Today, the World Intellectual Property Organization, the UN's copyright/patent/trademark body, hosted a "Information Meeting on Educational Content and Copyright in the Digital Age" -- a meeting where representatives of libraries, Creative Commons, publishers, and science organizations vied to convince representatives from WIPO's 182 member national governments about the need for laws that balance the rights of creators and educational users of copyrighted works. Representatives from the governments of Chile and Canada gave inspirational presentations about the education-friendly copyright exception proposals currently being considered in their national legislatures.

The content and timing of this meeting is no coincidence. It took place the day before the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights reconvenes for the first time in over a year. At the top of its agenda are two important items: (1) the proposed WIPO Broadcasting/ Webcasting Treaty, and (2) the Chilean government's proposal for mandatory international copyright exceptions for libraries and archives, educational uses, and the disabled.

Why are exceptions so important? Because the parts of the international copyright bargain that benefit rightsholders are "harmonized" and mandatory, while the protections for the rest of us (called "exceptions and limitations" by the lawyers) are not. This leaves libraries, distance educators, students, the disabled and others seeking access, with patchwork and discretionary protection. It means that developing countries, whose citizens could most benefit from reasonable exceptions, often do not have the sorts of protections for users that developed countries have. What might be lawful use by a library or teacher in one country may be infringement in another. As one of the national delegates eloquently noted today, this is not just about enforcement, but how to create a copyright system that society can live with.

These are truly international problems in need of an international solution. It would be a welcome first step for WIPO members to explore ways to develop a harmonized set of international exceptions that protect students, educators, libraries and archives, and the disabled.

Read the notes after the jump to hear what the experts said today.

Blogging WIPO: Information Meeting on Educational Content and Copyright in the
Digital Age

Notes of the World Intellectual Property Organization's Information Meeting on Educational Content and Copyright in the
Digital Age

World Intellectual Property Organization, Geneva

11/21/05

Impressionistic notes by:

Thiru Balasubramaniam, Consumer Project on Technology
(thiru (at) cptech.org)

Cory Doctorow, Electronic Frontier Foundation (cory (at) eff.org)

Eddan Katz, Information Society Project at Yale Law School
(eddan.katz (at) yale.edu)

Rufus Pollock, Open Knowledge Forum Network (rufus (at) okfn.org)

Public-domain dedication:

On November 23, 2005, Cory Doctorow, Thuru Balasubramianiam, Rufus
Pollock and Eddan Katz (The Authors) dedicated to the public
domain the work "Notes of the World Intellectual Property
Organization's Information Meeting on Educational Content and
Copyright in the Digital Age."

Before making the dedication, the Authors represented that they
owned all copyrights in the work. By making the dedication, the
Authors made an overt act of relinquishment in perpetuity of all
present and future rights under copyright law, whether vested or
contingent, in "Notes of the World Intellectual Property
Organization's Information Meeting on Educational Content and
Copyright in the Digital Age."

The Authors understand that such relinquishment of all rights
includes the relinquishment of all rights to enforce (by lawsuit
or otherwise) those copyrights in the Work.

The Authors recognize that, once placed in the public domain,
"Notes of the World Intellectual Property Organization's
Information Meeting on Educational Content and Copyright in the
Digital Age" may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted,
used, modified, built upon, or otherwise exploited by anyone for
any purpose, commercial or non-commercial, and in any way,
including by methods that have not yet been invented or
conceived.

--

Chair: Thank you all for coming. We're carrying this over from
the last meeting where we decided to address these issues.

--

First speaker, Julien Hofman, Commonwealth of Learning, Department of Commercial Law, University
of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. Has established a digital research repository on
this subject. [[There is a hand-out from Prof Hofman available to
delegates as well]]

Problem recently discovered by Commonwealth of Learning. Had been
using distance learning since 1998.

Most of the information needed for distance ed is covered by
copyright. They've drafted a joint letter to the ministers of
education in all the commonwealth countries to stress the need for
educatiofriendly exceptions and limitations

Drafted 2 page statement, available on WIPO website. reflects
need to have exceptions and limitations proper for education and
distance learning.

I want to tell you about my experience dealing with publishers
on behalf of the tertiary education system in South Africa. Maybe
this stuff shouldn't be in writing, but what the heck, we're all
friends.

I've spent the past several years trying to negotiate with
publishers for uses. We also have access to fair dealing, under
the usual terms, "a reasonable portion," "no impact on commercial
use." But no one knows what this means and no one knows what's
reasonable. Only the courts know and litigation is too expensive.

One technical question on labour law that we litigated cost us
5,000,000 Rand.

As educational sector, don't have the kind of money needed to
challenge the publishers. Need interpretation of legislation.
Publishers say they have taken a reasonable position. They have
no problem with individual students and teachers making copies.
But when an institution makes copies, even of a single page, they
must pay royalties. For instance, English literature professor making
copies of a single poem from an anthology of 600 of them. There
is no fair dealing from the standpoint of administrative teaching.
Publishers say, hey, no problem, all you need to do is tell the
students to copy it themselves. If you tell the students to come
with their own copies, most of them wouldn't do it.

In the area of distance education, this is even less likely, since
distance ed students don't have access to the school library. I
have to post my course materials. But the moment you put it up
for 100 students on the web, you become liable for unlimited
penalties for infringement. For all intents and purposes, the
fair use exception doesn't operate. We need something that
strikes a balance between the needs of educators and publishers.

Collecting societies operate on behalf of the publishers (not
authors -- we authors get precious little of this). They'll soon
reach out to high schools and also primary education in rural
areas. Places like South Africa - it's important there. We can
deliver stuff to schools electronically, but of course what about
the royalties.

Even the smallest, most rural school has Internet access and
electricity.

Once delivery is done by an institution, it becomes a target for
collecting societies.

I am not opposed to publishers. They are important to society --
they publish our books, they carry the risk that the books will
flop.

Academic publishers don't make a lot of money -- it's not like
there are many JK Rowlings in academic publishing.

But publishers as I know very well, in the ordinary way -- they
just sold their books, until the moment that digital distribution
arrived.

Now digital distribution has created a bonanza - a university can
easily pay in royalties 1 million rand. What most universities
do, which is why they don't challenge this, they just pass this
on to students. Students have to pay beyond the regular fees for
students.

It becomes an additional fee that students have to pay for their
education and learning. Some institutions pick up the bill for
that, but I wonder if they realize what they're letting
themselves in for.

Of the millions collected for these uses, 25% (5 million Rand)
goes to collection agencies. Where someone is using an online
distribution in a way that impacts the sales, that person should
be paying royalties. But where the use is in the normal course of
education, it's a tax on learning and in a country where there
are problems in education, this is an important problem.

WIPO is not accountable to the educational institutions of South
Africa or any other country in the world. It is accountable to
the member countries. Those countries should be working to change
this. But in most commonwealth countries, copyright falls under
the care of a department of trade and industry, not under a
department of education or culture.

There are two empty seats before me -- South Africa didn't bother
to attend. The permanent delegates from South Africa - one from
trade and industry, the other from refugees. The industry person
doesn't see the educational uses as part of their brief.

From our side, educational organizations will be pushing the
government to become more involved. We need more useful fair use
exceptions for copyrighted materials. It would be useful if the
larger intellectual property community would lead people to see
this in a wider context.

Thank you very much.

--

Teresa Hackett, Project Manager of Electronic Information for Libraries (EIFL), IP Advocacy for Access to Knowledge, and Member of Committee on Copyright and Other Legal Matters, International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA)

EIFL and IFLA are membership organizations representing libraries
and library associations since 1927.

Speaks for 4,000 leading libraries in the least developed and
transition countries. Development and copyright. How copyright
affects library education and information services.

* Libraries and education

Libraries are not just shelves of books. The unique role of
libraries. Well informed citizenry. They are vital to a
democratic and open society.

Good education cannot exist without access to knowledge. The
education commission of the United States, a US think-tank, notes that
good school libraries are linked to higher test scores.

High quality school libraries are linked to better results on
tests. When a university seeks accreditation. The effectiveness
of educational institutions depends on the quality of the
provisions of their libraries.

* Development and copyright

The greatest resource for development is an educated society. A
literate population

Literacy rates correspond to the development of a country. There
is a direct correlation between library holdings and literacy
rates, the higher the library holdings, the higher the literacy
rates.

Libraries build capacity for learning. The millennium development
goals are the most important way to make progress on development. Student teachers and
nurses will provide research and learning.

Student teachers, nurses and engineers rely entirely on
university libraries. Developing countries must ensure that
learning materials are made tot he widest possible base.

* How copyright affects library education and information
services.

Where do libraries stand on copyright? We believe in upholding
copyright law.

But copyright is not just about the rights of creators. What
makes copyright work is the exceptions and limitations. Copyright
is supposed to balance the user's right to access and use
knowledge. International agreements guarantee the same rights to
creators, but not the exceptions to monopoly rights. The
three-step test provides a mark to ensure that right holder rights are
guaranteed. Creates an imbalance from the start. Balance between
the rights of authors and rights of publishers.

If exceptions are narrow, how can there be a balance? Without a
balance, copyright works against libraries, against educators, against access for
people with disabilities and against development.

At the world library congress in Oslo in 2005, librarians from
all over the world discussed the problems they have with
copyright law: e.g., digitization projects are hampered by the
lack of exceptions for long-term preservation, and where they
exist, there's no making available rights.

Negotiations even for out of print material can be long and
painful. This can be lost for other generations because there are
no other institutions doing this work.

Masses of content held by libraries - permission from the
rightsholder is usually required, but is impossible. This is
because the copyright owners are untraceable -- the so-called
"orphan works."

Print medium is essential for literacy and education.

A teacher in South Africa, discussing her students: With no fixed
address they can't take books from the library. With no
electricity, they can't make their own copies. Copyright law
prohibits the teacher from making copies herself or preparing
translations.

What choice does she have? Make copies and derivative works to
educate or make unauthorized copies? How will people progress
from developing to developed. How will people learn about their
copyright law.

Super-national directives from the EU, the WIPO treaties, and
bilateral free trade agreements have eroded the balance.

We need proactive acceptance. This is why we need treaty on
Access to Knowledge. would enshrine user rights.

* Minimum set of limitations and exceptions that comply with
international agreements

What can we do right now?

Professor Ruth Okediji has undertaken some research in this area. After
analyzing Berne Convention, Prof. Okediji has drawn a list of
exceptions and limitations acceptable to Berne.

These are for personal use, for criticism and review, for
education, for reproduction by the press, ephemeral recordings,
for people with disabilities, for interoperability and in a
limited way for libraries too.

Every country can adopt these basic limitations and exceptions
today. Doing so would show willingness to provide a balance
between needs of publishers and needs of educators.

I don't believe that copyright law has to be a barrier.I want
to see copyright law, like in Statute of Anne, to encourage
learning. I want libraries to work

--

Otunba Olayinka M Lawal-Solarin, CEO Literamed Publishing,
Nigeria

I am a publisher. I feel like I should defend myself as a
publisher.

I'm a publisher in a developing country. We think we should have
stronger copyright law to protect indigenous publishers.

Should be able to develop and the national policies of for
instance governments in developing countries, in particular
Africa. Should make it possible to develop culturally relevant
books. What we're getting is not culturally relevant books.

Copyright laws should be strengthened in developing countries.

[[Ed: Why believe that stronger copyright for Nigeria will help
with this problem?]]

UN says that everyone has a right to protect their moral and
material interests resulting from scientific and literary works.

Socioeconomic principle that copyright encourages

Today's copyright law serves several purposes. The most important
is to encourage progress in arts and sciences.

Copyright is a legal mechanism for the ordering of social and
cultural life.

Here at WIPO, it's been emphasized that the driving force of development in the industrialized world is
IP, particularly, a well-educated and enforced copyright system.

[[Ed: Historically, this is untrue; the US's refusal to offer
exclusive rights to foreign authors is generally cited as key to
its post-colonial development]

Post-colonially, the old powers have used copyright to deny
access to knowledge to developing countries. Developing countries
couldn't obtain translation and reprint rights. Dev nations said
that copyright interfered with their access. The publishers said
that their authors and publishers were entitled to a fair return
and their rights should be respected. This lead to widespread
piracy with copyrights that were weak or unenforceable.

There were several attempts to ameliorate the situation by
producing low-cost editions. But this inhibited the growth of
indigenous publishing, the growth of publishers like me.

Multinational publishers are not doing enough to develop the
appropriate type of cultural goods for Africa.

Motivating indigenous publishers to produce relevant cultural
books and encouraging the provision of adequate textbooks.

The Nigerian policy on literacy envisages 5 textbooks per pupil.
Nigerian national policy envisages the individual sound education
with full literacy by 2000. They are still very far from their
goals.

The supply and distribution of books in francophone Africa is
still largely dominated by France.

Most South African publishers are white-owned.

Multinational publishers, Oxford Univ. Press, etc. divested
themselves of their interests after the the indigenization of the
industry.

As democracy takes root in most African countries, there will be
more indigenous publishing in Africa.

Kofi Annan talked about the $100 laptop.

A $100 laptop would provide 14,000 Nairu (?), multiplied by 25
million schoolchildren will cost 350 billion Nairu, which is
about 3-4 years' worth of our educational budget. If you produce
books that are cheap enough, it would provide six books per child
for the same period. We're not allowing Africa to develop and to
produce culturally relevant books. It's important that Africa be
allowed to develop culturally relevant books that gives African
children the same confidence as Western children. I believe in
cross-cultural fertilization, but at the primary and secondary
level African publishers need to be present producing medically
relevant books, comics, etc that are relevant to Africa.

Western publishing gets things wrong about Africa. There's a myth
that Black Africans don't have Rhesus Minus blood types. But I
did my own research and discovered that Africans have the same as
everyone else -- 50 percent Rhesus Minus.

Culture consists of ideas, knowledge, values, philosophy and so
on. Culture is a distinguishing factor between man and man. It
will not only kill local initiatives, but it would exaggerate
assumptions

The production of books that reflect the history of a people
should not be left to others.

--

Discussion

Teresa Hackett: Libraries are creating a mass market for your
books.

What we are asking for is exceptions that satisfy the three-step
test. We are not dealing with the issue of piracy here, we are
dealing with exceptions that satisfy the three-step test.

Julien Hofman - Africans are like everyone else, both in their
weaknesses and in their strengths. Like maximizing profit-making.
Interest is to maximize profits. The indigenous publishing
houses, like those abroad, seek to maximize profits. What is
reasonable from the point of view of reasonable fair use.

Otunba Olayinka M Lawal-Solarin: Publishing is NOT every man's
meat. It's not like buying rice or selling computers. It's
arduous work. It has taken me 35 years to make a viable
publishing company.

Collecting societies are there to collect SMALL royalties to be
distributed to publishers. ... I am saying right now there are
laws enough to protect everybody. ... There are collection
societies and there are publishers. Asking them to reverse the
laws. There are laws to protect everyone. If you're going to copy
100 articles, you should pay for it. Someone is suffering because
of that. If you're

[[ comment by RP: What do we think of the testimony of Sam Yagan
in this context in relation to Spark Notes?]]

Sonny Leong, Exec Chairman, Cavendish Publishing Limited: Have
to respond to Julien Hofman's comments. Such sweeping unqualified
statements are dangerous. Of course publishers have to make money
to invest in their interests. Sure you delegates out there will
want to see flourishing publishers in your country. But what will
happen to publishing in your country? Represent 500 publishers.
Not all of them are successful, there are some multinational
publishers. A lot of them are not making money. They do it for
the sake of the work. And such statements are dangerous.

Representative of Chile (Luis Villarroel Villalon) :

Question for Mr Otumba, I have heard from local publishers (in
Chile). they have to go through a very laborious process to get a
license from external publishers to get to publish in their
country. Can you explain to us what is the experience about how
complicated it is to get a license?

Otunba Olayinka M Lawal-Solarin: We have the same problem. I was
just in Frankfurt, trying to buy rights to Bible Stories, which
are universal, and we have problems. We have to get a reference
because we're African, because they don't trust African copyright
laws. I needed a reference. I had to go to a friend in Norway to
give me a reference in order to get the rights to buy. There are
difficulties. They're still happening.

They will sell the books, you cannot buy rights from the United
States (which is an English territory). I am going to tell you a
story: about 3 or 4 years ago I went to Frankfurt, and I went
from stand to stand to buy books and they told me they wouldn't
sell me the rights. I told myself when I got home that in five
years I'd return and exhibit my material. Here's my material.
Next year I'll exhibit in Bologna. I'll show them.

Delegate from Australia: Can I through you ask Professor Hofman a
question? He referred to the payments that educational
institutions have to make to make any copies. Were these sums
arrived at through negotiation or arbitration? He also mentioned
that he wondered whether he would ever see any of the
remuneration from collecting societies. Did he have any
information on the oversight of collecting societies?

Professor Hofman: 50 cents (South African cents) a page. This
was determined by collecting societies. There is no process of
arbitration, if you don't like their rate you don't get their
material. Moving to a blanket license. You pay half a million
rand and they then monitor what you do and if it is excessive it
gets changed.

How they distribute their royalties I don't know. I'm not in a
position to answer that. There is no statutory supervision of
their activities. There was only one collecting society -- a
monopoly -- until quite recently.

Representative of Nigeria: Thank you Mr Chairman. The first
question I have which would have been for Mr Hofman, but given
his disclaimer regarding this issue I want to limit it: In South
Africa do you have separate rate scales for different
institutions, primary, secondary and tertiary? The problems that
confront the developing world aren't the same as those we face in
the digital environment. Piracy is a long-standing problem,
policy distortion is a long standing problem, economic downturn
is a long-term problem. Just referring to experience in
Frankfurt.

There are cartels in international publishing. They may withhold
rights not because of your copyright system, but for other
reasons. Nigerian copyright is based on the same international
tenets as in the rest of the world. Each countries has different
enforcement capacity. That's what we're here to consider. When it
comes to level for enforcement, we need to understand that
different countries have different capacities in terms of
enforcement. How many rights do we need to give, how many layers
of rights do we need to allow and how many rights do we need to
concede? It's not just about extending rights - it's about
letting people live with the copyright system. This isn't just a
question about giving publishers more rights. It's about making
society able to live with the law that is being put in place. The
more the bar of copyright protection is raised without
considering the needs and concerns of society, the more difficult
it will be to run that copyright system. We have reached a point
where we need to look practically at how much is enough. Publishing
isn't all about profit, but profit is a key component of why
people stay in the business. But without limitations, it's like
putting a train on a track without a driver or a control
mechanism. What limitations do we need to put in place to have
the copyright systems serve society, so that both publishers and
users can be happy?

[Otunba Olayinka M Lawal-Solarin]: Collecting societies have a
certain amount that's paid to them and the rest is shared to
publishers and through them to authors. There's a formula for
distributing the proceeds of distribution to the publishers. What
we're asking for in Nigeria as a collecting society is so small
-- for instance, a student can copy whole books. It will cost
them about 1000 Nairu in copying costs, but you can buy the book
for only 500. If they buy my book I'll sell more books. I think
the professor thinks profit is a dirty word [Hofman shakes his
head]. Profit is necessary for expansion of the industry. You
need to reinvest, you need to reinvest every year. You can't take
your IP to the banks, they accept the fact that you are making a
profit, that you have a cash-flow.

Prof Hofman: As far as I know, no one has asked secondary or primary schools
to pay royalties yet. The infrastructure is intensive. But once
you create the principle that all copying comes with a payment,
its likely that fees will be assessed against any institution
that is worth suing. I agree that we'll need sliding scales for
different kinds of institutions.

[Delegate of Jamaica]: An issue for IFLA: Before leaving Jamaica
i had a meeting with a librarian from the University of the West
Indies. She raised the issue of subscribing to online
periodicals. She said that once you stopped subscriptions you
couldn't even get access to the old issues that you had paid for.

Hackett: It's a licensing issue and it's important. Increasingly
copyright exceptions are being overridden, by technological protection measuress and by
contract. When libraries acquire access to electronic material,
they do so by contract, which overrides copyright law in most
countries. Unless the library can negotiate, it ends up signing
away its rights. My organization is working on negotiating multi-country
licenses for libraries in developing nations, to get a good price
and fair terms. Perpetual access is one of those issues.
Traditionally when a library bought a journal it got to keep it
on its shelf, even if the library stopped its subscription, where students
could come and read it. Library would bind it and it would be
there forever. But in an electronic environment when access to
the journal ends access to the back issues also ends.

World Blind Union: I want to give you an example from everyday
life that despite limitations and exceptions can prevent access
to educational material. The example comes from the Netherlands
where a blind student in literature can't get the texts for his
degree in time, even though they have been created by a US NGO
that provides talking books for blind people; the US institution
couldn't verify whether its editions were lawful in the US and so
the Dutch library had to reproduce the talking book again. This
means a high cost and a delay which prevents the international
exchange of educational materials,

We think as the WBU that the international exchange of accessible
educational materials should not be hindered by unreasonable
copyright barriers.

Prof. Hofmann: Just wanted to respond to the remarks of the next
speakers. Let me give you a small example of what I am not trying
to say. There was a visitor from New York - that if you adopt
this approach, it will be the end of the publishing industry in
South Africa. She said, I don't give an f*** about the future of
publishing in South Africa. I do very much care about publishing
in South Africa. What I'm after is a balance and a gradation. The
present situation is skewed in the direction with disfavors
education of the very poor. I'm very in favor of a strong
publishing industry worldwide and in every country. It is simply
a question of where we draw the line.

Teresa Hackett: Libraries do support a strong publishing industry,
particularly local publishers. But the issue is bargaining power.
Our negotiations are often unequal.

[Otunba Olayinka M Lawal-Solarin]: For the first time, Prof.
Hofman and I are in agreement. We should not go directly to
publishers. There are collecting societies that are part of copyright laws. They
can be established in such a way that their content can be accessed at a price that is acceptable to everybody.

--

Facilitating the flow of educational materials in developing
countries:

Commercial licensing systems. Mr Sonny Leong, Exec
Chairman, Cavendish Publishing Limited, London.

Mr Victoriano
Colodron, Tech Director, Spanish Reproduction Rights Center
(CEDRO), Madrid.

Access to Affordable Books in Developing Countries.

Leong: I
fondly remember a scheme that allowed for low-cost publishing in
the developing world. It was dismantled by a few consultants. I
vowed never to allow this to be repeated.

Cavendish books publishes cheap editions to the developing world.
We're the largest indie law publisher in the UK, we export to 80
countries, 50 percent of them in the developing world.

Recently I was in a South American country; I had a meeting with
several people at the university as well as many students. It
embarrassed me to meet these students knowing my government took
away the books these students could have bought. They're capable
and could have gone to overseas universities, but because of
their economic circumstances they have to study at home. Their
library is full of > 20 year old books. These students were
deprived of the books they could easily have afforded to buy.

Tertiary Publishing

-FE, vocational and university (under and post graduate)
education

-English Language markets

Global issues

- Not a big item issue, unlike "Education for All" (EFA)

If any country wants to talk about education, they need to talk
about tertiary publishing.

- Perceived as elitist

Tertiary ed is not elitist -- it is a prerequisite for
development.

- Piracy (organized crime) (IPR)

There are raids in India, books seized. Piracy is organized
criminality. It's organized crime, big-time crime. They make more
money from piracy than gun-running. Books are use as a camouflage
for other activities.

- Tax/VAT - Import Duties

- Bureaucratic import procedures

This is why books can't be cheaply sold in developing nations.

To sustain publishing, you need certainty. Universities on
strike, etc undermine publishing.

We need an effective supply chain from author -> publisher ->
distributor -> wholesaler -> bookseller

Authors publish their own books on the Internet or on their own.
Some academics come to publishers because they add value to the
production cycle. We need a level playing field: in primary
school publishing, the state gets involved and commercial
publishers walk away. Tertiary publishing is expensive -- that's
why there's not much of it in developing nations.

How to sustain a viable publishing/book trade environment?

- Course/curriculum certainty

-Effective and efficient supply chain

-- Booklist/distributor/wholesaler ...

What are publishers doing now?

-International Students' Editions

Publishers bring out their own international students' editions,
pricing to markets. Publishers' association survey of 30 major
textbooks, compared across 30 developing nations: always cheaper
in developing countries.

---Global pricing?

We need global pricing. In India, 20 years ago, the Indian market
was closed. Publishers wanted to sell into the Indian market but
couldn't because it was inefficient there. Eventually they
licensed local printers to produce Indian editions. Now foreign
publishers had an interest in India. The Indian government
created "economic printing zones" where foreign publishers can
print local editions and export the majority abroad.

-Special pricing to markets/discontinuing

--Territorial rights

-Licensed reprints

Have adaptations of their works; e.g. Economics are the same the
world round, but publishers can produce local editions that tell
the stories locally.

--local editions

-BookPower Scheme (Subsidized)

--Former ELBS

Subsidy scheme funded by donors. We compete with OXFAM, Red
Cross, etc -- so we don't have a lot of money. We have 40 titles
and we sell 30k units/year in developing nations. This is
publishers doing something for developing countries.

-Local/co-publishing

Local authorship. have to encourage local publishing.

--Authors/printing

-Sacrificing margins

Publishers give away their royalties and margins to publish in
developing nations.

--Royalties

_More needs to be done_

We need to do more: lobby for government assistance. We need more
local authorship. I encourage local authors around the world. I
take them to an international scene.

-Lobby for government assistance

-Encourage local authorship

-Invest in tertiary publishing

-Eliminate customs and import duties

We donated 50k books to an Indian subcontinent country, but it
took 4 months to clear them through customs while we paid for
storage. We need faster clearance to get books into students'
hands.

-Training in supply chain

We need to invest in training supply chain

-E-publishing/learning?

5.25" floppy was supposed to be the death of the book. Then the
3.5" floppy. CD ROM. Online.

The book is still here.

There's loads of content on the Internet. But researching on the
Internet is a waste of time. Because anything that's free may not
be worth it.

[[Ed: !!!!!]

We need to train teachers to use technology. They have to be
trained to use this new medium.

_What next?_

-Empowering knowledge through partnerships

-EFA

-African Publishers Network (APNET)

-Access to finance to support local publishing

-Less red tape

--customs

I have spent the last 10 years visiting countries where there is
limited access to affordable books. We need to talk about
copyright and exceptions to the rule.

Any reasonable socially-conscious publisher will agree to the
problems of blind users. There is no problem [[Ed: so the
problems of blind users are imaginary?]]

Don't take away intellectual property wholesale. Piracy will be
the end of publishing. Together we can make ignorance history.

--

Mr Victoriano Colodron, Tech Director, Spanish Reproduction
Rights Center (CEDRO), Madrid.

[[Missed the beginning]

There are many billions of photocopies made without compensation.
It's natural that publishers want compensation for this. But it's
completely impractical to ask each and every one of them for
permission every time.

That's why we have collective licensing -- it's a practical
solution to legal problems.

_Reproduction Licenses_

-- License systems vary according to the legal framework

Regarding licenses for copying/scanning. They vary with national
legislation. The legal backing for them comes from a given
country. They're awarded for a type of copying, e.g., in the
course of education, but not for uses that replace purchases.

-- Licenses authorize the reproduction of small fragments

- Photocopies and also digitization

These licenses also authorize scanning for the intranet of
educational institutions. The most advanced bodies are located in
the United States, Canada and Australia.

-- Transactional and blanket licenses

Blanket licenses are useful for large institutions. This morning
we talked about fees. Tariffs are usually set per student. There
is a framework for negotiation. They must be established with a
great sensitivity. Regulations are set by public authorities and
published on the internet on our website. These are practical
system of licenses. Collective licenses of books are carried in
countries with different levels of development.

In Spain, we've just granted our first license of this nature.

-- Tariffs set per student

-- Royalties are distributed to rightsholders

Collection societies across different continents.

_ASIA_

-- Singapore: CLASS

-- Philippines: PRRO

-- Hong Kong, Korea, India ...

_AFRICA_

-- Malawi: COSOMA

-- Ghana: COPYGHANA

-- Cameroon: SOCILADRA

_LATIN AMERICA

-- Uruguay: AUTOR

-- Colombia: CEDER

-- Mexico (CEMPRO), Argentina (CADRA)

-- Bolivia (ABOPOL), Costa Rica (ACODERE), Chile (SADEL) etc.

__Support for license systems__

-- Collective management serves creators, users, and the society
at large

-- The book sector, a delicate ecosystem-damage to one part of
the ecosystem could destroy the entire balance.

-- Collective management, possible and important developing
countries

Collection societies are not just relevant in developed
countries, where publishing is fully developed. They are also
relevant to developing countries.

The problem is that it doesn't give any incentives to publishers
which results in less cultural diversity.

Mostly, pirates copy popular works, but these subsidize the
publication of poetry and other culturally important items.
Collective management allows us to counteract the negative
effects of photocopying. It facilitates legal access. It's a
practical and realistic way to manage the different needs of
actors in the publishing ecosystem.

-- Limits and exceptions with educational purposes should allow
rightsholders to manage their works.

For collective management to work, public authorities have to
assist them. But limitations and exceptions can be practically
managed through collecting societies. If E&Ls are vague, they
become meaningless. We've seen that happen.

Imagine that there's a law that determines that it's possible to
copy small parts of works without copyright holders' permission
for educational uses. This could lead to enormous problems.

-- The need for an effective commitment to copyright.

It's also important for the political authorities to address
copyright. It's very important to allocate budget to culture.
They should pay providers of people who provide culture and
education, e.g., royalties.

Governments shouldn't forget that publishers have to pay for
furniture and water.

--

Facilitating the flow of educational materials in developing
countries: Alternative Licensing Systems.

Mia Garlick, General Counsel, Creative
Commons,

Jan Vlterop, Director of Open Access, Spring, Surrey,
UK.

Mia Garlick: Before I start, here's a little about Creative Commons.

What is the problem CC is trying to solve?

Copyright automatically applies upon fixation. This turns some
people into unwitting infringers. Some people do know it, but
this instills fear in them that they'll get in trouble. Some have
no option and become infringers by necessity.

Digital tech revolutionizes creativity -- how it's made, made
available and used. It's democratizing, everything is online. The
very essence of copyright is implicated by the fact that digital
tech always makes copies.

_Absolute control v. Anarchy_

__All Rights Reserved v. No Rights Reserved.__

The outcome is polarization -- All rights reserved, technological protection measures,
litigation. On the other side, there's anarchy -- no rights
reserved, information wants to be free, old laws don't apply
online.

Creative Commons is a middle ground. Reasonable copyright -- some rights
reserved.

CC is a nonprofit in San Francisco, with offices in London and
Berlin, with volunteers in 50 countries.

Offer licensing, publishing and search tools for free. Partner
with tech companies for search (Google, Yahoo, etc).

We want to enable collaboration across space and time to allow
for active cultural participation -- content that can be freely
used and re-used.

The core licenses all require attribution (this didn't used to be
the case, but everyone wanted attribution, so we made it
mandatory). We've also got NonCommercial/NoDerivative/ShareAlike (if
you make a derivative use, you must re-license it under CC).

You can produce any of six CC licenses from "by" (attribution
only) to "non commercial/attribution/noderivs."

There's no money passing hands through our licenses, but that
doesn't mean that no money changes hands. Also, all our licenses
are non-exclusive, you can use them in combination with other
licenses.

Licenses are in three formats, b/c three different groups read
licenses: humans, lawyers and computers. The logo gets placed on
content, which links through to the deed, which links through to
the code. THere are affiliates in jurisdictions around the world
-- 24 countries so far, on every populated continent. Work is
underway in 13 more jurisdictions and projects are in 70+
countries all told.

Here's the license in Finnish -- language and legal system.

Science commons: Encourages stakeholders to create areas of free
access and inquiry using standardized licenses and other means, a
Science Commons built out of voluntary agreements.

In June 2005, launched the Open Access Law program. Open
publishing is common in science but not law. Weird, since law
publishing is meant to promulgate ideas and reputation, journals
pay no royalties. Editorial review is done by students for
prestige, and publishers subsidize them -- no one's doing it for
money. So it was a natural for CC.

29 journals have signed on in national areas, and two more
international journals are onboard.

Partnered with technology companies to find Creative Commons
licensed works.

You can apply CC to non-digital works, but searching relies on
Metadata, so real-world works don't get that lift.

Yahoo and Google announced CC searching capability. CC licensing
has been exported all over the world.

As of last June - over 12 million link-backs -- over 1MM after a
year

Enabling open educational resources and scholarly research

MIT Open Courseware

Started in 2002. Occurred after the MIT committee - the idea was
in line with MIT agenda to advance knowledge. There are 1000+
courses online, from aeronautics to philosophy. The goal is 1800
by 2008. They've published a guide to establishing an open
courseware project. Because it has been around for a while, we
have evaluation stats. Since March 2004, you can see distribution
of visits by geography. North America and Western Europe
dominate, but visitors come from all over the globe. Self
learners amount to more than 50% of the group. These
self-learners come from all regions equally.

Educators with less than five years' experience rely heavily on
the project -- possibly because they're younger and savvier.

Other open courseware: Johns Hopkins, Rice, Vietnam Fulbright
Economics, there are projects underway at universities in the US,
China, France, Japan, Spain, Portugal, Vietnam and India --
translating MIT stuff and making their own content.

South Africa's bridges.org, promoted ICTs for development and
uses CC licenses. The South African education system and
university of the Western Cape are both considering CC licensing.

PLoS. Public Library of Science -- publishes journals across many
disciplines.

Publish under our attribution licenses.

BioMed Central. over 100 open access journals in biological
sciences.

Benefits of CC

CC licenses clearly signal copyright terms, on a
fair-dealing-plus basis.

Allows translation and adaptation and localization of content and
provides ready tools for publishing and finding content to reduce
barriers in getting online and publishing from developing
countries.

open content can benefit commercial models. High-energy physics
research is nearly 100% open science with seemingly no effect on
subscription research. Consultants in South Africa give books
away for free online and sell print on demands, increasing
revenue by more than 300 percent.

Online lots of authors have adopted CC to spread their works
beyond the places where their works were published, expanding
their reach.

Public Policy Lessons from CC

Limited, because we're a voluntary, private ordering tool, that
can only offer fair use/fair dealing plus, so we're bound by
copyright. In the developing world, copyright is but one issue in
trying to facilitate access.

We would benefit from harmonized laws. The CC experience also
demonstrates what's possible if copyright friction is reduced.

It's increasingly inaccurate to consider copyright owners as a
monolithic whole -- there's real diversity in who makes that up.

--

Jan Velterop, Director of Open Access, Spring, Surrey, UK.

Coming to WIPO to talk about copyright is like carrying sand to
the Sahara.

In science, copyright is something that's used to build
sand-castles, but we need a level playing field.

Virtually no institution has access to all relevant literature,
no matter where it is in the world. In richer countries, it's
pretty good; in poorer countries, it's worse; in the poorest
countries, it can be limited to nothing but abstracts.

If we had open access then we'd have a level playing field then
in poorest countries and in the richest; the same, full, access

Not having open access publishing risks losing a large part of
the world's capacity for production of scientific research.
Science communication is the connective tissue between the
world's inquisitive minds. Need more than the sum of its parts.
To harness their power, we need optimal communication between
them.

Authors have to transfer exclusive rights to science publishers.
Copying is rarely allowed. What scientists and scientific authors
need is to have their work copied as widely as possible, simply
citing the author when it happens. We don't need money, but we do
need to propagate our ideas and contributions.

In open access publishing, the author has to pay, because all
publishing costs something. Traditionally authors paid the cost
by transferring copyright so that publishers could recoup the
cost of production through sales.

In our model, the author pays upfront -- but it's rarely the
author who pays; it's usually the institution who pays for it,
through subscription (just as it's almost always the institution
that pays for access to traditionally published journals)

In the old world, a journal cost $300k to run, with profit, with
100 articles, so each article cost $3000 each.

The old journals recouped this by charging $100 for 3000
subscriptions to individuals, like "Nature", with the understanding
that these wouldn't be shared. Or you can sell 500 subscriptions to
libraries at $600 each, with the understanding that they'll
share. Or you can sell 100 subs at $3000 for a library
consortium.

Our model: we charge $300,000 for the whole world and the whole
world gets to share it.

Where do we get $3,000 for our articles?

Currently an article costs the average library $5-10. Just
300-600 library subs/year cost $3,000. There are lots more than
600 libraries! This means that we restrict enormously
the potential of distribution.

With "author pays" you get unlimited worldwide access with wide
reuse of the material, just as we heard with CC licenses.

There is money in the academic system to pay for communication.
You can do it through subscription charges or you can do it
through libraries paying. Different models.

We don't charge for subscriptions, we charge for articles.

Is this a panacea? No. Those don't exist.

Look at this grid:

                    west            south
brains              good            good
money               adequate        inadequate
access              never enough    hardly worth mentioning
ability to publish  never enough    hardly worth mentioning

Optimal would be where access would be very good in both
developing and developed world.

How it works : author submits an article. There's a peer review
process. If the article is accepted, there's a payment from the
author to the publisher (but usually payment on behalf of the
author to the publisher). Then the author attaches a Creative
Commons license and the publisher copy-edits it, adds XML, etc.
Does not add DRM! World gets access.

Springer Open Choice

Don't think as a publisher that we can impose system on the
authors. Just give the authors' the choice to stay with the
traditional model or go with open access.

Governments can re-route the money they spend on subscriptions to
journals to subsidize authors who wish to make their materials
freely available for the whole world.

--

Discussion

Cancelled due to time pressure

--

Devising copyright exceptions for education: national experience
of Chile and Canada.

Luis Villaroel Villalon, IP Advisor, Ministry of Education,
Santiago de Chile.

Bruce Couchman, Legal Adviser, IP Policy Directorate, Department
of Industry, Ottawa.

Danielle Bouvet, Director, Legislative and International
Projects, Copyright Policy Branch, Department of Canadian
Heritage, Ottawa.

----

Luis Villaroel Villalon: Limitations are an integral part of the
IP system. Exceptions are for specific works and for specific
uses. Despite the importance of L&E and the development of IP
and the 1996 treaties, there has been specific developments for
rightsholders. There has not been commensurate development to
L&E.

This loophole for exceptions at the international level is
visible in Chile. We comply with international treaties and give
rights to creators, but we have precious few exceptions to
copyright in the digital environment, especially with respect to
exceptions for educational use, the disabled, and educators.

These loopholes are to be closed with a new bill in parliament

There are stiffer penalties for infringement. We must also
provide greater clarity to the use that is permitted without
suffering penalties. In this context let me discuss the Chilean
experience with L&E for educational purposes.

In the discussions we have had we wanted to improve the quality
of the textbooks within the IP framework. Schoolbooks are used
by classrooms and teachers and are not generally in competition
with content primarily for entertainment purposes.

There needs to be authorization for adaptation, translation etc
(especially digitization). Often it's hard to locate the rights
holders and involves a costly and time-consuming search. Often
publication is not authorized.

The main difficulties are locating rightsholder and negotiating
the payment. in the international framework for exceptions, there
are feasible solutions that we feel should be explored.

We could have compulsory licensing for textbook content. National
law must incorporate rights of quotation regarding textbooks. For
libraries: In Chile we have had intensive discussions in which
many of this morning's concerns were expressed. Libraries are
concerned about the potential penalties for copying materials,
fearing that this might be illegal. But libraries defend this,
saying it is part of scholarship and teaching.

There is now a bill in Chile which comprises legislative
provisions that would allow for permissible exceptions for
libraries. This bill is going through Parliament and says there's
no requirement for payment or permission for nonprofit use,
educational use or research. This doesn't violate the three-step
rule.

It is necessary to take account of the need of libraries and
respect the rights of rightsholders. We need the following
exceptions:

* Preservation and restoration of works -- photocopying without
prior authorization is legitimate if it is to replace a book
that has been lost or damaged or to acquire a copy for a library
if it has been unavailable in the market for a five-year period

* We also wish to allow libraries to produces copies of up to two
chapters without authorization or payment, provided it is not for
profit and for private use

* Libraries and archives should be able to digitize work that is
in its physical collection and that can be consulted by users
within their facilities without authorization or payment

* For educational libraries, they should be able to reproduce
short articles from periodicals or partial works for the use of
the students of the institution in response to the requests from
the teachers of a given course, provided that the rightsholders'
interests are upheld

* There should be exceptions for the disabled. Libraries should
be allowed to adapt works or reproduce works in assistive
formats, especially for the visually impaired. There might or
might not be remuneration depending on national legislation. This
depends on a second bill that's also working through Parliament.

It's important that we discuss the implication of Technological Protection Measures and
non-negotiated licenses with exceptions. I lack the time to
address that now, but I'd like to say that in presenting a paper
at the last SCCR, it was Chile's intention to launch an
initiative to have a discussion on the exceptions that will meet
public needs for education and archiving.

Bruce Couchman: Current Canadian Copyright Act is from 1924.
Employer is owner of works created by employees unless there's an
agreement to the contrary. Still have the concept of fair
dealing, similar to in South Africa. Also applies to private
study and research. Limitations on remedies for performing music.

There's a limitation on royalties payable for performing music in
libraries and schools. There's also a narrow right to works in
special collections. Lacked anything related to libraries. In
those days there was only one collective related to musical or
performing rights. They also increased criminal remedies.

In 1988, there were actually no specific exceptions Collectives
were allowed to organize with regard to any works.

Also increased criminal remedies. Most of these comments stem
from 1988 amendments. Prior to 1988, all collectives other than
music ones fell under the Competition Act and are subject to
anti-trust. Because of concern over anti-trust, most rights were
not collectively managed until 1988. Now they can exist without
worry about liability. In theory, they could even represent
foreign rights.

In terms of the structure of collective management organizations, they can federate either
nationally or communally.

They tend to be organized under relevant nonprofit incorporation
statues. There are no rules about transparency, disclosure,
governance or dispersion of royalties. There's no regulation
regarding publisher representatives and creator representatives.

In terms of how collectives operate in the education sector,
there are two relevant provisions:

1. Collectives start out negotiating to come to agreement about
royalties. If they fail to agree voluntarily, they can apply to
the copyright board to have a binding tariff set -- this is rare

2. Voluntary agreements - even if two parties agree to relevant
rate, they are not necessarily cleared in regards to competition
law. They can ask the copyright board to review the agreement,
since there may be third parties prejudiced under the Competition
Act.

The second major revision was in 1997. This is essentially the
current law. it hasn't been amended in ways relevant to this
discussion since then. We have set up exceptions for educational
institutions and libraries. Also includes exceptions for
preservation and for disabled people.

Clearly allowed performance of works in a classroom, with the
exception of cinematic works. You can play the radio, read aloud,
turn on the TV. It covered the performance right but not the
communication right. You can't send it to another classroom --
that's under consideration at Parliament now.

Also a number of exceptions introduced at that time relevant to
libraries.

1. If a person is entitled to make use of the fair dealing
exception, the library could do it on their behalf. Librarian is
entitled to the benefit on that person's behalf.

2. Fair dealing in request to research or private study.
Distinction between scholarly or scientific articles, where
exception applies immediately, and other periodicals, which have
one year delay in application.

Interesting concepts in 1997 amendments - Conditional exception.
Could either purchase or get a license, then it doesn't apply.
-Limitation on remedies. If there is a license between a
collection society and an institution. Works outside of the
collective. The remedy is limited to the royalty that would
otherwise be payable.

June. Bill C. 60. Amendment to Copyright Act introduced. Addresses 4 issues:

1. Implementation of WIPO copyright treaty

2. Internet service provider liability

3. Technological protection measures

4. Limitations and exceptions with respect to non-profit
libraries and educational institutions

The opposition parties are calling for an early election, so this
will likely not pass through this parliament. [[Ed: The current
Parliament is on the verge of collapsing under a non-confidence
vote]]

In Canada copyright is under federal jurisdiction but educational
institutions are administered under the provincial level.

Current copyright law allows transmission of works. Does not
include transmission of audi-visual works.

There are no technical restrictions on live transmissions, but
they may only be made to students in the course. Can't be sent
over regular radio or TV. There are some restrictions with respect
to recorded or subsequent retransmissions.

With respect to recording the lecture or presentation, lectures
must be destroyed within 30 days of the course finishing. Digital
works are even more restricted. Students must not use the
material after the course is ended. Student must be prevented
from reproducing the work. Records of the making and destruction
of these copies must be kept for three years.

Regarding textual material: this is very complex.

It is intended to say that if an educational institution is
allowed to reproduce, then it can also send it in a digital form
to students. Even though the collective does not have digital
rights. Allows digital or remote delivery of material. If they
have right to give course pack, they have the right to make the
work available digitally.

Must be restricted so that students can only make a single copy
or printout of the materials [[Ed: Wow, this looks like a DRM
mandate to me]]

This does not apply if the copyright owner has expressly NOT
given authorization to make a digitized copy for the collective.

Rights owner would still have the right to an injunction.
Provision also protects the student in case the institution does
something wrong. This particular provision applies only if the
collective doesn't have digital rights. No longer subject to this
particular provision for remedies.

This provision only applies if the collective doesn't have
digital rights. Once they do, the limitation on remedies goes
away (but the collective must give notice to the institution)

Change to proposed law on inter-library loans.

It is now possible to engage in purely digital delivery of print
material. The restriction that the user only gets a print copy no
longer applies, however there can only be a single printout and
that limit has to be limited to seven days. You could put this on
a website and the student can only access the website that only
lasts seven days. Or you could use a DRM file that self-destructs
after 7 days. [[Ed: Wow, that's more restrictive than the US's extremely restricted TEACH Act ]]

Danielle Bouvet:

- The relationship between technological measures and exceptions.

- Role and responsibilities of ISPs and public accounts for
educational purposes online.

Technological Protection Measures(TPMs) and limitations: in C60, Canada is trying to ratify the
1996 treaties. In this context we will amend Canadian copyright law
to introduce means of addressing TPMs. Canadian govt has
considered these issues in light of its obligations re TPMs.
There's a question as to whether we'll address anti-circumvention
and a means to prevent smuggling. Will we establish a link
between TPMs and counterfeiting? What about civil or criminal
penalties?

Government has taken a minimalist approach. Decided to preserve
the balance between existing exceptions and rights. In other words, the
TPMs are NOT meant to change the scope of the law.

Fair use by a student for private studies could constitute a
reasonable, acceptable circumvention. In this bill we define
technical measures which protect copyright under copyright law --
we have included civil provisions for rightsholders with respect
to reproduction of sound recordings, which is intended to punish
those who circumvent TPMs without authorization if they
jeopardize the interests of the rightsholder. There are civil
procedures against those who provide the means to circumvent TPMs
(knowingly) in the case of counterfeiting. Any agreement in which
one individual offer the ability to another to circumvent or
counterfeit a good the law provides a penalty.

The roles of internet and intranet service providers- In C60, the
government has decided to allow certain kinds of decryption. A
university with an intranet could be exempted from all liability
if they exercise no control, if the institution allows any
communication over its network, it can benefit from the
exception. Also caching of copyrighted material to facilitate
communication, if gains access to a limitation. Third, on
provision of a digital work to a student, the student and teacher
can share access under a limitation.

There are many obligations imposed on service providers and
learning institutions. There's notice-and-notice: a rightsholder
sends a notice to an ISP, which then has to pass it on to the
user who is the subject of the notice. The institution has to
preserve the material related to the user identity for six months
after notice, and may be required to further retain it in the
event of litigation.

Exceptions to copyright for educational institutions -- Canada in
its recent copyright law amendments -- we talk more about access
than L&E.

We think the term access is more appropriate for the needs of
educational institutions. We are exploring the use of publicly
available content over the Internet and have been studying it for
years. Wants a legal exception as to what educational
institutions can and cannot do with regards to the Internet. The
Canadian government is considering whether or not it should be
intervening. There are exceptions provided for by law and we
should decide whether we should go further with respect to the
existing exceptions.

With respect to the different approaches, we must ask ourselves
whether we can facilitate access through licensing or through
exceptions. Rightsholders suggest that the best answer is broad
licenses. The rightsholders -- the collective rights management
orgs -- would be able to grant blanket licenses to schools that
meet their needs. That's one possible solution. We've also looked
at compulsory licensing as has been recently tried in Australia.
There are lots of licenses that can be used, like Creative
Commons licenses that might be useful for scholarship. There's
also the possibility of using an implicit license. We would like
there to be an exception that enables legislators to define
exactly what they mean by fair use. Should the government specify
a definition?

Education circles have suggested that they should be able to use
any works on the internet as long as they are not protected by
TPMs.

Many options are available to us at this time. Some content is
online and there is no expectation for payment for its use. How
can we take this into account? The following was suggested: If a
technical protection measure is not imposed to lock users out of
the content, then the education sector should be able to use such
content. We would like for the education sector to assume that
things on the Internet can be used freely unless it explicitly
states that they are not. There are two schools of thought on
this. We hope to soon release a document that will help us take
stock of these discussions.

--

Discussion:

Cancelled due to time constraint.