[A2k] Open Letter to SKG and Meeting Note concerning the WBU proposed WIPO Treaty

[Heesob Nam]

Open Letter to the Korean Government Concerning the Proposed WIPO
Treaty for People with Reading Disabilities

The 18th session of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related
Rights (SCCR) of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
was held on 25 to 29 May 2009.  During this session, Brazil, Ecuador
and Paraguay proposed official discussions on the WIPO Treaty for
Improved Access for Blind, Visually Impaired and Other Persons with
Reading Disabilities (the proposed WIPO Treaty), which was presented
by the World Blind Union last year.

It is widely accepted that a number of people with reading
disabilities throughout the world have suffered from restriction in
self-development and social participation due to limited access to
copyrighted works. Constructing social conditions in which people with
reading disabilities can equally participate in the cultural life and
enjoy scientific advancement and its benefits is not only a legitimate
right of these people, but also an obligation of the state. As a way
of fulfilling this obligation, South Korea has tried, like some other
states, to ensure rights of people with reading disabilities through
the provision of limitations on copyright in the Copyright Act. Yet
copyright provisions differ from one country to the next, and efforts
to protect people=92s right to access in different countries has been
constrained. It is therefore necessary to establish an internationally
applied rule regarding minimum standards on copyright limitations for
people with reading disabilities. This is also vital for striking a
fair balance between the protection of copyright and the fair use of
copyrighted works, which is inherent and essential in a copyright
system.

Considering this, we ask the following questions on the position of
the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism (MCST) in connection with
the proposed WIPO Treaty.

(1) At the 18th session of the SCCR, the Korean delegation, while
admitting the importance of enhancing access to copyrighted works by
people with reading disabilities, supported =93alternative ways=94, rather
than negotiating a treaty. What does the MCST actually mean by
=93alternative ways=94 that can enhance the right to access of people with
reading disabilities in an effective and sustainable manner, as
opposed to temporary assistance for these people?

(2) What is the reason for the position of the MCST and the Korean
delegation supporting =93alternative ways=94 rather than a treaty?

(3) Has the MCST, as an executive branch in charge of copyright
policies, conducted a detailed review of the proposed WIPO Treaty? We
ask that any review be made public.

(4) Does the MCST consider the proposed WIPO Treaty to be in conflict
with any provisions of the Korea Copyright Act?

(5) We believe that the proposed WIPO Treaty can be negotiated in
parallel with any efforts seeking to enhance access to information for
people with reading disabilities. International efforts to improve
access to information for people with reading disabilities started
several years ago, and relevant discussions within the WIPO began in
2003. We hardly see any reason to delay discussions on an
international treaty for that purpose.

We would like to know if the MCST and the Korean delegation to the
WIPO intend to clearly express strong support for the proposed WIPO
Treaty.

November 4, 2009

Disability Discrimination Act of Solidarity in Korea (DDASK)
IPLeft (Intellectual Property Left)

----------------
Notes from the Meeting between Civil Society Organization Members and
Korean Government (MCST)

November 27, 2009

MCST:  Why national civil society groups are interested in the
proposed WIPO Treaty? What makes CSO members take part in such a
movement?

CSO: Although Korean domestic laws already have provisions similar to
the proposed WIPO Treaty, access to foreign works can be enhanced by
the proposed WIPO Treaty. Our participation is also vital for the
shared aims of people with reading disabilities all over the world.

MCST: Korean delegation is =93supportive=94 of the proposed WIPO Treaty
and hopes the proposal will become an international treaty as
proposed, rather than weakened. One of the concerns is that some
delegations =96 including that of the US =96 worry that the proposed WIPO
Treaty may encourage copyright infringements, which are already
prevalent. If such concern is not relaxed, entering into a treaty is
to be delayed. Furthermore, since the WIPO Internet Treaty of 1996 we
have not seen any other treaty concluded within the WIPO (e.g. the
broadcasting treaty); getting agreement on such a treaty for people
with reading disabilities is also difficult. But the text of a treaty
is already on the table and this is a good start.

MCST: Concerning the =93alternative ways=94 to which the Korean delegation
referred at the WIPO meeting, the MCST has no clear ideas about what
exactly these =93alternative ways=94 are, and the Korean delegation is not
in a position to oppose the proposed WIPO Treaty. When the WIPO
discusses a treaty, any urgent efforts by the WIPO necessary for
helping people with reading disabilities are likely to be halted
because the WIPO is an intergovernmental organization with limited
resources. [On the other hand, according to a local news story
(mediaus.co.kr), the =93alternative ways=94 may include =93recommendations=
=94
which are easier to agree on than a treaty that may take more than 10
years, says an official of the MCST.

CSO: Our concern is that many industrialized countries have indirectly
expressed their opposition and that the Korean government has
frequently followed the U.S. position. So the statement on
=93alternative ways=94 seems to be no different from such indirect
opposition. Nonetheless, we welcome if the MCST is in a supportive
position and demand a clear expression of support from the Korean
delegation at the next session of the SCCR.

MCST: Concerning domestic policy on people with reading disabilities,
publishers still oppose the recently revised provisions in the
Copyright Act regarding copyright limitation for such people. Thus the
MCST focuses more on practical issues such as how to ensure the
prevention of copyright infringement in the process of converting
copyrighted works into an accessible format for people with reading
disabilities.

---

Heesob