[Ecommerce] WID story on Broadcasting

[Manon Ress]

"Webcasters are happy"?... but they're out according to other stories.
Talk about spinning
Manon

See:

http://www.cptech.org/ip/wipo/wid11232004.html

Proposal to Protect Webcasting Signals Gains Support

Washington Internet Daily vol 5, no. 225
November 23, 2004
Dugie Standeford

GENEVA -- Ending 3 days of tough debate, delegates at last week's
meeting of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Standing
Committee on Copyright & Related Rights (SCCR) edged closer to agreement
on a treaty aimed at updating IP protections for broadcasters.
"Substantial progress" was made toward narrowing differences on key
issues, WIPO said Mon. Broadcasters called the meeting a success, and
webcasters said they'll probably win some protection for their broadcast
signals. Civil society groups, on the other hand, said developing
countries are being bullied into submission.

Key decisions included: (1) WIPO will organize consultation meetings in
Geneva, and regionally as requested by member states. (2) SCCR Chmn.
Jukka Liedes will prepare a 2nd revised version of the consolidated
treaty text and a working paper to address whether and how protection
should extend to webcasters. (3) Consensus will be sought on the scope
and duration of rights under the treaty. Some delegations want signals
protected 20 years, while most delegations called for 50, WIPO said. (4)
At its next meeting, the SCCR will discuss a proposal by Chile
concerning exceptions and limitations to copyright rights for education,
libraries and disabled persons.

U.S. webcasters were "exceedingly pleased" with the European
Commission's (EC's) enthusiastic support for addressing Webcasting in
the primary treaty, said Digital Media Assn. Exec. Dir. Jonathan Potter.
Both delegations argued that webcasting is enough like broadcasting, at
least regarding piracy, to be included in the treaty, he said. Potter
expects Liedes to propose that webcasting be addressed in a protocol
attached to the treaty. Webcasters were also happy that, for the first
time, several dozen countries acknowledged that webcasting is important
and must be addressed. Those that didn't, Potter said, tended to have
more of a regulatory than an antipiracy enforcement perspective.
Developing countries sometimes aren't informed enough about the Web, he
said.

NGOs, Developing Countries Unhappy

The decision to hold consultation meetings infuriated civil liberties
and consumer groups, which have steadfastly opposed both the proposal to
broaden the treaty to protect broadcasting signals and a U.S. move to
include webcasters under that protection. IP Justice called the decision
to convene regional meetings "possibly illegal."

Developing countries, including Brazil, Indian, Argentina, Egypt and
Iran, wanted the SCCR to hold between-session meetings in Geneva where
all member states could be present, IP Justice said. Such meetings would
allow developed and developing countries to air differences and would
make it possible for public interest groups to participate, IP Justice
said. Regional consultation meetings, on the other hand, will allow WIPO
to "more easily pressure individual countries into accepting the treaty
through a 'divide and conquer' strategy," the group said. While
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) like IP Justice aren't allowed to
attend, it said, the U.S. and the European Union have been allowed to
participate at other regions' meetings to convince those countries to
adopt WIPO treaties.

India and the others were also frustrated by Liedes' refusal to include
in his draft an option to delete the treaty's proposed anticircumvention
provisions and other developing countries' proposals, said IP Justice.
WIPO procedural rules were violated when Liedes served as chairman 7
sessions in a row, IP Justice said, rendering the decision on regional
meetings invalid.

But broadcasters accused the delegates of India and the other countries
of being "unhappy with the outcome" of the meeting despite participating
fully. The delegates' procedural questions were "unsubstantiated
attempts to challenge the procedural basis for ending the meeting on the
basis of conclusions drawn up the Chairman, which they did not like, but
which, as demonstrated by the show of hands at the end, did indeed
reflect the position of the large minority," said Moira Burnett, legal
adviser to the European Broadcasting Union. However, she said,
conclusions prepared by the chairman are "standard practice in most
committee meetings these days."

IP Justice accused developed countries of using "bully tactics" on
delegates from developing nations. In an update e-mailed during the
meeting, NGOs complained that piles of their briefing documents were
thrown in the trash overnight, and that their participation in the
meeting was being severely curtailed. When the NGOs informed WIPO Deputy
Dir. Gen. Rita Hayes of the alleged theft and requested assistance, IP
Justice said, they were told she couldn't provide help because she was
unhappy about "the Internet publication of daily reports from civil
society representatives on the substance of the debate during the
meetings." A WIPO official told us Hayes "deplored the incident and
emphasized the importance of NGO contributions to the discussion."

The meeting was "dramatic and chaotic," said Manon Ress, of the Consumer
Project on Technology. The good news, she said, was: (1) The agreement
to discuss limitations and exceptions for the visually impaired and
others. (2) A "loud and clear" statement by 14 performers' and other
content holders' groups that "they are not against the proposed treaty
but against almost everything in it" except technological protection
measures (TPMs). Content owners "do see the problems with giving the
'casters competing rights," Ress said, but there are some "tricky
conflicts" among them since some are both content owners and
broadcasters. (3) More public interest groups participated, and despite
the lack of time for them to speak, and the loss of their briefing
papers, "we managed to make our points somehow and got many good vibes
from delegates who welcomed our input."

On the down side, Ress said: (1) There was no substantial discussion of
TPMs. (2) There was the "dangerous" proposal for "flexibility" regarding
inclusion of webcasters in the treaty. The U.S. wants them given the
same rights as broadcasters. The EC prefers giving rights to
simulcasters; under the 3rd proposal, webcasters would be completely
excluded from the treaty. Countries would have the option to choose what
level of protection to give webcasters, Ress said. "This is the worst
possible situation, since it will lead to bilateral pressure." The
dispute between the chairman and the developing countries meant the day
ended "with harsh words," Ress said, and "a vote that did not seem quite
right."
--
Manon Anne Ress
manon.ress@cptech.org,
www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology in Washington, DC
PO Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036, USA
Tel.:  1.202.387.8030, fax: 1.202.234.5176

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