[A2k] Broadcasting Treaty: From “The Bridge on the River Kwai” to “They Shoot Horses, Don't Th ey?”

[Manon Ress]

Broadcasting Treaty: From “The Bridge on the River Kwai” to “They
Shoot Horses, Don't They?”

For 10 years, the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights
has been negotiating a treaty for the protection of broadcasting,
cablecasting and webcasting organizations.  For the last few years of
negotiations, some people were drawing a parallel between what was
going on at the SCCR meetings and the novel then movie "The Bridge on
the River Kwai".  Some people were even whistling the famous score
whistled by Colonel Nicholson (Alec Guinness). (See: http://www.imdb.com/ti=
tle/tt0050212/)

In short, in the movie, the British colonel co-operates with the
captors to lead his men in the construction of a bridge that will be
destroyed by the allies.  While the first instinct of the men is to
sabotage the bridge, their leader convinces them that it is their duty
to build the bridge as a symbol of British morale and dignity.
Back to the SCCR.  As Jukka Liedes, the Chair-for-life of the SCCR
explains in his paper ( See http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/doc_details.jsp=
?doc_id=109212
  ) prepared for the next meeting November 3-7, 2008, the negotiations
kept failing because 86 countries have signed the Rome convention and
thus consider giving more related rights to casters but more than 100
states (including the US) have never signed the Rome and do not
believe in giving intellectual property rights to casters.  It does
not mean the casters are not protected, just not with intellectual
property rights.

And then you also have the business of including webcasting which, as
Jukka Liedes pointed out, led many delegates (including NGOs) to
oppose the treaty for the potential harm to consumers and innovation.

In his paper, the Chair describes perfectly the long failing process
but like Colonel Nicholson, he walks on.  Describing the need to
update the international protection of broadcasting and cablecasting
organizations, he makes sure to reassure us that it would absolutely
be "in line with the Development Agenda at WIPO" and would be really
useful for developing countries.  Since the big demandeur for the
treaty is the American National Broadcasting Association (NBA), it is
a stretch but maybe the delegates will buy it (again)?

In his conclusion, Jukka Liedes, explains 2 options:
    QUOTE
    A – A continuation of the process
-            Another try could still be suggested on the basis of the
document SCCR/15/2 rev.
-            In addition, discussions could be based on informal papers.
-            This endeavor should be open, inclusive and flexible.
-            In the end, there could be an understanding that a new
treaty might be established by a clear majority.
B – A possible new avenue
-            A model based roughly on Articles 2 and 3 of the Geneva
Phonograms Convention of 1971 could be envisaged;  similar to that of
the Brussels Satellite Convention.
-            That model is different from those included so far in the
working documents of the SCCR.
-            That model could achieve the main objective of an
international protection and the prevention of signal theft.
-            To provide the delegations with an idea of the structure
of such an option, its core provisions might be as follows:
“The Contracting Parties shall protect broadcasting and cablecasting
organizations, who are nationals of other Contracting Parties, against
unauthorized acts, including:
- retransmission
- fixation
- [other acts that might be agreed on].
The means by which this Treaty is implemented shall be a matter for
the domestic law of each Contracting Party.  The means shall be
adequate and effective, and shall include one or more of the following:
- protection by means of copyright, rights related to copyright, or
other specific rights;
- protection by means of the law relating to unfair competition or
misappropriation;
- protection by means of administrative legislation or penal sanctions.”
END OF QUOTE
The Option C, to end the discussions is not really an option:
quote:
Finally, if after consideration of the options above (A/B) and
possible other options, it will not in the present situation be
possible to decide on the establishment of a new treaty, the SCCR
should end these discussions through an express decision in order to
avoid further spending of time, energy and resources to no avail.
Such a decision could include a timetable for later revisiting and
reconsidering the matter.
end of quote

Which made me think of another good movie:  They Shoot Horses, Don't
They?
(See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/They_Shoot_Horses,_Don%27t_They%3F)

Seriously, the WIPO delegates should put the broadcasting treaty “out
of its misery.”

Hopefully, many still believe that the SCCR should concern itself with
important and useful work.  And there is such possibility.  There is
another item on the agenda: limitations and exceptions.

For over 10 years, WIPO has been pushing for more and stricter rights
and it is time to examine how the lack harmonization for limitations
and exceptions are affecting users of knowledge and entertainment
goods such as consumers, libraries, education and people with reading
disabilities.   That would be in line with the development agenda and
would make a difference.






***************************************************************************
Manon Ress
manon.ress@keionline.org
Knowledge Ecology International
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20009 USA
Tel.:  +1.202.332.2670, Fax: +1.202.332.2673