Entries Matching: WIPO Broadcasters Treaty
The Broadcast Treaty has been on the agenda at WIPO for a long time. In the past few weeks it has become more of a live issue, with new proposals for language and new efforts to move it forward.
Last Friday, Public Knowledge wrapped up a busy week of Presidential transition team meetings. First, as part of the Open Internet Coalition, PK and a number of its industry and public interest allies met with FCC Agency Review team co-chairs Susan Crawford and Kevin Werbach to discuss the Coalition's priorities and how we would like to see them implemented.
At least half of that title isn't a metaphor. I'm referring to the heated discussions that took place at WIPO SCCR 17 last Friday, as the member states tried to decide what the future work of the Committee might look like with regard to limitations and exceptions for the visually impaired.
What was so incredibly striking was the evident desire of certain member countries to foreclose the idea that WIPO might want to pass a treaty guaranteeing certain rights for the blind to access copyrighted works.
Some background: At the end of these meetings, a day or so is devoted to debating and deciding what the conclusions of the meeting have been. The Chair writes up a draft document, which is presented to the delegates.
The World Intellectual Property Organization's Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights just finished meeting in its seventeenth session. On the agenda are three major areas of work: exceptions and limitations to copyright, the protection of audiovisual performances, and the protection of broadcasting organizations.
OK. Hopefully you all realized that S. 4108, the APRIL Act of 2008, was a joke. After all, there were a few excesses in there that would indicate how ludicrous the bill is.
Well, sort of. A lot of the provisions we included in the fake bill were modeled after real proposals made either by legislators, content industry lobbyists, or other policymakers. Some of the provisions were even taken verbatim from introduced legislation like the PRO IP Act and the IP Enforcement Act. We've posted a newly marked-up version that provides the sources of some of the provisions of the APRIL Act, showing that a lot of the silliness surrounding IP policy isn't limited to today.