Proposed WIPO Treaty for Improved Access for Blind, Visually Impaired, and Other Reading Disabled Persons

Although the world’s attention has on several occasions been turned to the plight of the vision impaired, there has been no international copyright instrument that specifically provides for limitations or exceptions to copyright for their benefit. Such an instrument becomes imperative amidst the grow- ing number of persons in this category and the need to facilitate their access to information that will give them the opportunity to participate in public affairs. Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay, and Mexico (Brazilian group) seek to fill this gap by submitting to the WIPO’s Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights a draft treaty for Improved Access for Blind, Visually Impaired and Other Reading Disabled Persons. How- ever, this proposal has generated a lot of reactions, resulting in three other such proposals being submit- ted to WIPO for deliberations. Copyright owners have also opposed the treaty. Amidst these reactions, this work seeks to analyze the compatibility of the Brazilian group’s proposal with the TRIPS three-step test, which has enjoyed a great deal of international recognition since its inclusion in the Berne Convention. It also seeks to find its compatibility with EU copyright law as harmonized in the Directive 2001/29/EC. In the end, we conclude that the proposed treaty is in harmony with the three-step test, and though it has some variations from the EU Copyright Directive, it nonetheless shares some underlying objectives with the Directive and does not radically depart from what prevails in several EU member states.

The Benefits of Multilingualism for Statutory and Constitutional Interpretation in South Africa

Taking the South African experience as an example, this article considers the interpretive benefits to be reaped from having access to bi- and multilingual versions of a statutory text. The discussion takes place against the backdrop of a history of statutory bi- and multilingualism in the said jurisdiction as well as, at present, constitutional guarantees of language rights and the “parity of esteem” of eleven official languages. It is argued that, if invoked with due discretion and in a non-rigid way, statutory multilingualism can be a boon to statutory and constitutional interpretation. The South African courts – whose traditional approach to statutory inter-pretation has tended to be literalist, formalistic and formulaic – are, generally speaking, to be commended for their supple use of bilingualism as an aid to interpretation over the years. The advent of constitutional multilingualism and the (potential) availability of statutory texts (and the Constitution) in more than two languages, have moreover created conditions conducive to the further development and refinement of reliance on multilingualism in statutory and constitutional interpretation – certain challenges notwithstanding.