SUBSCRIBE TODAY!
Subscribing entitles a reader to complete stories on all topics released as they happen, special features, confidential documents and access to the complete, searchable story archive online back to 2004.
IP-Watch Briefs

Inside Views

Contribute your views! Submit an Inside Views idea to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch.

We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

Call For Transparency In The Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiation

In this post, three US law professors explain a recent call by over 30 legal scholars for the US Trade Representative to increase transparency for the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement intellectual property chapter, and their response to Ambassador Kirk’s response that he is “strongly offended” by the suggestion that the negotiation is not adequately transparent already.





Latest Comments
  • Congratulations upon re-election;-WHO chief.Priori... »
  • Great article. Ms. Chan may want to read our book ... »

  • For IPW Subscribers
    A guide to Geneva-based public health and intellectual property organisations. Read More >

    Monthly Reporter

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter, published from 2004 to January 2011, is a 16-page monthly selection of the most important, updated stories and features, plus the People and News Briefs columns.

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available in an online archive on the IP-Watch website, available for IP-Watch Subscribers.

    Access the Monthly Reporter Archive >


    EU Copyright Group Seeks Solutions to Digitisation Roadblocks

    Published on 20 April 2007 @ 6:14 pm

    Intellectual Property Watch

    By Dugie Standeford for Intellectual Property Watch

    Problems related to digital preservation, orphan works and out-of-print materials must be resolved if European Commission plans to digitise and make accessible Europe’s cultural heritage are to succeed, copyright experts said in an 18 April report.

    The Digital Libraries project is part of a Commission drive to boost jobs and growth by making Europe the most knowledge-based economy in the world by 2010. Information Society and Media Commissioner Viviane Reding formed the High Level Expert Group on Digital Libraries (HLG) last year to help solve online copyright issues. Members of its copyright subgroup, which published the report, include rights owners and libraries.

    The HLG report provides “practical solutions” to key issues, the document said. Those solutions rely more on voluntary agreements than on regulatory proposals.

    Digital Preservation

    Digitisation may be the only way to ensure that cultural material is available in the future, the report said. Some EU countries permit libraries and other institutions to make a single copy of a work for preservation purposes, but that exception to copyright’s exclusive reproduction right “may prove insufficient” as recording media become technologically obsolete and content must be shifted to other formats. Moreover, audiovisual digital material may be shorter-lived than analogue media, the report said.

    The HLG recommended that where EU states allow an exception for digital copies, and where copies are made solely for preservation, rights-owners should authorise publicly accessible libraries, educational institutions, museums and archives to make more than one copy if necessary to ensure preservation of the work. Successive copying should be permitted if and when technological developments require it, for preservation only, the report said.

    Other recommendations included permitting preservation only for works no longer commercially available in any format; coordinating the various European preservation initiatives at regional and EU level; and allowing copy protection devices in born-digital works deposited in national deposit libraries to be disabled for the libraries’, but not users’, purposes.

    Orphan Works

    Content whose owners cannot be identified or located, is hampering work on large-scale digitisation, the report said. It concluded “unanimously that a solution to the issue of orphan works is desirable, at least for literary and audiovisual works.”

    Non-legislative solutions might include databases dedicated to information on orphan works, embedding better rightsholder data in digital material, and negotiating better contracts between stakeholders. The panel urged the Commission to persuade member states to support contractual arrangements “in a suitable manner, taking into account the role of cultural establishments.”

    Solutions may differ nationally, but they must fulfil several core principles, the report said. These include covering all orphan works on the basis of a common definition, providing guidance on how to perform a diligent search for a work’s rights-owners, and allowing for withdrawal of an orphan work if its owner reappears. Member states’ solutions must be interoperable, and must agree to mutual recognition, the report said.

    The panel reviewed several legislative proposals for determining when the search for the owner of an orphaned work is diligent. It recommended that potential users of such works be required to “conduct a thorough search in good faith.” It also urged the Commission to take a flexible approach to dealing with requirements for searches for orphan works due to the rapid change in information sources and search techniques. Finally, it said any solution should apply to all kinds of works.

    Out-of-Print Content

    The report defined out-of-print works as those not commercially available, as declared by the appropriate rights holders. It recommended a four-prong solution that includes a model licence, establishment of a database of such works, a joint clearance centre and a procedure to clear rights.

    The licence grants libraries a non-exclusive, non-transferable right to digitise a work and make it available to users in closed networks. It grants rights holders the right to payment which they may waive. An author or publisher retains copyright in the work and its digitised version and can revoke the licence at any time. The licensor may also require libraries to provide information on the use of the work to assess its commercial potential, but must reimburse the library’s costs if it withdraws any part of the material and the withdrawn portion represents more than 10 percent of a title.

    The licence was specifically developed to take into account libraries’ needs and publishers’ requirements, said Olav Stokkmo, secretary-general of the International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organisations, a member of the copyright subgroup. It will likely be applicable to other sectors as well, including the audiovisual industry, he said.

    Group members considered the model licence the most complicated part of their work, Stokkmo said. Now they hope the Commission, international federations and other associations will publicize it on their websites, so that it can be used as publishers and libraries negotiate digital copy agreements.

    The approach favoured by the copyright subgroup “based on widespread agreements between libraries and rights holders looks promising if they manage to make the user interests a priority,” Reding said.

    Dugie Standeford may be reached at info@ip-watch.ch.

     


    Leave a Reply

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

    By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

    2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

    3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

    4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

    5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

    6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

    7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

    8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

    9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.