[A2k] ] NGO files law suit against Brazilian Publishers Association]

[Michelle Childs]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: [ipr] NGO files law suit against Brazilian Publishers Association
From:    "Vera Franz" <vfranz@osieurope.org>
Date:    Tue, July 25, 2006 11:55 am


        To add to the below: Thailand's Supreme Court has recently ruled
that whole works can be copied for free for educational purposes.
I am waiting to receive the English translation of this decision
and will then post it to this mailing list. all best, Vera

 *

 from http://www.a2kbrasil.org.br/ENG/article.php3?id_article=43
 Source: IDCID (small adaptations and translation made by Andr&eacute;s
Vivas and Pedro Paranagu&aacute;)

 NGO Files Law Suit Against Brazilian Publishers Association The
Counterattack Begins Monday 24 July 2006  On June 1, 2006, the
International Trade Law and Development Institute (IDCID), a Brazilian
public-interest Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) comprised of renowed
professors, filed a Public Civil law suit (a law suit filed on behalf of
public interests) against the Brazilian Association of Reprography Rights
(ABDR). The law suit was filed at the 5th S&atilde;o Paulo State Civil
Court, and runs in the care of the 1st instance Judge Adevanir Carlos
Moreira da Silveira. The ABDR, which represents several &#8212; but not
all &#8212; Brazilian editors, has taken up several initiatives since
2004 to prevent both students and professors throughout Brazil from even
partially reproducing copyrighted materials for educational purposes and
academic research throughout all of Brazil. Since these initiatives
began, the act of photocopying has now become a very serious legal
infraction, with professors and students held as pirates, barbarians, and
criminals. It is worth mentioning that the Brazilian copyright law, no.
9.610/98, art. 46, enumerates the exceptions and limitations to
copyrights. Photocopying small parts is allowed, but the Law does not
define what "small parts" mean, nor the Courts do. Their is no "fair use"
or "fair dealing" provision under Brazilian copyright law. But the 1988
Brazilian Constitution is clear when it says that property must have a
social function. The Constitution also says that everyone shall have
access to information, culture, and education. Such initiatives taken by
the ABDR are based in the argument that reproduction of copyrighted
materials, even if it is for unquestionably public ends, inhibits
cultural development in Brazil, stripping authors, or more appropriately,
the publishing houses, of a monopoly on the diffusion of information. The
law suit filed by the IDCID argues that the ABDR fails to recognize the
fact that 24.7% of Brazilians are miserable, of which 83% are illiterate.
In other words, an extremely relevant portion of Brazil&#8217;s
population exists without resources sufficient enough for survival,
making it undeniable that for this population it is unthinkable to cope
with the acquisition of book and other cultural goods with the purchase
of food at the same time. Consequently, recognition of the right of this
important portion of the population to reproduce copyrighted works, even
in their entirety, does not interfere with the normal means that authors
have for extracting financial resources from their work, as this sector
can be considered outside of the consumer market. Suppression of the
right of substantial portions of the population to freely reproduce
protected works will not affect the total number of purchases of
published materials. Without education and information, there is not even
the most minimal possibility of enabling this segment of the population
to the fullest of his or her potential both professionally and in terms
of material and intellectual development. The Public Civil law suit taken
by the IDCID seeks to free the right of partial reproduction of
copyrighted materials for educational purposes and academic research
throughout all of Brazil, and more importantly, to allow for entire
reproduction of protected works by the more materially fragile segment of
society, as a means of making viable access to basic instruments for
intellectual and individual formation. The logic of the law suit was
based upon the notion that copyrights are means for reaching a greater
end, and not an end in and of themselves. When blind observance of
copyright raises difficulties for attaining such an objective, its
interpretation and application should be rethought. Restricting access to
information inhibits the development of Brazilian society in material and
intellectual terms.  Source: IDCID (small adaptations and translation
made by Andr&eacute;s Vivas and Pedro Paranagu&aacute;) --  Vera Franz
Program Manager Information Program  Open Society Foundation 100,
Cambridge Grove London W6 0LE phone +44 20 7031 0219 fax +44 20 7031 0201

--
Michelle Childs -Head of European Affairs
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
http://www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology in Washington, DC
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20009 USA .Tel.:
+1.202.332.2670,Fax: +1.202.332.2673

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