Digital Right Management (DRM) and Library Copyright Policy

The purpose of this paper is to introduce Digital Rights Management (DRM) and its implications for content producers, consumers, and libraries. Simply stated, DRM is a technology that allows copyright owners to regulate and manage their content when it is disseminated in a digital format, and it is the reason why some patrons cannot access some of the downloadable digital content provided by libraries. In the first part of this paper, we provide a short introduction to DRM by outlining the entities, the various technologies used as well as usage restrictions that come with DRM. In the second part of the paper are discussed the alternatives for the libraries, using DRM as a tool for library copyright policy and the main documents, which present the position of library organizations towards information legislation.

Where the bloody hell does parody fit in Australian copyright law?

This article examines the role of the recently introduced fair dealing exception for the purposes of parody and satire in Australian copyright law. Parody and satire, while central to Australian expression, pose a substantial challenge for copyright policy. The law is asked to strike a delicate balance between an author’s right to exploit their work, the interests of the public in stimulating free speech and critical discussion, the rights of artists who rely on existing material in creating their own expression, and the rights of all artists in their reputation and the integrity of their works. This article highlights the difficulty parodists and satirists have historically faced in Australia and examines the potential of the new fair dealing exceptions to relieve this difficulty. This article concludes that the new exceptions have the potential, if read broadly, not only to bridge the gap between humorous and non-humorous criticism, but also to allow for the use of copyright material to critique figures other than the copyright owner or author, extending to society generally. This article will argue that the new exceptions should be read broadly to further this important policy goal while also being limited in their application so as to prevent mere substitutable uses of copyright material. To achieve these twin goals, I suggest that the primary indication of fairness of an unlicensed parody should be whether or not it adds significant new expression so as not to be substitutable for the original work.

Copyright enforcement in the networked society : guiding principles for protecting copyright

This paper argues that any future copyright policy should be proportional and flexible and be developed from a clear and evidence-based approach. An approach is required that carefully balances the incentives and rewards provided to economic rights holders against fundamental rights of privacy, self-expression, due process and the user rights embodied in copyright law to protect access, learning, critique, and reuse. This paper also suggests that while adequate enforcement measures are certainly part of a solution to a well functioning lawful, enforcement alone can never solve the root cause of unlawful file-sharing, since it utterly fails to address supply-side market barriers. Focus on enforcement measures alone continues to leave out a legitimate but un-served market demand, susceptible to unlawful alternatives. A competitive and consumer friendly digital content market and an appropriate legal framework to enable easy lawful access to digital content are essential preconditions for the creation of a culture of lawful, rather than unlawful, consumption.

Access, progress, and fairness : rethinking exclusivity in copyright

This article provides a detailed critique of the incentives-access binary in copyright discourse. Mainstream copyright theory generally accepts that copyright is a balance between providing incentives to authors to invest in the production of cultural works and enhancing the dissemination of those works to the public. This Article argues that dominant copyright theory obscures the possibility of developing a model of copyright that is able to support authors without necessarily limiting access to creative works. The abundance that the Internet allows suggests that increasing access to cultural works to enhance learning, sharing, and creative play should be a fundamental goal of copyright policy. This Article examines models of supporting and coordinating cultural production without exclusivity, including crowdfunding, tips, levies, restitution, and service-based models. In their current forms, each of these models fails to provide a cohesive and convincing vision of the two main functions of copyright: instrumentally (how cultural production can be funded) and fairness (how authors can be adequately rewarded). This article provides three avenues for future research to investigate the viability of alternate copyright models: (1) a better theory of fairness in copyright rewards; (2) more empirical study of commons models of cultural production; and (3) a critical examination of the noneconomic harm limiting function that exclusivity in copyright provides.

Digital Copyright Exchange Feasibility Study : Response to the Hooper Consultation from the Big Innovation Centre

In this submission, we provide evidence for our view that copyright policy in the UK must encourage new digital business models which meet the changing needs of consumers and foster innovation in the UK both within, and beyond, the creative industries. We illustrate our arguments using evidence from the music industry. However, we believe that our key points on the relationship between the copyright system and innovative digital business models apply across the UK creative industries.

Shine: Copyright law and film

This article looks at the various experiences of the film-makers involved in Shine in relation to copyright policy and litigation. Part 1 considers the involvement of Jan Sardi in the campaign to get screenwriters included in the moral rights regime in the film industry. Part 2 recounts the efforts of Scott Hicks to push for directors to acquire royalties under the retransmission scheme in the Copyright Amendment (Digital Agenda) Act 2000 (Cth). Part 3 discusses the contractual dispute between independent producer Jane Scott and the distributor over the gross receipts to the film Shine. Part 4 explores the disputes over the use of Sergei Rachmaninov's music in the film Shine.

Creating an Innovation Exception? Copyright Law as the Infrastructure for Innovation

Innovation is clearly essential for economic growth, cultural development and personal autonomy. Yet the relationship between innovation and copyright law in Australia is uncertain and perhaps overly restrictive. After the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement Australia now has a copyright regime that can broadly be
described as a lock up and lock out scheme. Whilst the Australian Government has paid lip service to innovation the Australian Copyright Act, which provides the essential legal infrastructure for innovation, now privileges the rights of owners over the interests of the public. In particular, the Copyright Act neglects to create a specific exception for technology innovation. If there is to be some coherence in Australia
thinking with regards to innovation and copyright policy it is crucial that such an exception be created. Arguably, it is possible that such an exception can withstand the scrutiny of the three step test. At present the only ‘exception’ that can be said to exist is in the form of the limits of the authorisation liability provisions or the ISP safe harbour scheme. Australian copyright law needs something more substantial than that
and needs for there to be a clear hierarchy between the exceptions and the liability provisions.

BISA copyright review: Brazil

This paper is part of the Brazilian branch of the BISA Copyright Review, a research project focused on the intersection of copyright and public interest in Brazil, India and South Africa, funded by the Ford Foundation. The Brazilian contribution is based on interviews with some of the key actors involved with the process of copyright reform initiated by the Brazilian Ministry of Culture in 2007, and provides a thorough picture of the Brazilian copyright policy scenario as of 2008.

Archives and Copyright: Risk and Reform

This paper considers the place of the archive sector within the copyright regime, and how copyright impacts upon the preservation, access to, and use of archival holdings. It begins with a critical assessment of the current parameters of the UK copyright regime as it applies to the work of archivists, including recommendations for reform that have followed in the wake of the Gowers Review of Intellectual Property (2006-2010), the Hargreaves Review of Intellectual Property and Growth (2010-2011), the Consultation on Copyright (2011-12), as well as the government’s response thereto: Modernising Copyright (2012). It considers the various problems the copyright regime presents for archives undertaking mass digitisation projects as well as recent European and UK initiatives in this domain. It argues that the UK copyright regime, even when read in conjunction with current national and regional recommendations for reform, falls short of delivering a legal framework that would enable archivists to realise the full potential that comprehensive, universal online access to the country’s archival holdings would contribute to local and national democracy and accountability, to education, learning, and culture, and to the sense of identity and place for local people, communities and organisations. Ultimately, a case is made for the differential treatment of archives within the copyright regime – different, that is, from libraries and other related institutions operating within the cultural sector. The paper concludes with a policy recommendation that would greatly enhance the ability of archives to provide online access to their holdings, while at the same time safeguarding the economic interests of the authors and owners of copyright-protected work.

Rethinking Copyright: History, Theory, Language

This book provides the reader with a critical insight into the history and theory of copyright within contemporary legal and cultural discourse. It exposes as myth the orthodox history of the development of copyright law in eighteenth-century Britain and explores the way in which that myth became entrenched throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. To this historical analysis are added two theoretical approaches to copyright not otherwise found in mainstream contemporary texts. Rethinking Copyright introduces the reader to copyright through the prism of the public domain before considering how best to locate copyright within the parameters of traditional property discourse. Underpinning these various historical and theoretical strands, the book explores the constitutive power of legal writing and the place of rhetoric in framing and determining contemporary copyright policy and discourse.

On the Origin of the Right to Copy: Charting the Movement of Copyright Law in Eighteenth Century Britain (1695-1775)

Taking as its point of departure the lapse of the 1662 Licensing Act in 1695, this book examines the lead up to the passage of the Statute of Anne 1710 and charts the movement of copyright law throughout the eighteenth century, culminating in the House of Lords decision in Donaldson v Becket (1774). The established reading of copyright's development throughout this period, from the 1710 Act to the pronouncement in Donaldson, is that it was transformed from a publisher's right to an author's right; that is, legislation initially designed to regulate the marketplace of the bookseller and publisher evolved into an instrument that functioned to recognise the proprietary inevitability of an author's intellectual labour. The historical narrative which unfolds within this book presents a challenge to that accepted orthodoxy. The traditional analysis of the development of copyright in eighteenth-century Britain is revealed to exhibit the character of long-standing myth, and the centrality of the modern proprietary author as the raison d'etre of the modern copyright regime is displaced.

Copyright, Licences, and Statutory Fraud

In this article we explore the interplay between the law of copyright, contract, and statutory fraud within the digital environment, and in particular with respect to the business of commercial image licensing within the UK.

What is the Point of Copyright History?:Reflections on Copyright at Common law in 1774 by H. Tomás Gómez-Arostegui

Copyright history has long been a subject of intense and contested enquiry. Historical narratives about the early development of copyright were first prominently mobilised in eighteenth century British legal discourse, during the so-called Battle of the Booksellers between Scottish and London publishers. The two landmark copyright decisions of that time – Millar v. Taylor (1769) and Donaldson v. Becket (1774) – continue to provoke debate today. The orthodox reading of Millar and Donaldson presents copyright as a natural proprietary right at common law inherent in authors. Revisionist accounts dispute that traditional analysis. These conflicting perspectives have, once again, become the subject of critical scrutiny with the publication of Copyright at Common Law in 1774 by Prof Tomas Gomez-Arostegui in 2014, in the Connecticut Law Review ((2014) 47 Conn. L. Rev. 1) and as a CREATe Working Paper (No. 2014/16, 3 November 2014).

Taking Prof Gomez-Arostegui’s extraordinary work in this area as a point of departure, Dr Elena Cooper and Professor Ronan Deazley (then both academics at CREATe) organised an event, held at the University of Glasgow on 26th and 27th March 2015, to consider the interplay between copyright history and contemporary copyright policy. Is Donaldson still relevant, and, if so, why? What justificatory goals are served by historical investigation, and what might be learned from the history of the history of copyright? Does the study of copyright history still have any currency within an evidence-based policy context that is increasingly preoccupied with economic impact analysis?

This paper provides a lasting record of these discussions, including an editorial introduction, written comments by each of the panelists and Prof. Gomez-Arostegui and an edited transcript of the Symposium debate.

Copyright and Parody:Taking Backward the Gowers Review

In 2006 the Gowers Review of Intellectual Property made a series of recommendations for reforming the intellectual property regime to better serve the interests of both consumers and industry. Among the proposed recommendations was that an exception for parody be introduced within the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988. In January 2008 the Intellectual Property Office (the IPO) launched the first part of a two-stage consultation process on exceptions to copyright. As part of that consultation process, the IPO proposed a ‘fair dealing style exception’ for parody, and sought views on whether a new exception should be introduced as well as what form it might take. In December 2009 the IPO launched the second stage of this consultation process. The second consultation document rejected the case for a new parody exception. This article considers the place of parody within the copyright regime and the objections levelled against the introduction of an exception set out within the IPO's second consultation document. It invites the IPO to reconsider its decision not to recommend the introduction of a specific exception for parody within the UK.

Photography, copyright, and the South Kensington experiment

Reviews the development of UK copyright law in the 19th century concerning photographs of works of art in public collections. Discusses the project at South Kensington Museum to sell photographs of works of art to the public at cost price, and the introduction of copyright protection for original photographs under the Fine Arts Copyright Act 1862. Considers the parliamentary debates on whether photography was worthy of copyright protection. Examines whether lessons should be learned now that digital technology offers the opportunity to improve public access to works of art.