I’m delighted that lots of people are engaging with the consultation process on the Copyright Review Committee’s Consultation Paper (update: you can download a pdf of the Paper here (via DJEI) or here (from this site)). First, the Committee now has a dedicated website and it will be directly linked from the Department’s homepage until the Review process is complete. The Committee’s site provides various ways to participate in the consultation process. As well as by post and email, the Committee has prepared an online questionnaire to reply to the questions they pose in the Consultation Paper.

Second, taking up an invitation from the Minister of State with responsibility for Research and Innovation at the Department of Enterprise, Jobs and Innovation, Seán Sherlock TD, the Irish Internet Association is also providing an online mechanism to facilitate internet stakeholders who wish to respond to the Paper. This will collate the views of its members and of the members of the Internet Service Providers Association of Ireland, and will gather the views of other members of the online community who wish to provide feedback in this way.

Third, Bernie Goldbach and David Brophy have written blogposts listing all of the questions from the Paper, making them very easily accessible indeed (update: I’ve also got around to listing them on this blog as well). And Joe Drumgoole has gone further, providing various web-friendly versions of the Paper.

Fourth, along with the IIA/ISPAI, various other communities are also looking for feedback (eg, libraries, photographers); and poethead has written what seems to me to be the first blogpost actually engaging with an issue in the Paper.

Announcing the Committee’s online questionnaire, and welcoming the the IIA’s survey, the Minister said that he would “also welcome any similar initiatives undertaken by other online representative groups. The wider the consultation on the Committee’s work is, the better the outcome will be”. I agree. As I say in the title to this post, the more, the merrier. Which-ever mechanism you choose, please make your submission before close of business on Friday 13 April 2012 Thursday 31 May 2012.

Finally, there will be a public meeting from 10:00am until 12:00 noon, on Saturday 24 March 2012, in the Robert Emmet Lecture Theatre, Room 2037 Arts Block (map here), Trinity College Dublin. Attendance is free and open to anyone interested in the work of the Committee, but registration is necessary. To make a written submission, or to register for the public meeting, please email the Review, or write to Copyright Review, Room 517, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Kildare Street, Dublin 2.

Chapter 4 of the Copyright Review Committee’s Consultation Paper considers the position of rights-holders in copyright law in general, and how such rights-holders contribute to the process of innovation in particular (update: you can download a pdf of the Paper here (via DJEI) or here (from this site)). The intersection between copyright and innovation is clear in the case of rights-holders, who benefit from the rights conferred by copyright law in two main ways: they can commercially exploit their works, and they protect the artistic integrity of their works. The central premise from which copyright law has developed is that it is the potential reward provided by copyright that encourages the art, movie, music, programming and writing. In that sense, copyright law fosters and protects innovation. Moreover, copyright provides rights-holders legal protection for the artistic integrity of their works. Nevertheless, both of these justifications look not only to the rights-holder, but also to the public benefit of the work: the State affords copyright protection to rights-holders because a diverse range of work is for the public benefit or the common good; and the appropriate reward afforded to the rights-holder is not an end in itself, but rather the means to this diversity, competition and innovation.

This is the background against which the Paper examines some of the specific submissions which touched upon the position of rights-holders. Read the rest of this entry »

One of the main issues on which the Copyright Review Committee invites submissions is whether there ought to be a Copyright Council of Ireland (the Council). The model which is proposed for discussion in the Consultation Paper would be an independent self-funding organisation, created by the Irish copyright community, recognised by the Minister, and based on principal objects that ensure the protection of copyright and the general public interest as well as encouraging innovation (update: you can download a pdf of the Paper here (via DJEI) or here (from this site)).

The copyright communities in many other countries – such as Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom – have established copyright councils. The functions of these copyright councils are very similar, representing the interests of their members, principally rights-holders and collecting societies. However, the model in the Paper goes considerably further, with a broadly-based subscribing membership, so that every interested member of the Irish copyright community (such as all of the various categories of person and organisation which made submissions to the Review) could be subscribing members of the Council if they wish to be. Such a body has the potential to be an important resource for the Irish copyright community and the general public, especially if it undertakes processes of public education on copyright, recommends standards of best practice, and gathers evidence to support the process of ongoing copyright reform. At the end of the chapter, an early draft is provided of the kind of legislative provisions which might be necessary to establish such a Council (modelled on the statutory provisions which underpin the Press Council).

Read the rest of this entry »

The main focus of the Terms of Reference of the Copyright Review Committee is upon the barriers to innovation, if any, created by Irish copyright law; and this was reflected in the submissions which the Committee received (update: you can download a pdf of the Paper here (via DJEI) or here (from this site)). After an introductory chapter 1, chapter 2 of the Copyright Review Committee’s Consultation Paper (published yesterday) sets out what the Committee understood by innovation (section 2.2), it briefly outlined some salient features of Irish copyright law (section 2.3), and the points in the previous two sections were applied to a classification of the submissions received (section 2.4).

In the Paper, the Committee construe “innovation” and its connections with copyright fairly broadly. Whilst the Committee has regard to innovation, creativity, ingenuity, renewal and transformation in all of their forms – artistic, cultural, educational and social, as well as economic – nevertheless, much public policy is now being driven by “innovation” in the sense of the development of new businesses, products and technologies. For example, the Organisation of Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) understands the process of innovation (pdf)

as the implementation of a new or significantly improved product (good or service), or process, a new marketing method, or a new organisational method in business practices, work-place organisation or external relations … [which must therefore] by definition, contain a degree of novelty.

There are great competitive advantages to be gained if the basic conditions of the Irish innovation ecosystem are well-adapted and conducive to sustaining a thriving knowledge economy. Copyright law is one of the pressures that will shape some of the outcomes of the process of technological innovation. The aim of the Review is to determine whether current Irish copyright law strikes that balance appropriately. Read the rest of this entry »

In the press release announcing the publication of the Copyright Review Committee Consultation Paper mentioned in my previous post (and which I hope will be discussed on twitter at the hashtag #CRC12), the Minister also announced the signing into law of the European Union (Copyright and Related Rights) Regulations 2012 (SI No 59 of 2012). This Statutory Instrument (SI) relates to the availability of injunctions by rights-holders against intermediaries to prevent copyright infringement by the intermediaries’ customers (which has the twitter hashtag #sopaIreland). I cannot stress enough that this issue is separate and distinct from the work of the Committee, and is not dealt with in the Paper. In other words, as the title to this post says, #CRC12 is not #sopaireland. Much has been written already about the SI when it was in draft form; and doubtless more will be said now that it has been brought into force. However, it was not within the remit of the Committee, and I hope the parallel publication of the SI and the Paper does not detract from the issues canvassed in our Paper (update: you can download a pdf of the Paper here (via DJEI) or here (from this site)).

In our Final Report, we hope to be able to provide draft heads of a Copyright and Related Rights (Innovation) (Amendment) Bill, 2012, (the Bill) to implement our recommendations. Moreover, one of the questions which we pose in the Paper is whether all of the amendments to the Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000 (also here) which are still in force should be consolidated into that proposed Bill. If that is done, then the SI would be incorporated into the Bill, and there would be scope at that stage to revisit the issue. In particular, if there were matters that could not be addressed in the SI, due to the relatively limited scope allowed to SIs in amending principal Acts for EU reasons, there would be no reason why these matters could not be discussed for inclusion in that Bill.

That, however, will be a matter for the Minister in due course. In the meantime, please don’t confuse the SI with the Consultation Paper. If you are interested in that, please participate in the next round of submissions. These should be received by close of business on Friday 13 April 2012 Thursday 31 May 2012. There will also be a public meeting from 10:00am until 12:00 noon, on Saturday 24 March 2012, in the Robert Emmet Lecture Theatre, Room 2037 Arts Block (map here), Trinity College Dublin. Attendance is free and open to anyone interested in the work of the Committee, but registration is necessary. To make a submission, or to register for the public meeting, please email the Review.

Update: you may also make a submission via the Committee’s online questionnaire, or via any of the other online submission mechanisms being made available by many interested parties.

As regular readers of this blog will know, last Summer, to maximise the potential of digital industry in Ireland, the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Richard Bruton TD, set up the Copyright Review Committee to identify any areas of Irish copyright legislation that might create barriers to innovation and to make recommendations to resolve any problems identified. Our Consultation Paper has just been published on the the Department’s website (and it’s also available for download here (pdf)). Welcoming the Paper, the Minister of State with responsibility for Research and Innovation at the Department of Enterprise, Jobs and Innovation, Seán Sherlock TD, said

I am committed to reviewing and updating the Copyright legislation currently in place in order to strike the correct balance between encouraging innovation and protecting creativity. This paper has been prepared by the Copyright Review Committee in response to submissions received and public engagement. I urge all interested parties, including information providers and ISPs, innovators, rights holders, consumers and end-users, to study it carefully and engage in a constructive debate on all the issues.

As to what is in the Paper, the wordle above gives a good sense of the frequency with which various words are used in it. The largest words above, and thus the most frequently used in the Paper, are: copyright, section, work, innovation, submissions, use. As the frequency of “submission” demonstrates, the Paper is submission-led; it explores possible outcomes; and it poses 86 specific questions on which further responses are sought. Read the rest of this entry »

From last Friday’s Irish Times (with added links):

Review aims to open up new digital creative space

The Copyright Review Committee is trying to take on board as many viewpoints as possible, writes Karlin Lillington.

… Several successive governments have highlighted digital businesses as an area for major growth in the economy. It’s a sector heavily wooed by IDA Ireland, and also promoted by Enterprise Ireland. But for years, this sector has been critical of Irish copyright law … However, from big multinationals such as Google on down to small indigenous start-ups and individual content creators such as musicians and artists, digital innovators think there’s plenty of room for improvement and argue that this would not only unleash greater national creativity, but would also help drive expansion in the economy. New industries would see Ireland as a good legal environment in which to do business, they say. …

The submissions reflect the interests and concerns of the whole panoply of players across many digital industries … There are submissions from the rights holders, who were concerned to protect copyright; from the intermediaries – the people like Google who are the gateways to the internet – and from the users, the SMEs and entrepreneurs and those trying to do interesting, creative things and who want to consider new business methods, new businesses, and new applications. … The aim of the committee is to look at all of those interests and try to encourage digital innovation. …

Yesterday morning, I chaired a public meeting of the Copyright Review Committee (#CRC11). The Committee was set up in May to identify solutions for any aspects of the current copyright legislation that create barriers to innovation, and in particular to consider whether a US-style ‘fair use’ doctrine to see if it would be appropriate in an Irish or EU context. Today, I read a provocative criticism of the event by photographer Dominic Lee:

© Copyright Act Review by Dominic Lee

… While this was a “Review”, it quickly became clear to me that the committee’s agenda is to attempt to introduce “Fair Use” to the Copyright Act 2000. However, the term “Don’t Want to Pay” is more appropriate in each and every aspect of those in favour of this change.

… Media publications would never dream of publishing a painting by Graham Knuttel or an extract from a Maeve Binchy book without asking their permission first but many of them have no problem riding rough-shot over Photographers work because they know there is a very slim chance that we could afford to sue for breach of Copyright. … Photographers make a living by selling photographs and deserve to be treated with the same respect as musicians, artists, and writers. There is great advertising value to be gained by using our images on the www but the Copyright Law must protect us from those who wish to make a living at our expense. Fair Use is not Fair Play.

From a more general perspective, David Brophy (Partner, FRKelly, Dublin) provided an immediate and excellent summary of the event on the 1709 Blog: Read the rest of this entry »