[A2k] Indiantelvision.com: WIPO working on new treaty for b'casters

[Manon Ress]

Dear Andrea,

I wish I could tell you that the SCCR is only doing a "signal protection
treaty" and all we should be worried about is the broadcast
flag...However, it is not all we have to worry about.

The original rational was based on concerns regarding signal piracy of
television.  It was presented as an =E2=80=9Cupdate=E2=80=9D of the Rome, B=
erne, TRIPS,
WCCT and WPPT.  Somecynics believe that the WIPO Standing Committee on
Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) wants to justify its existence by
producting new treaties (Debacle of the =E2=80=9Cperformers' treaty in 2000=
).

Why we are concerned: the new casting treaty, will create new rights for
broadcasters, cablecasters AND webcasters, expands scope and duration of
existing rights (in most jurisdications), creates a precedent for
protection based on investment (as for database treaty) AND extends the
power of broadcasting/cable/and webcasting organizations to control
consumer use of text, data, images and sounds, including material in the
public domain

Many, including in the copyright owners NGOs, expressed serious concerns
over new rights for the casters.  For example, the act of transmiting
material would give a new layer of property rights to restrict and
authorize use, even for materials not restricted by copyright owners
older works now in public domain, for works for which copyright owner
permits redistribution (such as CC or GPL type licenses), for works not
subject to copyright (non-orginal or creative works such as data,
government works, some live events, etc).

AND the duration of the rights is 50 years (the more limited in scope
Rome and TRIPS provisions have a duration of 20 years).

The US (and now the EU in some ways) seek to include webcasting in the
treaty.  The proposal creates new and untested rights for webcasters who
seek to claim ownership over works that are now freely available.

As you know, the internet is the best opportunity ever to provide more
equal access to knowledge...and this treaty could be the biggest threat
to A2K.  A last depressing note:  broadcasters (and cable casters) seem
to have huge political power ALL OVER THE WORLD and they will get as
much as they can if more countries do not push back.

Feel free to ask more questions or check:

http://www.cptech.org/ip/wipo/wipo-casting.html


Andrea Glorioso wrote:
> Dear Thiru, dear all,
>
>
>>>>>>"Thiru" =3D=3D Thiru Balasubramaniam <thiru@cptech.org> writes:
>
>
>     > * http://www.indiantelevision.com/headlines/y2k5/apr/apr62.htm
>
>     > WIPO working on new treaty for b'casters
>
>     > *(6 April 2005 7:00 pm)
>
>     > MUMBAI: With new technologies like broadband emerging, the
>     > Geneva-based World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) is
>     > developing a treaty, which will update the rights of
>     > broadcasters in a digital scenario.
>
> At  the cost  of sounding stupid,  which treaty  are we  talking about
> here?   As  far  as  I could understand,  work   on the  protection of
> broadcast  signals is basically  held in the SCCR,  and  the focus was
> mainly  on  DRM and the  equivalent of  the US FTC-mandated "broadcast
> flag".  What am I missing?
>
> Ciao,
>
> --
> Andrea Glorioso=09=09andrea@digitalpolicy.it
>                         +39 348 921 4379
>
> _______________________________________________
> A2k mailing list
> A2k@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k
>
>

--
Manon Anne Ress
manon.ress@cptech.org,
www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology in Washington, DC PO Box 19367,
Washington, DC 20036, USA Tel.:  +1.202.387.8030, fax: +1.202.234.5176

Consumer Project on Technology in Geneva, 1 Route des  Morillons, CP
2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland. Tel: +41 22 791 6727

Consumer Project on Technology in London, 24 Highbury Crescent, London,
N5 1RX, UK. Tel:+44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252. Mob:+44(0)790 386 4642. Fax:
+44(0)207 354 0607