The Electronic Frontier Foundation is not really happy at this moment
The Electronic Frontier Foundation published recently an article about
the problem of the CASE Act of 2017. We will summarize it, but you can find the
entire article here !
The CASE Act of 2017 has been criticised for many reasons, but the EFF
here is quite clear: they don’t want it. For them, the CASE Act will have
several unwanted consequences, and the first of them is the fact that the
Copyright Office will become a Copyright Court. This is the worst that could
happen for them, because “the Copyright Office it not known for its neutrality
on copyright issues”. According to the EFF, this will magnify the problem of
copyright’s unpredictable civil penalties.
Indeed, the CASE Act of 2017 would set up a “Copyright Claims Board”
within the Copyright Office, staffed by three judges empowered to hear
copyright complaints from all over the country. The proceedings will be
voluntary, but if a respondent fails to opt-out, the proceedings become binding
and the outcome can be enforced in federal court. According to the CASE Act,
the board car issue damages award up to $15 000 per work infringed, or €30 000
per proceeding. And of course, if the parties consent, it can issue “agreements
to cease infringing activities” … that become binding injunctions.
For the EFF, the opt-in method “would have greater incentive to design
proceedings that safeguard the respondent’s interests, and clear standards that
everyone can understand. Equally importantly, an opt-in approach would help
ensure that both participants affirmatively choose to litigate their dispute in
this new court, and help prevent copyright holders from abusing the system to
obtain inexpensive default judgments that will be hard to appeal”.
And you, what do you think?
EU Parliament voted for a copyright reform aimed at making more TV shows
and films available online across borders
Commercial TV broadcasters, football leagues and film producers scored a
win on Tuesday when European Union lawmakers watered down a copyright reform
aimed at making more TV shows and films available online across borders.
The EU Parliament
EU Parliament voted to restrict the scope of the copyright proposal to
news and current affairs, excluding TV shows and films. It means that
broadcasters will be able to show their news content online across the EU, but
only after clearing the rights in their home country!
The original proposal was contested by the media industry. According to
them, voting this kind of proposal would have lead to “pan-European licensing,
diluting the value of exclusive rights and squeezing out smaller broadcasters
that would be unable to afford pan-EU rights”. Indeed, films and TV shows are
often broadcast when selling exclusive distribution rights on a
country-by-country basis.
However, the vote is not final and dissenters still have hope as the EU
Parliament will have to find compromise with member states in the coming
months.
Call collect?
A couple of snippets of news from the world of collection societies: First off, The US Copyright Royalty Board is to raises some of the music streaming royalty rates instigating a change based on a cost of living adjustment for the rates paid to copyright holders by online webcasters. The rates increased to $0.0018 for commercial ad-supported non-interactive music streaming services, and $0.0023 per performance for paid services. That's up slightly from $0.0017 and $0.0022, respectively. Additional rate announcements from the CRB are expected in the coming days. And the collecting societies representing song rights saw the monies they collect worldwide rise by 6.8% to €8 billion last year – a jump in part fuelled by a 52% increase in digital income – according to new figures published by CISAC. Across all its member societies, digital income was up 51.4% at just under €1 billion. CISAC notes that the boost mainly came from premium streaming services.
Except this? Except that?
The World Intellectual Property Organisation is going to take a long hard look at the issue of limitations and exceptions to copyright, and provide a draft action plans, one each for libraries, archives, museums, educational research institutions, and persons with other disabilities than sight impairment. The plans, being discussed in this week’s committee meeting, include brainstorming sessions, studies, and regional seminars, and conferences to advance understanding and issues related to copyright for those particular actors. The WIPO secretariat has circulated a document [pdf] providing draft action plans for different strands of the discussions for the 2018-2019 biennium.
Web-blocking in Switzerland and South-Africa?
You may no know what web-blocking is… This is the anti-piracy tactic
where rights owners can get injunctions forcing internet service providers to
block their customers from accessing piracy websites. For right owners, this is
the perfect anti-piracy tool, and they surely hope that this tool would soon be
available in more and more countries.
A new Cybercrimes and Cybersecurity Bill is
currently on trail in South Africa, and the local entertainment industry asked
for web-blocking. The local entertainment industry took the example of some
European countries, in which there is already this web-blocking tool, and asked
the ISPs to consider adopting this method. Just like in some European
countries, such as France with its “Hadopi”, they also asked for the ISPs to
send warning letters to suspected online infringers, and maybe even monitor
infringement on their networks.
Unfortunately, none of that is going to be included in the Cybercrimes
and Cybersecurity Bill. Ministers opposed them that their proposals were not
within the remit of the Bill. However, another Bill is coming, based on seeking
to amend the country’s copyright law, and these proposals would be better put
forward for that legislation.
In Switzerland, we’re focusing on a copyright review. A lot of critics
have been going on for some time on the fact that the copyright regime is
ill-equipped to deal with infringement. Indeed, in Switzerland, casual
downloading and streaming of unlicensed content is covered by the pesky private
exception.
Various new anti-piracy measures have been proposed during the current
copyright review and an update on which proposals will go forward was published
last week. A possible takedown-and-stay-down requirement has been proposed… Is
something great coming?
According to Torrentfreak, Swiss lawmakers have already knocked back
proposals that web-blocking be introduced there. However, as people will still
be able to “pirate” copyrighted material (as long as that content is consumed
privately), it does not include videogames and software. And here is something new: any supposed losses will be compensated via
a compulsory tax of 13 Swiss francs, levied on media playback devices including
phones and tablets.
You may also note that uploading is explicitly ruled out. Rights-holders
will be able to capture IP addresses of suspected infringers in order to file a
criminal complaint with authorities! That being said, there will be no system
of warning notices.
As you see, the news is coming, and it sounds better than before!
This Copykat from Lolita S.
No comments:
Post a Comment