[Openstandaarden] [OT] Fwd: WIPO Broadcasting Treaty Survey
-- call for volunteers
Wouter Vanden Hove
wouter.vanden.hove at pandora.be
Tue May 4 16:21:11 CEST 2004
Ward Vandewege wrote:
> Dit is niet direct on topic, maar op deze lijst zitten waarschijnlijk wel
> mensen die dit zal interesseren. Het is een probleem waar we steeds meer
> mee te maken schijnen te krijgen - hoog boven onze hoofden (Europese
> commissie, WIPO,...) wordt vanalles beslist, zonder enige democratisch
> controle, en uiteraard enkel in het voordeel van big business...
Ik heb daar deze week een boek over gekocht:
Who Owns the Knowledge Economy?"
by Peter Drahos with John Braithwaite
Heel interessant voor "the big picture",
mogelijk zitten er nog enkele goede argumenten in voor politici om tegen
software-patenten te stemmen.
> ----- Forwarded message from David Tannenbaum <davidt at public-domain.org> -----
> Hi List,
> Nearly 2 years ago Phil Kerr posted to this list about a treaty that
> would give broadcasters new powers to control recording of broadcasts,
> possibly including webcasts; extend the length of these powers from 20
> to 50 years, and require countries to ban circumventions of
> technological protection measures (eg, the US's broadcast flag). (see
> http://www.xenoclast.org/free-sklyarov-uk/2002-August/003044.html) All
> of this even if the broadcast is of a public domain work.
> Well, the treaty is here now. A chairman's draft has been released, and
> will be negotiated in early June.
> If you've heard about the proposed WIPO Broadcast Treaty, then you
> already know that the big broadcasting companies are ready to ram
> through a treaty that gives them new powers over material already in the
> public domain.
> Unfortunately this issue has been so far under the radar screen that no
> one really knows where most governments stand on the treaty's provisions.
> We want to change that by surveying our governments and posting the
> results to the web (see the survey below). This effort is completely
> volunteer driven, and we need as much help as we can get.
> Can you help out in your country? So far we are very short on volunteers
> from the UK and the EU more generally. Please contact me if you can help
> out, at davidt at public-domain dot org.
> And please spread this message far and wide--time is short and we need
> as much help as we can get.
> Coordinator, Union for the Public Domain
> davidt at public-domain dot org
> * For more information on the details of the treaty see Ernest Miller's
> excellent report at
> http://www.corante.com/importance/archives/002925.html, and Edward
> Felten's sharp analysis at
> * You can also download a copy of the survey from our website,
> UNION FOR THE PUBLIC DOMAIN SURVEY OF NATIONAL GOVERNMENT
> REPRESENTATIVES REGARDING THE WIPO BROADCASTING TREATY
> The free exchange of knowledge and information enabled by the public
> domain is being threatened by proposals in many international forums,
> including the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). One of
> the major difficulties of protecting the public domain against these
> threats is that the positions of national representatives in these
> international forums are unknown, even to citizens of the country they
> represent. We want to change that.
> This questionnaire is being used by volunteers to collect information
> about national positions on the proposed WIPO Broadcasting Treaty. The
> results you collect will be posted on the Web so that citizens in your
> country and around the world can act appropriately to protect the
> public domain.
> The proposed WIPO Broadcasting Treaty expands and gives new privileges
> to transmitters of information. Rights that are normally granted to
> creators and performers would be given to organizations that merely
> transmit works and performances--even if those works are in the public
> domain, or if those works' creators wish to have the works distributed
> without restriction. (For more information see Ernest Miller's excellent
> analysis at http://www.corante.com/importance/archives/002925.html.) It
> is important that we find out how countries stand on this proposed
> expansion of rights.
> To find out where national government officials stand you can e-mail
> this questionnaire to them for a written response, or you can interview
> the officials over the phone and record their answers. There is not yet
> an easy way to find out who is representing your country at WIPO. You
> can start the search by scouring the web, and then by calling the
> country's copyright or trade office. As volunteers collect contact
> information we will make it available so that the process is easier the
> next time around.
> Time is of the essence, so if one method of getting answers isn't
> working, try another. It may take some work to find someone who is
> willing to answer the survey, but your persistence will pay off by
> strengthening our efforts to protect the public domain and the free
> exchange of knowledge and information.
> If you are collecting information, please be sure to contact the
> coordinator of the survey, survey at public-domain.org, so that we can keep
> track of what countries we have covered. Also make sure you record the
> contact information of the government officials with whom you interact,
> and the results of your interaction, even if they were negative. This
> way we can be more efficient next time we administer a survey.
> And if you know anyone else who would be interested in helping out,
> please ask them to download the survey at
> http://www.public-domain.org/?q=node/view/30 and to contact
> survey at public-domain.org.
> Thank you for all of your help!
> Information about person administering survey
> E-mail address:
> Country surveyed:
> Country of residence:
> Record of Interactions with Government Officials
> [please duplicate this section if you have more than one interaction]
> Name of official:
> Contact info (phone, fax, e-mail, postal address):
> Description of interaction (for example, gave all answers; gave some
> answers; helpful and friendly, but doesn't work on this issue, etc):
> QUESTIONS FOR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
> Consideration Process and Timing
> Should WIPO schedule a diplomatic conference on the proposed WIPO
> Broadcast Treaty?
> Length of Powers
> Should the proposed Treaty grant 50 years of exclusive broadcasting
> rights, as proposed by some, or retain the 20 year term in TRIPS and the
> 1961 Rome Convention covering broadcasters? rights, as proposed by
> Scope of Powers
> Should the Treaty apply only to traditional wireless broadcasting; or
> should the Treaty be extended to transmissions over wired cable networks
> as proposed in Article 2(c)?
> Should the Treaty be extended to apply to ?webcasting?, meaning making
> accessible images and/or sounds over computer networks, as proposed in
> Alternative C, Article 2(g)?
> If the Treaty includes a provision on webcasting, what is the
> appropriate definition of webcasting? Would you support an alternative
> definition to that proposed in Alternative C, Article 2(g)?
> The current draft covers transmissions or the ?making accessible? of
> ?sounds or of images or of images and and sounds or of the
> representations thereof? (Definitions, Article 2.) As currently
> drafted, do you believe that the proposed Treaty will cover all types of
> content that is broadcast, including text, and other data?
> Would you support extending the Treaty only so far as to cover motion
> pictures and or sounds, but excluding text and other data?
> Nature of Broadcasters? Powers
> Should the Treaty simply provide broadcasters with the right to prohibit
> or authorize fixations of broadcasts (as provided in Article 13 of the
> Rome Convention and Article 8 of the proposed Treaty), or go further, by
> granting the following additional rights?
> * the right to authorize or prohibit distribution to the public of
> original and reproductions of fixations of a broadcast, as provided
> under Article 10;
> * the right to authorize deferred transmission of broadcasts after
> fixation as provided under Article 11;
> * the right to authorize or prohibit the making available of broadcasts
> from fixations, as provided under Article 12 of the proposed Treaty?
> Should the broadcast organization have the power to restrict the
> fixation or redistribution of broadcasts of materials that are in the
> public domain?
> Should the Treaty allow Contracting Parties to make explicit exceptions
> for certain purposes, like the four purposes currently recognized under
> Article 14 of the Rome Convention ((a) private use; (b) use of short
> excerpts for reporting of current events: (c) ephemeral fixation by own
> facilities for use in own broadcasts; and (d) sole purpose teaching and
> scientific research)?
> What other legitimate exceptions should the Treaty permit to preserve
> the existing balance between various types of holders of rights in
> content and users and viewers of that content? Do you support the
> exceptions as currently drafted in Article 15 of the proposed Treaty?
> Legal Sanctions for circumventing technological protection on broadcasts
> Do you support the inclusion of the provisions in Articles 16 and 17
> which require Treaty parties to ban the circumvention of technological
> protection measures added to signals by broadcasters, and protection for
> technologically protected content?
> Do you support a further ban on the importation, sale or making
> available of devices capable of assisting to decrypt an encrypted
> program-carrying signal, such as a satellite signal, as proposed in
> Alternative V, Article 16(2) of the proposed Treaty? Or do you believe
> existing copyright law as applied to the underlying work being broadcast
> under Articles 11 ? 12 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty and Articles 18 - 19
> of the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty is sufficient.
> Free-sklyarov-uk mailing list
> Free-sklyarov-uk at xenoclast.org
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> Openstandaarden mailing list
> Openstandaarden at openstandaarden.be
More information about the Openstandaarden