In our capacity of permanent observers of the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR), we are attending the 41st session of the Committee, which is taking place in a hybrid format of in-person and online participation from 28 June and 1 July 2021.
The first day of the event was dedicated to discuss the protection of broadcasting organizations, and several delegations shared their dissatisfaction with the fact that informal discussions on the text of the draft broadcast treaty had taken place without ensuring the participation of a diversity of delegations. The SCCR Chair invited to these meetings only to the so-called “Friends of the Chair”, which include Argentina, Colombia, the European Union, Finland, Germany, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, the Philippines, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, and the United States of America. Civil society observers joined Indonesia, Pakistan, Iran, South Africa and Chile in their ask for greater transparency and inclusivity.
The following is the statement made on behalf of COMMUNIA on this agenda item (Agenda Item 5):
In our capacity of permanent observers of the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR), we are attending the 40th session of the Committee, which is taking place in a hybrid format of in-person and online participation from 16 to 20 November 2020.
The following is the statement made on behalf of Communia on the protection of broadcasting organizations (Agenda Item 5):
We understand that the draft of the Broadcasting Treaty gives broadcasters perpetual rights over public domain and freely licensed content, which is extremely problematic for users.
Without this extra layer of rights, these works can be used without restriction, and this freedom should be maintained.
In addition, we are concerned that the current proposal for exceptions only gives countries the option to extend already existing exceptions to broadcasting signals. Obviously, countries can choose not to exercise that option, and if they opt not to, the Treaty will be creating new obstacles to access to culture and information.
Exceptions are essential to achieve a balance between the interests of the broadcasting organizations and the public interest. The vision that supra-national instruments should only mandate the introduction of new rights, without imposing adequate exceptions, is outdated and turns a blind eye to the fact that copyright can prevent the exercise of fundamental freedoms.
It is about time for this Committee to align itself with the knowledge produced by its academics and by its courts, which have over and over again referred to the need for a balanced view of copyright.
The Treaty should include a broad provision like the one contained in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, which makes it mandatory for each Party to provide an appropriate balance in its copyright system, including by means of exceptions for legitimate purposes. In addition, it should have a minimum set of mandatory exceptions, namely for the uses already required by other copyright treaties.
In our capacity of permanent observers of the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR), we are attending the 39th session of the Committee, which is taking place in Geneva from 21 to 25 October 2019.
The following is the statement made on behalf of COMMUNIA on the agenda item on the protection of broadcasting organizations (Agenda Item 7):
I’m speaking on behalf of COMMUNIA, an association that works to protect and defend the public domain and users’ rights.
We understand that the current proposal of the Broadcasting Treaty gives broadcasters perpetual rights over content that is not subject to copyright and content that is subject to non-exclusive free licenses, such as Creative Commons licenses. We find this extremely problematic for users.
In addition, the proposal for exceptions in the Chair’s text provides narrower exceptions to protect users than exist for copyrighted works. The draft text says countries “may” extend the same exceptions that exist for copyright, but, obviously, countries can choose not to do this.
This adds new international law restrictions on the adoption of limitations and exceptions for parties to the Rome Convention. This is also more restrictive than the Berne Convention, which has mandatory exceptions for news of the day and quotations, and permissive exceptions for educational and other uses.
The exceptions provisions in the Broadcasting Treaty are particularly important, and different from the issues covered in the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty and Beijing Treaty, because they could add a layer of rights clearance upon copyrighted content.
In order to avoid creating new obstacles to access to culture, knowledge and information, mandatory exceptions and limitations should be adopted. In addition, no rights should be placed on works that are in the public domain or that are openly licensed.
In our capacity of permanent observers of the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights, we are attending the 37th session of the Committee, which is taking place in Geneva from 26 to 30 November 2018.
The following is the statement made by Teresa Nobre on our behalf on agenda item 5: Protection of Broadcasting Organizations.Continue reading
In our capacity of permanent observers of the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights, we are attending the 36th session of the Committee, which is taking place in Geneva from 28 May to 1 June 2018.
The following is the statement made by Teresa Nobre on our behalf on agenda item 5: Protection of Broadcasting Organizations.
I’m speaking on behalf of COMMUNIA International Association on the Digital Public Domain.
We would like to urge this Committee to consider the interests of all relevant stakeholders, when working on agenda item 5.
The discussions on the protection of broadcasting organization have been revolving mainly around the private interests of such organizations and other beneficiaries of copyright.
We consider that the Committee should also engage in discussions aimed at ensuring the protection of the interests of users, namely the global community of educators, learners, researchers and librarians, and also the general Internet users that create user generated content.
Taking these public interests into account includes developing mandatory exceptions and limitations that protect legitimate practices, such as criticism, parody, uses for the purposes of teaching or scientific research, and uses by libraries and other culture heritage institutions. It also requires making clear that the exceptions for broadcasting rights are not less enabling for users than the exceptions that apply to copyright.
Furthermore, protecting users rights implies that the broadcasters are not given rights in works that are in the public domain, or that are openly licensed.
Finally, any treaty granting post fixation rights should foresee that the term of protection of those rights does not in any case extend beyond the term of copyright, in order to give legal certainty to users and to avoid deepening the already complex issue of accessing and using orphan works.
We look forward to participating in further debates on these issues.