Items tagged "WIPO Broadcasters Treaty"
WIPO Broadcast Treaty Talks Appear Near CollapseJune 21, 2007 Press Release , WIPO Broadcasters Treaty
For Immediate Release
It appears as if the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) will not be able to write a treaty this year granting new intellectual property rights to broadcasters. The latest report from Sherwin Siy, director of Public Knowledge's Global Knowledge Initiative, is posted here.
The following is the statement of Gigi B. Sohn, president of Public Knowledge:
"It is good news for consumers and for innovators that the talks on a new broadcast treaty appear finished for this year. Broadcasters are seeking a new copyright-like right on material they do not own, but which they only broadcast. Such a right would only hurt consumers who want to transmit TV shows from a set-top box to different TV sets around their house. Such a right would only hurt innovators, like Sling Media, who want to help consumers use their TV content lawfully.
"We are well aware that the broadcasters have been trying for this treaty for nine years, and that they won't give up. They should. Broadcasters have every right to prevent signal theft, but the proposed treaty and the new rights they seek are not necessary.
"This welcome result is due to the diligent efforts of the U.S. delegation to WIPO as well as to the work of many non-governmental organizations and technology companies. They are to be commended."
36 Organizations Oppose New Rights for BroadcastersSeptember 5, 2006 Press Release , WIPO Broadcasters Treaty
For Immediate Release
Background: The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is considering a new treaty that would grant broadcasters a new 50-year property right over the content of broadcasts, regardless of whether the broadcasters own the content they are transmitting.
Thirty-six companies, public-interest groups and non-profit associations today declared their opposition to the proposed World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) treaty that would extend new property rights to broadcasters. Signers ranged from AT&T, Verizon Communications, Dell, Intel and HP to Public Knowledge, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Consumer Project on Technology.
The statement, released at a roundtable discussion of the proposed treaty held today by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO), set out the basic objections on which all of the signers agreed. Individual organizations also had other areas of concern. "Creating broad new intellectual property rights in order to protect broadcast signals is misguided and unnecessary, and risks serious unintended consequences," the statement said, adding that if broadcasters believe there is a problem with signal theft, then a much more narrow treaty could be drafted.
In addition, the statement outlined concerns that the treaty would interfere with the rollout of broadband and home networking services and would subject network carriers to the threat of direct or secondary liability.
A copy of the statement follows:Read More
Non-Profits and Companies Alert Hill to Dangers of International Broadcasting TreatyJune 7, 2006 Press Release , WIPO Broadcasters Treaty
For immediate release June 7, 2006
Non-Profits and Companies Alert Hill to Dangers of International Broadcasting Treaty
Congress should take a close look at a proposed treaty that would give broadcasters new control over TV programming they may not own, groups of non-profits and corporations told Congress today.
At issue is a treaty being drafted by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) that would give broadcasters, cablecasters and Webcasters "a broad and unprecedented 50-year intellectual property right" over content they distribute. Such proposed new rights could harm consumers by allowing broadcasters to restrict access to the content and limit use of what otherwise would be legal access by consumers.
In a letter to the members of the Senate and House Judiciary Committees, Public Knowledge and 11 other groups asked for Congress to hold hearings on the treaty before it is submitted to the WIPO General Assembly for consideration and for the U.S. Copyright Office to have a public proceeding to analyze the proposed treaty's impact.
The non-profits letter was signed by Center for Democracy and Technology Consumer Federation of America Consumers Union Consumer Project on Technology EDUCAUSE Electronic Frontier Foundation Free Press The Internet Society (ISOC) IP Justice Public Knowledge Union for the Public Domain U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
A similar letter on behalf of a number of companies was signed by:
AT&T Inc. Panasonic Corporation of North America
BellSouth Corp. RadioShack Corporation Broadband Service Providers Association Sony Electronics Incorporate
Cingular Wireless Sprint Nextel
Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association TiVo Inc. Computer and Communications Industry Association Verizon Communications Inc Consumer Electronics Association Verizon Wireless
Dell Inc. US Internet Industry Association. Information Technology Association of America United States Telecom Association
A copy of the company letter is here:
The non-profits' letter follows:
June 7, 2006
Re: Proposed WIPO Broadcast Treaty
Dear : (Senator or Member of Congress)
We are writing to share our concerns regarding the proposed "Treaty on the Protection of Broadcasting Organizations" currently being negotiated in the United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO Broadcast Treaty). We are troubled not only by the substance of the treaty, but also by the fact that the U.S. delegation, represented by the Library of Congress Copyright Office and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), have failed to engage in any public discussion about the effect of the treaty on consumers, industry, copyright holders and U.S. law.
Negotiations on the treaty are moving forward rapidly with the support of the U.S. delegation. A target date of September 2006 has been set for recommending the treaty to the WIPO General Assembly for a diplomatic conference.
The treaty would give broadcasters, cablecasters and webcasters a broad and unprecedented 50-year intellectual property like right in their signals. Placing new layers of rights on top of the already existing copyright in the underlying program material would complicate current U.S. law and existing regulations for copyright holders, Internet Service Providers, telecommunications companies, technology companies and consumers. It would also place in jeopardy new initiatives like a solution for "orphan" copyrighted works. The harm to the millions of consumers represented by the undersigned organizations would be particularly great – this additional layer of rights could permit broadcasters to restrict access to content within the home and could limit lawful uses of content over the Internet. Thus, this treaty could reverse the explosion of diverse and increasingly sophisticated "user generated" content that has become part of the fabric of the Internet.
For these reasons, we ask Congress to hold hearings on the WIPO Broadcasters' Treaty prior to its submission to the WIPO General Assembly. This will to give public policy makers and private stakeholders an opportunity to comment on and discuss the U.S. position and justification for establishing an additional layer of copyright protection for broadcasters, cablecasters and webcasters.
In addition, we respectfully ask that you request the Copyright Office and the USPTO to issue a Federal Register notice seeking public comment on the treaty that provides an analysis of the proposed treaty's impact on: 1) current U.S. law; 2) stakeholders, such as copyright holders, the telecommunications industry, consumer electronics industry and consumers; and 3) the public domain and the greater public interest.
We urge the committee to act expeditiously on both requests so that Congress and the public better understand what is at stake should negotiations on this treaty move forward.
If you have questions, or would like to discuss this matter further, please contact Gigi Sohn, President, Public Knowledge at (202) 518-0020. Thank you in advance for your consideration of this important issue.
Center for Democracy and Technology Consumer Federation of America Consumers Union Consumer Project on Technology EDUCAUSE Electronic Frontier Foundation Free Press The Internet Society (ISOC) IP Justice Public Knowledge Union for the Public Domain U.S. Public Interest Research GroupRead More
The Broadcast Treaty vs. Broadcast LawJune 24, 2011 Future of Video , 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.Read More
‘Tis the Season Part IV: PK and allies to USTR – It’s Time for an Office of InnovationDecember 23, 2008 Broadcast Flag , Fair Use , FCC , Piracy , WIPO Broadcasters Treaty
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.Read More
The Broadcast Treaty at the 17th Session of WIPO’s Standing Committee on Copyright and Related RightNovember 8, 2008 Piracy , WIPO Broadcasters Treaty
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.Read More
S. 4108, the APRIL Act, and the Realities Behind ItApril 1, 2008 Broadcast Flag , DRM , Fair Use , Piracy , WIPO Broadcasters Treaty
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.Read More
Limitations and Exceptions on the Agenda, But so is Broadcast Treaty: WIPO SCCR 16, Day 3March 12, 2008 Fair Use , WIPO Broadcasters Treaty
The WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights ended its 16th session today, agreeing upon a set of conclusions that have yet to be published by the WIPO Secretariat.
In sum, though, the broadcast treaty remains on the agenda for future WIPO meetings. Also, the delegations agreed to work on limitations and exceptions in the future, but not necessarily towards a treaty.Read More
The last day of the 16th meeting of WIPO's copyright committee has just begun. As we listen to a presentation on WIPO's arbitration and mediation center, we've been handed a set of draft conclusions for the meeting.
There's still some discussion, including NGO comments on the broadcast treaty, to come, but here's the draft conclusions, which will be discussed towards the end of the day.
STANDING COMMITTEE ON COPYRIGHT AND RELATED RIGHTS
Sixteenth Session, March 10 to 12, 2008-03-12
Protection of audiovisual performances
The outcome of the deliberations in the course of the sixteenth session of the SCCR will be reported to the General Assembly.
- The Delegations who took the floor expressed their willingness to take up further discussions on the substance, with the aim of finding a way forward. Some Delegations stressed the importance of finding a
Discussion on Limitations and Exceptions; Broadcast Treaty Still Being Discussed: WIPO SCCR 16 Day 2March 11, 2008 DRM , Fair Use , WIPO Broadcasters Treaty
Basically, Chile, alongside Brazil, Nicaragua, and Uruguay, proposed a work plan for work on limitations and exceptions to copyright and related rights. That proposal is available here.
It proposes that WIPO facilitate an exchange of information on different cuntries' limitations and exceptions, with the idea of finding common ground for an eventual treaty that will incorporate basic, minimum limitations and exceptions for users to use copyrighted works.Read More