In 2017, PIJIP released the User Rights Database, a novel, survey-based dataset, which measures changes to countries’ laws on copyright exceptions over time. Last spring we have added three additional countries to the dataset – Canada, Mexico and Taiwan. This post introduces the new data and discusses how it compares to the data from the original set of countries.
Research Symposium, QUT Faculty of Law, 29 July 2020 Overview This event will consider the relationship between intellectual property and higher education in the age of the public health crisis over the coronavirus COVID-19. It will bring together scholars, experts,…
Last March, the European Commission sent a letter to the South African government warning that its proposed Copyright Amendments Bill carried a "significant legal uncertainty, with negative effects on the South African creative community in general and on foreign investment, including European investment." In May, MEP Jiří POSPÍŠIL asked who from the Commission sent the letter and why they did so. He noted that the Bill "was the result of a consultation involving representatives of all sectors of South African society, and it concluded that it was the best option available and that it was expected to bring positive effects for South African society." He also asked which multinational companies the Commission had communicated with about the Bill.
[Natalia Mileszyk] Last month, we held the first edition of our Copyright Directive Webinars, aimed at explaining the different provisions of the new Copyright Directive and making suggestions on what to advocate for during the implementation process of those provisions at a national level, to expand and strengthen user rights. We’ve now released the presentations and video recordings of the webinars. As you know, many countries are now speeding up with the process of implementation of the Directive – you can find below a short summary of what’s going on.
In his online newsletter, President Ramaphosa regularly speaks about unemployment, poverty and various socio-economic problems that are negatively affecting millions of people in our country. He stresses the importance of education, social upliftment and the need to improve the lives of people with disabilities. He stresses the importance of a reading culture and an employed public. He talks about the various Government initiatives and plans underway to address many of these issues. Yet, he fails to acknowledge that access to information and knowledge-sharing are key elements for socio-economic development and advancement, teaching and learning, as well as creativity and innovation in South Africa.
The President of South Africa recently exercised his power to return the long considered Copyright Amendment Bill back to Parliament because of reservations about its constitutionality. Specifically, the South African President declared unconstitutional the provisions in the bill that would require contracts with creators to include royalty payments, the reversion of ownership rights back to creators, and the introduction into South Africa of a fair use right and other common exceptions to copyright. The move was immediately heralded by representatives of collecting management organizations, multinational publishers and music labels as a win for creators. In fact, the provisions declared unconstitutional by the President serve the interests of individual creators vis a vis these well-heeled intermediaries who lobbied extensively against the bill. This note analyzes the specific constitutional reservations given by the President for his referral and concludes that all of them are acutely unsupported.
[Teresa Hackett] At the end of March, at the height of the global lockdown, UNESCO estimates that more than 1.5 billion learners in 193 countries were affected by country-wide or localized closures of schools and other educational institutions. The closures happened overnight and mid-way through the academic year, leaving no time for teachers and students to prepare. For education to continue, it had to move off-campus and online.
[South African Democratic Teachers Union, Independent Beneficiaries Forum, South African Guild of Actors, ReCreate South Africa, Section 27 and BlindSA] On June 16th we celebrate the resistance by the youth of Soweto and across South Africa to oppressive laws that limited their future education prospects based on race. In 1976 black school students left their desks to protest the imposition of Afrikaans as a medium of instruction. The massacre of students that followed was one of the darkest days in the history of apartheid. Sadly, 44 years later on June 16th 2020, we faced another dark day for the prospects of our young people. In a letter which received little media attention, President Cyril Ramaphosa referred the Copyright Amendment Bill back to Parliament. This move by the President could dash the future education and employment prospects of millions more young South Africans.
Last week, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa returned the Copyright Amendment Bill and the Performers' Protection Amendment Bill back to Parliament for further consideration. The legislation had been passed by the National Assembly and sent to the President to be signed into law, but it had generated strong opposition from rightholder groups, including those in the U.S. such as the IIPA.
[Jonathan Band] The documents provided to Knowledge Ecology International in response to its Freedom of Information Act request to the U.S. Trade Representative concerning the South African Copyright Amendment Bill (“CAB”) led to the discovery of a set of comments on the draft bill prepared by Michele Woods, Director of the Copyright Law Division of the World Intellectual Property Organization. These comments, dated October 1, 2018, in effect refute the central argument of the International Intellectual Property Alliance’s petition to USTR that South Africa should be denied U.S. trade preferences because the CAB, if signed into law, would not provide adequate and effective protection to intellectual property. Woods prepared these comments as a member of a panel of experts appointed by the Portfolio Committee of the South African Parliament to review the CAB. Woods stated that the comments reflected her views and are not official WIPO interpretations of international treaty obligations.
[Laurence R. Helfer, Molly K. Land, and Ruth L. Okediji] Abstract: This article reviews state ratification and implementation of the Marrakesh Treaty since its conclusion in 2013. We find that most states have adhered closely to the Treaty’s text, thus creating a de facto global template of exceptions and limitations that has increasingly enabled individuals with print disabilities, libraries and schools to create accessible format copies and share them across borders. The article argues that the Marrakesh Treaty’s core innovation—mandatory exceptions to copyright to promote public welfare—together with consultations with a diverse range of stakeholders, may offer a model for harmonising human rights and IP in other contexts.
[Paul Keller] Article 17 of the DSM directive establishes that Online Content Sharing Service Providers (OCSSPs) are liable for copyright infringing uploads by their users unless they either obtain a license for the use of such content, or take a number of measures designed to prevent the availability of such content on their platforms. While the directive never explicitly talks about filters or automated content recognition (ACR) systems, it is assumed by all sides of the debate that, in order to meet this obligation, platforms have little choice but to implement ACR-based filtering systems that will scan all user uploads and block or remove uploads that contain works that have been flagged by their rightholders.