As CI KTN’s recent Beacon Project illustrated, technology is driving change in the creative industries on a scale unthinkable when the regulations governing copyright were last amended.
Currencies are a hot topic at present, and copyright has been characterised as the “currency of the creative economy”. Important changes to copyright law are currently subject to consultation, in an exercise which runs until 21 March.
To help creative businesses decide whether and how to respond to these proposals, CI KTN will be generating a series of articles over the next fortnight. These will look at key elements of the proposed changes, accompanied by industry perspectives on them. This first article is an introduction to put these developments into perspective.
Copyright changes: the context
These proposals follow recommendations made in the 2011 Hargreaves Review and subsequently accepted by Government. The Review set out a number of measures which it is believed will make IP law better suited to the digital age.
Two workstreams concern copyright law, and therefore have special relevance for the creative industries:
- The potential establishment of a Digital Copyright Exchange or DCE, intended to make it simpler to license digital works legally. This is undergoing two phases of scrutiny, the first of which has recently closed. You can read CI KTN’s submission, featuring evidence drawn from its 2011 Beacon Project on IP and Open Source.
- The introduction of a number of copyright “exceptions” which are already permitted by European IP law, but which the UK has not brought into statute in the past.
This second workstream is the one currently subject to a consultation exercise, which is being managed by the Intellectual Property Office (IPO).
Scope of the changes
The IPO website summarises the scope of this exercise as follows:
The consultation covers the rules on copying for educational uses, for people with disabilities, for quotation and reporting current events, for preservation by libraries and archives, for research and private study, for text mining for research, for parody, and for public administration. It proposes protecting all those users’ rights from being removed by contracts. It also proposes a solution to the problem of orphan works, and proposes regulation of copyright Collecting Societies.
CI KTN has singled out the following eight areas (each hyperlinked to the accompanying blog post in the series) where it believes members may have strong and divergent views, each of which will form the basis for a separate article.
i) Orphan works (those without an identified copyright owner). Measures are being considered to allow easier access to works believed to be orphan, accompanied by steps to protect legitimate rights holders, including precautions to prevent works being intentionally orphaned.
ii) Extended collective licensing It is proposed that authorised societies should be enabled to collect copyright licensing incomes on behalf of any organisation or person in their sector who has not opted out of the collecting mechanism. This amends an established principle that only a rights owner can provide consent to usage, or explicitly delegate this power.
iii) Codes of conduct Since collecting societies will be provided with quasi-monopolistic powers under the above proposal, precautions are needed to ensure that their operation is clear and transparent. While self-regulation is preferred, statutory powers to intervene are likely to be sought.
iv) Limited private copying This aims to bring popular practice within the law. It is defined as being ‘non-commercial’ and is intended to be format and technology neutral. It is suggested that the costs of this change should be factored into the price of the work at the point of sale.
v) Preservation and archiving These changes are aimed at creating a level playing field across different media formats (it will effectively extend the same rights to those copying audio-visual materials and sound recordings as already exist for books).
vi) ‘Fair dealing’ extension Permission already exists to reproduce extracts from copyright material without the need for permission, for the purposes of research, private study, criticism and review. At present this only applies to specified media, and the intention is to broaden it to include audio/visual and broadcast media.
vii) Text and data mining. At present whole works cannot be scanned, for instance to conduct scientific research, unless a specific licence to do so is provided. This is held by some to be a barrier to innovation. Initially changes would be restricted to non-commercial uses, but there are suggestions this exception should be broadened.
viii) Parody and pastiche is at present not adequately covered by ‘fair dealing’. This is seen as a freedom of speech issue, though it is also acknowledged that rights owners should be able to protect the integrity of their original work.
The consultation document, which sets out the Government’s proposals in detail over 171 pages, can be found on the IPO website here. There is also a separate, formal response form which contains the 114 questions posed by the consultation document, which can be found here. The IPO has made it clear that it welcomes responses which are limited to just a few points of particular interest, as well as those wishing to comment on all aspects.
In order to help interested parties to understand the scope and implications of the proposed changes, IPO has also organised a number of regional engagement events. These include one on 29 February at Cardiff City Stadium, one on 8 March at Leeds United Conference and Events, and one on 9 March at Birmingham Science Park. Places are limited at these events, but you can request a ticket via the link currently shown on the IPO’s home page.
The closing date for responses is 21 March 2012, following which the Government will consider the best way forward. Responses should either be sent via e-mail to email@example.com or posted to David Burgess at the IPO’s London office, details of which are provided in the documentation.