To
students of the School of Information Studies at University of Ottawa:
The European Commission (EC) has opened public on
the copyright reform for the European Union, legislation that will impact
copyright policy in Canada. Now, before February 5, is the time
to have your voice heard on this import issue for information
professionals.
As busy students, an easy way to have your say is
to visit the website copywrongs.eu
developed by group of workshop participants at a
recent Chaos Communication Congress.
All you have to do is visit the website, select a copyright issue that
is of interest to you, and fill out the comment box. A standard response to the question “I feel that copyright
duration is excessively long” has been developed for your use.
Should you
choose to develop a different message and/or respond to another question, you
are encouraged to share this response by posting it to this blog.
In today’s
global economy, decisions made for the European Union on copyright reform set
precedents in turn putting pressure other countries to conform. Balanced copyright legislation is important.
If copyright is skewed, negative impacts ensue society: access to information
and cultural production is reduced, innovation and growth in the economy is
obstructed. Let us ensure that we
have a voice in the debate.
Standard
Response to “I feel that copyright duration excessively long”
As a student of the School of Information
Studies at the University of Ottawa, I am concerned that the length of
copyright duration in the EU is excessively long.
If copyright is extended or remains as life of the
artist plus 70 years, EU citizens, as well as their culture and scholarship
will be placed at a strategic disadvantage. Taking into consideration that few
copyrighted works are commercially available, and that orphan works present a
challenge to digitization, long copyright terms inhibit access to literature,
music, art and scholarship. As
such, copyright obstructs learning, innovation and economic growth.
To achieve its intended outcome, copyright is
meant to benefit all of society, and not solely to protect the interests of
corporate bodies. During this
consultation, the public has been asked to consider whether the current
copyright terms are appropriate in a digital age. I would argue that today’s copyright protection policies are
too restrictive. Decentralized
production characterizes the knowledge economy. Content consumers are also content producers and not
everyone is motivated to created because of copyright. Evidence of this can be
found all over the Internet. For
example, many are choosing to customize copyright for their work through
creative commons licenses. Restrictive
copyright laws hinder innovation, knowledge production and sharing.
Copyright is intended to ensure that incentives
and rewards are in place for content producers. Since profit margins for most works are only high for a
short period after publication, there would be no more incentive to artists
were copyright periods to be extended.
The Berne convention states that copyright should
extend 50 years after the life of an artist. Countries should not attempt a race to the bottom by
extending copyright terms in favour of large corporations, who are the only
beneficiaries to such policy.
As the European Commission considers the
duration of copyright protection, evidenced-based decisions factoring in broad
social and economic growth should be priorities over the economic interests of
a few. Decisions made for the
European Union on copyright reform set precedents in turn putting pressure
other countries to conform.
Balanced copyright legislation is important. If copyright is skewed,
negative impacts ensue society: access to information and cultural production
is reduced, innovation and growth in the economy is obstructed. Let us ensure that the EU is not racing
to the bottom.
No comments:
Post a Comment