[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
DFC Update
This is an update of the DFC agenda
-----------------
Subject: Database and Distance education on the move
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 09:39:38 -0400
From: Skip Lockwood <dfc@dfc.org>
Organization: Digital Future Coalition
To: Digital Future Coalition Discussion List" <dfclist@list.alawash.org>
Greetings DFC Members,
I hope that you are all well. It has been some time since I last sent
an update on DFC issues. Our concerns are starting to move and so its
time to get people energized and up-to-date.
Per the dictates of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the Copyright
Office has completed and released its study on distance education. The
report entitled, "Copyright and Digital Distance Education" is
available at http://www.loc.gov/copyright/reports/ and on its face,
appears favorable to our position that the current law governing
distance learning needs to be updated to account for the unique nature
of the digital environment.
According to it's recent press release, seven specific recommendations
are made by the copyright office. They are:
1. Update the exemption to permit digital transmissions over computer
networks, expanding the rights covered to include those needed to
accomplish such transmissions, to the extent technologically required.
2. Eliminate the physical classroom requirement in section 110(2),
permitting transmissions to students officially enrolled in the course,
regardless of their physical location.
3. Add language that focuses more clearly on the concept of mediated
instruction, in order to ensure that the performance or display is
analogous to the type of performance or display that would take place in
a live classroom.
4. Add safeguards to minimize the greater risks of uncontrolled copying
and distribution posed by digital transmission, including limiting the
retention of any transient copies, requiring the adoption of copyright
policies and education, and requiring the use of technological measures
that reasonably prevent unauthorized access and dissemination.
5. Retain current "nonprofit" requirement for educational institutions
seeking to invoke the exemption.
6. Add a new provision to the Copyright Act to allow digital distance
education to take place asynchronously, by permitting a copyrighted work
to be uploaded onto a server for subsequent transmission to students
under the conditions set out in section 110(2).
7. Expand the categories of works exempted from performance right beyond
the current coverage of nondramatic literary or musical works, adding
other types of works but allowing performances of only reasonable and
limited portions.
The Copyright Office also recommends that Congress use the legislative
history to further clarify the fair use doctrine. On the whole, this
report is an affirmation of the fundamental principles laid-out by the
DFC at the outset of the DMCA battle. While this is a small victory, we
are left with a much larger legislative battle to fight.
Currently, the DFC knows that there will be hearings in the House
Judiciary Committee on the Copyright Office report and proposed
statutory language on June 24, 1999. A bill has not yet been entered
into the House for consideration but it is expected shortly. Sources
tell us that the new legislation will be called the Copyright Distance
Learning Improvement Act (CDLIA), and that it will be developed under
the auspices of the Judiciary Committee and Chairman Coble. There
have also been rumors and intimations that the CDLIA legislation will
subsequently be tied to H.R. 354, the "Collections of Information
Antipiracy Act". Linking the two pieces of legislation together would
serve as a political wedge in the substantial opposition to the
"database" bill as educational institutions would have to swallow
extensive new protections for databases to protect distance learning.
In the absence of a bill, the DFC has been asked to provide draft
language.
On the Senate side, Senators Hatch, Leahy and Grassley, among others,
held hearings on May 25, 1999 in the Judiciary Committee on distance
learning. The Copyright Office's testimony is available at
http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/cpypub/regstat52599.html. Members of the
Senate Judiciary Committee are ready to introduce legislation to update
copyright law. They have called for a review of the copyright office's
recommendations and have asked for possible statutory language. Again,
the DFC's input will be a valuable asset to lawmakers as they commence
the process of updating the current statutory language on distance
learning. There is no word yet whether or not the Senate would support
the linking of the database and distance learning legislation. We do
know, however, that action is imminent on this issue. The copyright
office maintains a page devoted to the distance learning topic at
http://www.loc.gov/copyright/disted/.
On another front, Chairman Coble's. H.R. 354, the "Collections of
Information Antipiracy Act" has completed it journey through the House
Judiciary Committee and has now been sequentially referred to the House
Commerce Committee. All that is known at this time is that the
referral is for a finite period of time, somewhere between 30 and 90
days. With the introduction of H.R. 1858, the "Consumer and Investor
Access to Information Act of 1999", by Chairman Bliley of the Commerce
Committee, the course of action for dealing with H.R. 354 has yet to be
determined. H.R. 1858 tracks very closely to the alternative database
language suggested by the DFC and other opponents to H.R. 354.
Therefore, the DFC, along with other organizations has applauded the
introduction of H.R. 1858 (see www.databasedata.org) and continues to
work with both Committees.
H.R. 354 has had a tumultuous ride through the House Judiciary
Committee. During sub-committee mark-up the legislation was moved
significantly towards the center of the spectrum. Subsequently, at the
full committee mark-up, a majority of these changes were rolled-back.
In the end, the version of database legislation that left the House
Judiciary Committee was not dramatically different from its
introduction. After its referral to the Commerce Committee we can
expect attempts to be made to move H.R. 354 (potentially in concert with
the distance learning legislation) to the House floor under the
suspension calendar. Further, Senator Lott has told database
proponents that legislation will be passed on this issue this session.
Momentum for database legislation in the Senate is building. Senators
Hatch and Leahy have made the database and distance learning issues a
priority but it is unclear yet as to the nature of database legislation
that will be introduced in the Senate. Many of you will recall that
Senator Hatch made a statement in January (available at
www.dtabasedata.org) about the possible approaches to database
protection. In those comments he included the DFC alternative as well
as other proposed language. The final analysis points to database
legislation of some kind within the next four months.
With the large amount of activity that is currently underway, the DFC
will shortly schedule a meeting to discuss the DFC's positions as well
as strategy for the forthcoming legislative battles. We are also
desperately in need of funds and if your organization has not made its
donations for this year, the time is now. If you have questions or need
more information, please contact Skip Lockwood at 202-628-6048 or at
dfc@dfc.org.
--
Skip Lockwood
Coordinator
Digital Future Coalition
P.O. Box 7679
Washington, DC 20004-7679
202-628-6048 (phone)
202-628-9227 (fax)
dfc@dfc.org
www.dfc.org
--
James Love, Director, Consumer Project on Technology
I can be reached at love@cptech.org, by telephone 202.387.8030,
by fax at 202.234.5176. CPT web page is http://www.cptech.org