It indicates that the Obama administration is opposing rights for the blind due to its deference to the content owners agenda.
Here's his conclusion, re the proposal under discussion at WIPO:
Why oppose this proposal? Scaremongering aside, there is no real threat to anyone’s business model here. But if one sees any limitation of the most extreme version of copyright as a dangerous and ideologically driven attack on property itself, well then, one must fight. This proposal represents the ideas that rights should have limits and that we should harmonise limitations and exceptions as well as rights themselves. It is that principle, the principle of balance, that must be resisted. Even if it puts one in the embarrassing position of – ever so pragmatically – sacrificing one’s blind citizens to an industry agenda. In a world where we have to deal with torture and climate change and the collapse of our economic system, this little piece of moral cowardice is not something many people are going to notice. But it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth, nonetheless.
Save this while you can. These things don't last too long at the FT website.
Are you sure you have the correct link there? It seems to be a link to a book that you authored, not an Financial Times article.ReplyDelete
Doh! Fixed. Thanks.