[A2k] Re: DRM and the World Blind Union's Proposed Treaty for Reading Disabled Persons

[Norbert Bollow]

Janet Hawtin <janet@hawtin.net.au> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 6:34 AM, James Love <james.love@keionline.org> wr=
ote:
> > Dear Richard,
> >
> > Let me see if I understand where you are on this. =C2=A0Right now the W=
BU has
> > asked for a treaty that would grant disabled persons two freedoms. =C2=
=A0(1)
> > The freedom to use copyrighted works without permission from copyright
> > owners, in order to make versions that are accessible, and (2) the
> > freedom to circumvent DRM to make the copies, when the DRM is a barrier=
.
> > (Plus the ability to import and export the accessible works).
> >
> > You oppose the treaty on the grounds that it grants disabled persons th=
e
> > right to circumvent DRM.
> >
> > So you would support the treaty if it did not grant disabled persons th=
e
> > freedom to circumvent DRM?
> >
> > Jamie
>
> Is it feasible to make it permissable to circumvent DRM whenever the
> intended use is otherwise a legal copyright use?

This precisely is what the recently-revised copyright law of
Switzerland says.

I might add that the Swiss law not only allows making accessible for
people with disabilities, but also a good number of things from which
everyone benefits, including reverse engineering, and making copies
and sharing them with friends (for most types of works, and under the
condition that they don't pay you for copying and sharing).

These freedoms were under serious attack from the copyright industry
lobby.  Having been personally very strongly involved in lobbying in
this area, I believe that I can say that it was very successful to
have an alliance aimed at defending everyone's freedom, including the
freedom of having no legal obstacles against using Free Software to
access any works, which included disability organisations.  We made
various kinds of arguments, including arguments empasizing the
importance of Free Software, but it was the arguments related to
the needs of persons with disabilities that were most effective in
moving the hearts of the politicians.  In particular the argument
that blind people usually cannot afford for financial reasons to
always buy the newest version of screen reader programs, which would
be necessary to always keep up with the newest kinds of "accesssible
DRM" was very effective for protecting not just the freedom of blind
people, but also the freedom of Free Software users like myself.

In view of these experiences, I encourage Free Software advocates and
all others who value their freedom of not being restricted by DRM to
ally themselves with the disability organisations to jointly push both
for WBU's proposed treaty and for implementations into national law
which are beneficial for everyone.

The Swiss law could IMO serve as a reasonably good example for how the
proposed treaty can be implemented while also fulfilling the
requirements of international copyright law including the wicked "WIPO
internet treaties", minimizing the damage that the requirements of
those treaties cause to everyone's freedoms.

Greetings,
Norbert