AAP Hails WIPO Bills; Libraries, Consumer Groups Voice Opposition
Calvin Reid -- 9/22/97
In the face of persistent opposition from a coalition of library, educational and nonprofit consumer groups, representatives of the Association of American Publishers and other American creative industries appeared before a congressional subcommittee in support of legislation to implement the international copyright treaties negotiated late last year at the World Intellectual Property Organization's (WIPO) contentious meeting in Geneva.
Following appearances by singer Johnny Cash and the film industry's Jack Valenti, Allan R. Adler, AAP's v-p for legal and government affairs, testified last Wednesday before the house subcommittee on the courts and intellectual property, calling for both swift passage of H.R. 2281, the legislation required to implement the treaties, and ratification. The WIPO treaties -- signed by 96 nations last December -- represent the first revision in 20 years of the Berne Convention, which governs international copyright, and will update its protections for books, music, films, software and TV for distribution over the Internet.
Currently, Congress is holding hearings on both H.R. 2281, the WIPO implementation legislation supported by publishers and copyright owners, and H.R. 2180 -- which AAP implacably opposes -- legislation that would limit online copyright liability for online and Internet service providers and other telecommunications networks.
Adler's testimony emphasized the importance of the Internet as the next publishing frontier for both new digitized products and their global distribution. "Content will drive the future of the Internet," said Adler. But the Internet is also a perfect environment for copyright piracy. Adler emphasized the need for "adequate safeguards" with the development of "technological protection," and "appropriate business practices" by publishers and "the continuing viability of copyright law," to be ensured through the ratification of the WIPO treaties.
But Adler also took aim at the continued and well-organized opposition to implementation legislation for what he called "baseless criticism and extraneous proposals." His criticism was directed at the Digital Future Coalition, a group of 38 libraries, educational organizations, nonprofit consumer groups and computer trade associations that includes organizations like the American Library Association, the National Education Association and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Adam Eisgrau, legislative counsel for ALA, told PW the DFC opposes the implementation legislation, not the treaties themselves, which they support. "National laws sometimes must be changed to implement treaties," Eisgrau explained, but the DFC believes the proposed legislation g s beyond "what is needed to keep U.S. copyright law balanced and up to date."
The DFC, Eisgrau told PW, specifically objects to sections 1201 and 1202 of the proposed legislation, provisions that would ban devices to circumvent copyright protection. In addition, according to the DFC, these provisions would threaten individuals who alter copyright protections or management information with criminal penalties, even if the alterations, as happens in software development, are not intended to criminally infringe, but to develop new products. "There is good circumvention and bad circumvention," said Eisgrau. The DFC also expresses qualified support of the hotly disputed proposals for online copyright-liability limits in H.R. 2180, not only for OSPs and ISPs, but for libraries and schools, which the DFC claims may be liable if they provide public access to the Internet.
The DFC also maintains that implementing legislation should clearly define digital equivalents for Fair Use; first sale (the ability to freely dispose of a personal, legally acquired copy); library archiving activities; and aspects of the uniform commercial code. Indeed, the DFC believes that any implementation legislation should include all these issues, before WIPO ratification can take place. To that effect, the DFC praised a bill just introduced by Sen. Jon Ashcroft (R.-Miss.), the Digital Copyright Clarification and Technology Act of 1997, which it called a "crucial step" toward balancing the interests of educators and copyright owners.
AAP Dismisses DFC Criticism
Adler testified that section 1201 d s not ban any device that could "conceivably" circumvent copyright protections, "only devices that are intended" to circumvent them. He noted that Fair Use "is a well-established part of our copyright law" and that H.R. 2281 would leave fair use “undisturbed." He dismissed concerns that anticircumvention provisions would stifle legitimate software innovation and emphasized that those provisions would encourage investment in copyright management systems and help secure individual privacy concerns. Adler noted that the provisions would not "overrule" legal precedents governing home taping of freely available material and noted that the legal system is capable of distinguishing "legitimate research claims" of software developers and "post hoc rationalizations of illicit conduct." Adler dismissed the remainder of the DFC's criticisms as a "wish list." Pat Schr der, president and CEO of AAP, called the implementing legislation “the most important piece of business to come before Congress this year....Publishers need to let Congress know that the treaties must be ratified quickly."
Back To News
---> |
