Copyright for Education Blog- Visit to Hargreaves IP Review. Comment

[transferred from  july 2011]

Sorry Emily to have to do it this way round but I’ve tried twice to add a comment to  your very interesting blog report on visiting the IPO

and lost it in the blogger works at the last step. Bloody annoying.

My comment is as follows:

<start of comment>

You wrote:

“The concept of fair use cannot be implemented in the UK as it lies outside of the scope of Article 5 of the EU Information Society Directive, and even if it could it would be an unpopular solution as a result of the amount of litigation it would generate. But, as the Prime Minister has raised the fair use question, the Hargreaves Review must make recommendations on what could be done in place of fair use to better drive innovation”

True enough the whole body of USA fair use runs against the EU infosoc directive but a restricted version, recommendation 11 of the Gowers Review on transformative works could be unilaterally introduced in the UK.   The EU have  an IViR (Amsterdam) study that says Gowers seeking change at EU level is wrong as EU directive does not cover harmonisation of “adaptation”.  See the Scibella submission to the IP review for more detail.

IViR spell it out it even more  clearly in their response to the EU green paper on copyright in the knowledge economy  about user created content

“First, systematically, this question seems to derive from a misunderstanding of the legal structure of the Directive. The Directive does not harmonise a right of adaptation, nor does its catalogue of permitted exceptions relate thereto. In other words, insofar as an exception would allow certain transformative uses, it would have no place in a revised Directive, unless the Directive’s scope would be broadened to include a right of adaptation. Absent harmonisation of the adaptation right, Member States remain autonomous and may elect to codify exceptions or limitations to this right to permit certain non-commercial transformative uses.”


On the issue of litigation costs I note  that the Guardian has reported

“The Hargreaves inquiry could create a fair use review panel to rule over test cases, without the requirement for expensive lawyers”

Well ,we’ll just have to wait and see. 

Thanks for the steer in your post on linking Gowers and economic benefits which I tried to do in my submission. Pity they haven’t published it  and won’t tell me why so far. Sometimes the ways of Whitehall surpasseth understanding , well my humble understanding anyway.

<end of comment>

This entry was posted in Intellectual Property. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Copyright for Education Blog- Visit to Hargreaves IP Review. Comment

  1. Emily Goodhand says:

    Hi Pete,

    Many thanks for this – sorry my blog didn’t want to accept your comments! That’s a very interesting point you make about transformative works – I think we all tend to assume that we are bound only by what is in the Info Soc Directive rather than what is not. In which case, I would agree with you. However – I think one of the (many) problems with copyright law is that it lumps all of the exclusive rights together. I’m beginning to wonder now whether we shouldn’t take each right on its own merit and have particular exceptions for e.g. adaptation/derivatives, copying, communication to the public, and so on. It may not be the solution, but wonder if it would be a step in the right direction.

    I’ll reserve judgement on the fair use review panel… 😉 As long as representation on the panel is fair and balanced in itself, then I’ll be happy!

    All the best,

    Emily (@copyrightgirl)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s