[A2k] EFF: What's next for the WIPO Webcasting and Broadcasting Treaties?

[Gwen Hinze]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Some thoughts, posted at EFF Deeplinks blog:
<ttp://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004657.php>

Full text below:

---

Blogging WIPO: What's Next for the Webcasting and Broadcasting Treaties?

As we reported last Friday, the public interest won a big victory at
WIPO's latest meeting on the Broadcasting Treaty. The contentious
provisions creating unjustified rights for webcasters and
simulcasters will be removed from the treaty. While this is good
news, the battle isn't over yet. The remainder of the treaty draft
covering "traditional" broadcasters and cablecasters still poses
significant problems, and the webcasting and simulcasing proposals
are still in play, as a separate draft treaty moving through a slower
process. Drafts of the revised broadcasting/ cablecasting and new
webcasting/ simulcasting treaties are due by August 1.

Why are the webcasting and simulcasting provisions so worrisome? The
treaty would have created new 50 year intellectual property rights
over Internet transmissions -- backed by technology mandate laws --
that would stifle technological innovation, impede the free flow of
information on the Internet, and create new liability for Internet
intermediaries. This might endanger new and existing devices such as
TiVos for online radio and Slingboxes, and transferring recorded
television to your Video iPod. In addition, creating this new layer
of rights above copyright would allow transmitters to restrict re-use
of transmitted public domain works or music you created and Creative
Commons-licensed.

The same concerns could still arise in the new webcasting and
simulcasting treaty, but that won't necessarily be the case. Unlike
the current broadcasting treaty draft's expansive intellectual
property rights framework, a future treaty could focus on a more
limited theft of signal or services approach. That would not require
rights to control "fixation" for any length of time, nor rights over
post-fixation uses, or technological protection measures. Last week
many member states -- including the U.S. -- expressed support for a
treaty more focused on signal theft. The U.S. delegation is tasked
with producing a signal theft approach proposal before September.

However, it's still possible that webcasting and simulcasting could
come back into the "traditional" broadcasting treaty. The U.S. and
E.U. delegations stated that if the WIPO General Assembly does not
vote in September to hold a 2007 Diplomatic Conference on
"traditional" broadcasting and cablecasting, they want webcasting and
simulcasting to be part of the package in future talks. That would be
a big step backwards. Webcasters and simulcasters could then be given
full intellectual property-based rights over Internet transmissions.
A lot is now riding on the September General Assembly.

Even if webcasting and simulcasting are out, the remaining
"traditional" broadcasting and cablecasting treaty is still bad news.
It will be detrimental for technology innovation. It includes
broadcaster technological protection measures that will require
technology mandate laws like the U.S. FCC Broadcast Flag regulation
over televisions, radios and possibly even personal computers. The
treaty could create the global legal framework for tech mandate laws
that rival the proposed U.S. broadcast and digital radio flag
mandates. As EFF, Intel Corp. and many others have noted, the
combination of DRM mandates with novel rights raises serious threats
to innovative entertainment technologies.

The remaining treaty also raises significant concerns for access to
material in the public domain. As demonstrated by the recent deal
between the Smithsonian Museum and Showtime, granting transmitters a
new layer of rights that apply over and above copyright, and are
enforced by legally-sanctioned technological measures, is likely to
restrict the public's ability to access public knowledge.

These issues deserve consideration now, not as an afterthought once
the "traditional" broadcasting treaty is almost a fait accompli in
September.

To get the full story, read the NGO Coalition's notes of last week's
meeting after the jump.
---


Gwen Hinze
International Affairs Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Email: gwen@eff.org
Tel.: +1 415 436 9333 x110