Stevie Wonder has been working hard to get an international pact approved that will see books and other reading materials become more accessible to the blind, and it finally happened today. As a result, Wonder will perform a special concert in Marrakesh on Friday.
The treaty was approved by over 600 negotiators from 186 states, which was no easy feat.
“This is a legacy, a gift to future generations. So let’s finalize a new agreement that opens doors to the world’s written treasures and moves towards a future where there are no barriers to the expansion of knowledge and enjoyment of culture,” Wonder said.
The major issue with having many written works turned into blind-accessible formats is that there are copyright laws which bind them. Now, several countries will adopt laws that will permit the works to be republished in braille, audio, and large-print form.
Wonder seems to have been inspired by his international philanthropy; he said recently that he may put a gospel tune sung in Arabic on his upcoming album.
“We’re going to do some traditional gospel stuff, but I’m thinking about doing a gospel song in Arabic,” he revealed. “I’m going to twist it all up in different ways, because I think everyone needs to hear the word of the gospel … whether they read the Koran, the Torah or the Bible, whatever they read.”
The concert will take place at the Palais des Congres in front of members of the diplomatic conference.
It’s been a while since we last heard anything about the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement. All we knew was that the secret negotiations were still ongoing, but no public statement had been made for a few months. Now the silence has been broken as the treaty may be losing support from a potentially important ally.
TechDirt reports that Japan may be dropping its support for TPP. The country, which is known for absurd Internet-related laws, isn’t dropping its support because of any copyright or Internet-related propositions in the treaty. Instead, the treaty is losing support among officials due its potential threat to local agriculture.
Japan isn’t the first Asian country to suggest pulling out of TPP over concerns of what it would do to their economy. Back in August of last year, Malaysia’s Health Minister said the country should pull out of the agreement due to it favoring U.S. pharmaceuticals:
According to the agreement, if a medicine is launched in the US, and then three years later it is launched in Malaysia, the patent would start from when it is launched here and not when it was launched earlier in the US. This is not fair.”
Going back to Japan, the opposition from the agriculture industry doesn’t mean Japan will back out of it completely. Despite strong opposition from its citizens, the country secretly ratified ACTA in the middle of the night last year. Of course, Japan’s new conservative government may not be as willing to approve a treaty that’s being spearheaded by the U.S., but then again, maybe it is.
Despite the vocal minority objecting to TPP, the treaty still has quite a bit of support from participating nations. It also doesn’t face much resistance due to the secretive nature of the negotiations so most citizens don’t even know what those involved are planning. One group is trying to gain access to the treaty’s text by offering a bounty for it, but their efforts have yet to be rewarded.
Fair use – what do those two words mean to you? If you’ve been following copyright law at all lately, you probably have heard the term thrown around a few times. It’s considered by many to be the most important feature in copyright law, so why is it always under attack?
It would be unfair to say that fair use is directly under attack. Even the worst Hollywood executives understand fair use and do nothing to directly impede it. What bills and treaties like SOPA, PIPA and ACTA did was weaken fair use to a point where it didn’t matter anymore. Thankfully, those three laws were killed before they could change everything for the worst. Unfortunately, the most secretive treaty of all – TPP – just revealed its intentions for fair use, and it’s not good.
Is fair use a concern to you? Are exceptions to copyright law something worth protecting?Let us know in the comments.
Before we get into that though, it’s important to understand why fair use is so important. As an example, here’s a YouTube parody video based on the popular video game, Skyrim:
If you’re not aware, this video contains a lot of copyrighted content from the game’s developers. That content can not be used without permission from the original copyright owner under normal conditions. Under fair use, it’s totally legal and encouraged. You see, fair use is an exception in copyright law that allows people to use copyrighted materials if the content in question is a non-commercial parody or uses the content for criticism, commentary or education.
YouTube is actually the perfect example of fair use. The entire Web site is pretty much dedicated to it with thousands of video creators using other people’s works in ways that fall under fair use protections. The young girl singing her favorite Justin Bieber song into a camera is fair use. The political commentator pulling clips from CNN and Fox News to make a point also falls under fair use.
The importance of fair use can not be understated. That’s why the recent leak from the fair use section of TPP has proponents so concerned. After promising that the revised TPP would contain strong fair use protections, the text of the bill actually restricts fair use. Here’s the text of the treaty acquired by KEI Online:
1. [US/AU: With respect to this Article [(Article 4 on copyright) and Article 5 and 6 (which deal with copyright and related rights section and the related rights section)], each Party shall confine limitations or exceptions to exclusive rights to certain special cases that do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work, performance, or phonogram, and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holder.]
2. Subject to and consistent with paragraph (1), each Party shall seek to achieve an appropriate balance in providing limitations or exceptions, including those for the digital environment, giving due consideration to legitimate purposes such as, but no limited to, criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research.92]
It shall be a matter for legislation in the countries of the Union to permit the reproduction of such works in certain special cases, provided that such reproduction does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author.
While the actual text doesn’t seem all that bad, it’s the interpretation that counts. When you leave the legality of fair use up to “not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author,” things are going to get messy. The problem is further compounded by a Supreme Court ruling in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music that put the burden of proving fair use on the defendant. It’s so much easier to prove that a work is copyright infringing then to prove that it’s fair use. Thankfully, in the aforementioned case, the defendants were able to prove that their work was valid under fair use. One victory does not mean that all will be like that, and the rules of TPP make it harder for people to prove fair use.
What’s interesting is that only the United States and Australia are behind these excessive measures. TPP is being debated and written by a number of countries in the Pacific, but only the U.S. and Australia are behind the worst parts. In fact, countries like Brazil, Chile, Malaysia and Vietnam want to incorporate strong consumer protections into TPP that would strengthen fair use and allow consumers to own their digital content.
[NZ/CL/MY/BN/VN propose; AU/US oppose93: 1. Each party may provide for limitations and exceptions to copyrights, related rights, and legal protections for technological protections measures and rights management information included in this Chapter, in accordance with its domestic laws and relevant international treaties that each are party to.]
Do you think TPP should strengthen its fair use clause? Or are the current protections enough?Let us know in the comments.
Earlier, I used a Skyrim parody video to illustrate fair use. Unfortunately, we live in a world where real world examples of fair use and essential freedom abuses are easy to come by. We recently reported on a YouTube video being taken down due to copyright violation notices from CBS and the United States Department of Homeland Security. The main concern here is that the video, which only contains the ramblings of a conspiracy theorist, was taken down by a brach of the government.
The secondary concern is that the video falls under fair use. Even if it was the insane ramblings of a conspiracy theorist; he was using copyrighted content, a Sky News broadcast in this case, to provide commentary on world events. Such a case falls under fair use and copyright holders should know that. While there’s something to be said on how YouTube gives into copyright pressure too easily, it would only get worse if fair use was restricted.
While the changes to fair use are bad enough, we still don’t know the extent of the damage. TPP’s secretive nature has led to it being one of the more problematic treaties of our time. Fortunately, things can change for the better. If Sen. Ron Wyden has his way, TPP would be open for debate in Congress and among the citizenry. That’s really all we can ask for.
Do you think fair use is in danger from TPP? Or are advocacy groups blowing it out of proportion?Let us know in the comments.
The internet is still rejoicing after last week’s win over ACTA. The European Parliament overwhelmingly voted down the treaty which effectively kills it for the time being. It will be back later, but the Internet can celebrate another win for now. While our friends in Europe our celebrating, the U.S. must still be on the offensive in regards to the ever elusive Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement.
It’s rare for us to get any kind of news in regards to TPP and even rarer for it come straight from the U.S. Trade Representative, but that’s what happened last week. During the always secret TPP talks taking place in San Diego last week, the USTR introduced “New Copyright Exceptions and Limitations Provision” into the TPP text. Here’s the statement from the USTR:
For the first time in any U.S. trade agreement, the United States is proposing a new provision, consistent with the internationally-recognized “3-step test,” that will obligate Parties to seek to achieve an appropriate balance in their copyright systems in providing copyright exceptions and limitations for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. These principles are critical aspects of the U.S. copyright system, and appear in both our law and jurisprudence. The balance sought by the U.S. TPP proposal recognizes and promotes respect for the important interests of individuals, businesses, and institutions who rely on appropriate exceptions and limitations in the TPP region.
So why is this such a big deal? The introduction of the Berne three-step test to TPP makes the copyright section at least appear desirable The three-step test allows people to use copyrighted works in cases of criticism, parody, education, etc all under the banner of fair use.
So is TPP fine after this? Not by a long shot, but it proves that the USTR is at least attentive to recent happenings around the world. The death of ACTA may have had a hand in this recent change as those involved in the treaty do not want massive protests on the level of what we saw in Europe.
While the introduction of the three-step test is a start, many civil liberties organizations feel that it is not enough. A joint statement from EFF, Knowledge Ecology International, Public Knowledge and Public Citizen said that the still secret provision could actually “restrict fair use and other copyright exceptions and limitations crucial for the progress and access of culture, science, education and innovation.”
Their fears are justified as the USTR only said that they would be introducing the three-step test. It’s not in the bill yet and those involved in the negotiations (i.e. Hollywood) might shoot down the provision. They could also pass it in name only, while keeping the draconian copyright statutes that we’ve seen in previous leaks.
We’ll keep you updated on any more changes to TPP over the coming months. The recent interest in TPP from a Congress that’s angry over their being left out of the negotiations could prove interesting as we head into the election season.
The response to ACTA throughout Europe has been the stuff of legends. People from all walks of life have taken to the streets to protest the amendments in the treaty that only help to serve copyright industries while hurting the Internet in much the same way that SOPA proposed. The political response to the protest has also been encouraging with many nations refusing to back the bill, but it could soon all be for naught.
Techdirt has stumbled upon some rather disturbing movements within the pro-ACTA movement. It looks like the main pro-ACTA forces are using one of three tactics to get the treaty pushed through – arguments, delays, or if all else fails, outright secrecy. All three tactics could work, but it’s the last that is the most worrisome.
Let’s stick with the traditional ways of getting it approved for now. First up is the argument that ACTA is absolutely necessary to police the ever evolving Internet and protect never evolving copyright industry. It’s like dinosaur scientists wanting to create a shield out of tar and twigs to protect themselves from their own impending doom at the hands of an asteroid.
The more likely scenario out of the first two is a delay on the vote. Some members of the EU Parliament are hoping to either build up more support, or rewrite ACTA to remove the more offensive bits. The only problems is that the offensive bits is what makes ACTA the treaty that it is. Many people from within the various industries that built the treaty want these provisions (like internet policing and restrictions on generic drugs) to save their own hides against the ever marching giant of progress.
Unfortunately, there’s an even worse solution to ACTA on the horizon. It’s been rumored now that members of the EU Parliament will push through a vote using secret ballots. What is a secret ballot, you ask? It essentially lets all the members of Parliament vote anonymously so they can’t be held accountable for said vote. Say what you will about our own Congress, but they would never be allowed to get away with something that heinous.
It’s almost kind of ironic really. The very thing the Internet is trying to protect – anonymity – is being used to save the asses of those who want to destroy the greatest thing the Internet ever gave to mankind. It’s just another sad double standard that governments around the world love to employ.
The one hope left is that news of the secret ballot gets out. The anti-ACTA protests have been a little on the slow side now that all of Europe is rightly concerned with the current debt crisis. A treaty like ACTA would do nothing to help grow the economy, so here’s hoping that the citizenry understands that and responds appropriately.
ACTA news has been slow coming, once again due to the debt crisis, but we’ll keep watching the situation. It looks like the vote will be coming to a head soon and we’ll be here to let you know what happens to SOPA’s big international daddy.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement is by far one of the more dangerous treaties being tossed around world governments because we know nothing about it. Despite a minor leak of an old version last year, we’re still none the wiser as to what’s actually going on. The only people who know about the details of the treaty are the President, the United States Trade Representative, and the MPAA. Wait, what?
Sen. Ron Wyden, friend of the Internet, has been against every major treaty and piece of legislation that would harm the Internet. He was one of the co-creators of the OPEN Act, the far more tolerable alternative to SOPA. His latest target is TPP and he wants to know what’s going on.
TechDirt is reporting that Sen. Wyden’s staff attempted to obtain details of the what the USTR is proposing in TPP. His staff has all the clearance they need that is legally required to obtain the treaty, but the USTR isn’t handing it over. Sen. Wyden says that it’s been more than two months now since he has requested the details as TechDirt put it, “the USTR gave him the finger.”
Congress not being made privy to details on an important trade agreement is one thing, but the USTR is proving itself to be a friend of corporations instead of the American people and our government. Sen. Wyden has found that the USTR is providing intimate details on TPP to major U.S. corporations like Halliburton, Chevron, PHRMA, Comcast and the MPAA.
It’s not so surprising when you consider that the MPAA was intimately involved with TPP discussions at a secret meeting in February. Those attending the meeting were even given a private tour of Hollywood studios after the meeting was over. It’s pretty obvious that the USTR is playing favorites and Sen. Wyden is having none of it.
To combat this, he is introducing the Congressional Oversight Over Trade Negotiations Act. He says that it’s a clarification of the 2002 law, the Congressional Oversight Group. The idea was to increase transparency between the USTR and Congress, but it has obviously done little in that regard. The new law would make it so that the USTR would have to afford same level of clearance to Congress that it is obviously giving corporations.
While all of this is obviously bad and we wish Sen. Wyden all the luck in getting more transparency in government, TPP might not be the big, bad treaty it once was. Reports surfaced earlier this month that suggested the treaty was on the ropes due to the smaller countries realizing how harmful it is to their own economies. When a treaty tells countries that IP protection is more important than stabilizing their own developing economy, those countries are going to realize sooner or later that such a treaty is absolutely asinine and self-serving.
We’ll keep you updated on further efforts to increase TPP transparency and any other developments on this secret treaty. Considering that news has been slow to surface so far, I wouldn’t be surprised if we didn’t hear anything else on TPP until way later this year. Here’s hoping that’s not the case.
To read the full statement from Sen. Wyden, check out the copy that TechDirt has graciously provided. It lays out exactly what the new law intends to enable while laying the smack down on the Obama Administration for keeping the American public in the dark in regards to TPP.
With all the recent talk about CISPA and ACTA, it seems like we’ve been forgetting about our old friend TTP, or Trans-Pacific Partnership. For those who need a recap, TPP is essentially ACTA for the U.S. and Pacific nations. The only key difference is that TPP has been negotiated in complete secrecy and it’s only through leaks that we’ve been able to keep up with what’s going on.
TPP finally poked its head out a few weeks ago and in public no less. Foreign Policy magazine reports that U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk was in Singapore talking up TPP. He was confident that all talks regarding TPP were to finish by the end of July leading to the treaty being signed in by all member nations.
It seems that Kirk is being a little too optimistic, because Foreign Policy spoke to many of Singapore’s “diplomats, journalists and academics.” Their take was that TPP was actually far from being ratified and might even be dead soon. The reason? The Obama administration has been apparently rushing to get the treaty ratified before the election, but has left out key partners from negotiations.
Those key partners are Canada, Mexico, Japan and China. Foreign Policy explains that getting Mexico, Japan and China on board will all be challenges for very different reasons. Even worse still is that Chile, once considered a major supporter of TPP, is also starting to question whether or not TPP will benefit them in any way.
It looks like TPP, from the start, was a deal created between Singapore and the U.S. to strengthen the presence of the U.S. in Southeast Asia. Other countries that were roped into the treaty are now starting to see this and backing out. Why would they sign an agreement that only benefited two countries? It makes no sense. Foreign Policy puts it best:
This is the problem with trying to use trade deals as tools of diplomacy. It may sound nice and positive for two countries to say they are tightening their relationship by doing a free trade deal. But eventually at some point, someone has to count the jobs and the balances of trade and financial flows. Typically, deals done primarily for geo-political purposes don’t add up, and when they don’t, all the “strengthening of commitments ” in the world often doesn’t save them.
Unlike ACTA, which is dying due to strong public pressure, TPP seems to be dying from its political ambitions and mismanagement. In somewhat of an ironic twist, the U.S. may be the straw that breaks TPP’s back. It was reported by Huffington Post last week that Congress is now wanting to kill TPP as well because of a part of the treaty that would ban “Buy American” provisions.
Whether it be from China’s unwillingness to join or America’s own rushing of the treaty; TPP seems to be on the ropes. It’s unclear whether it will be knocked out yet, but it’s not looking good. If the treaty isn’t signed by November, I expect the Obama administration to scrap it.
Do you think TPP is dying? Or will the U.S. and Singapore salvage it? Let us know in the comments.
At a ceremony in Tokyo, Japan, more members of the European Union signed ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement), ratifying the treaty for the countries that signed it. However, because the European Union parliament as yet to weigh in, ACTA is not currently binding, as in, it’s not a “global law,” yet, anyway.
The European Union parliament, according to The Guardian, is scheduled to debate ACTA (pdf) this summer.
Procedural processes aside, it’s clear there’s the treaty has a coalition of support as international governments race to apparently rescue the downtrodden entertainment industry, masked in a treaty of intellectual property protection. Speaking of masks, there has been some push-back from EU citizens in a number of areas, including Poland and France.
Polish citizens took to the streets to express their displeasure with the treaty, which some fear is even more dangerous than the recently-buried SOPA/PIPA bills. The protests, however, weren’t just on a citizen level either. Kader Arif resigned his position as primary ACTA rapporteur, and left the following biting statement in his native French, which was translated by La Quadrature Du Net:
“I want to denounce in the strongest possible manner the entire process that led to the signature of this agreement: no inclusion of civil society organisations, a lack of transparency from the start of the negotiations, repeated postponing of the signature of the text without an explanation being ever given, exclusion of the EU Parliament’s demands that were expressed on several occasions in our assembly.
As rapporteur of this text, I have faced never-before-seen manoeuvres from the right wing of this Parliament to impose a rushed calendar before public opinion could be alerted, thus depriving the Parliament of its right to expression and of the tools at its disposal to convey citizens’ legitimate demands.
Everyone knows the ACTA agreement is problematic, whether it is its impact on civil liberties, the way it makes Internet access providers liable, its consequences on generic drugs manufacturing, or how little protection it gives to our geographical indications.
This agreement might have major consequences on citizens’ lives, and still, everything is being done to prevent the European Parliament from having its say in this matter. That is why today, as I release this report for which I was in charge, I want to send a strong signal and alert the public opinion about this unacceptable situation. I will not take part in this masquerade.”
As an aside, it would be nice if other politicians were this forthcoming. Concerning the aforementioned citizen protests, as indicated, Poland was a noted hot spot of ACTA disagreement, something the lead image indicates quite well.
There’s also some video of the protestations:
Oddly enough, while the Guy Fawkes masks are indeed a nice touch, and fitting if you know the story of November 5th. That being said, do the mask-wearing supporters know they are giving financial support, however vicariously, to Time Warner every time one of the Fawkes mask is purchased?
It’s highly likely Time Warner would be considered an ACTA supporter.
