Blog, which is generally held responsible for undermining copyright values among impressionable young readers and remains visible nearly two years after its author went into hibernation, Against Monopoly, for allegedly defending the right to innovate, and the IPKat for its persistent criticisms of WIPO’s failure to protect the rights in its own logo...

We look forward to further news from London and Geneva on related front. Check back for further developments via the IPKat blog here and here.

HK