Ingrid de Ribaucourt is IFRRO Senior Legal Counsel since May 2010. She is a Belgian Lawyer with a master degree in European Affairs and currently doing a Master in UK, US and EC copyright law.
She has gained practical experience in EU policies related to the media and in defending copyright , working for more than four years for the European Federation of Magazine Publishers.
1. Access to Knowledge
Yogyakarta,Indonesia
28 September 2010
Ingrid de Ribaucourt, Senior Legal Advisor,
IFRRO
2. Value of the creative industries
Cultural value
National identity
Fiction, non fiction (science, technology, education),
poetry, drawings, photographs... And more!
“Cultural industries” work within
Culture
Knowledge
Entertainment
Economic importance
Incentive to create and publish
8. How does a work become
protected by copyright?
• All works
• Automatic
• Legislation
• Author’s exclusive right
• Reproduction
• Distribution
• Communication to the public
• Public domain
9. Copyright – Limitation to exclusive
rights
Berne Convention – Article 9.2
Cumulative 3- step test
Certain special cases
No conflict with the normal exploitation
No unreasonable prejudice to the
legitimate interest of authors
11. Addressing Reprography
Point of Departure
• Billions of copies made annually
• Most impossible to stop
• Some considered legitimate
• Portions/small parts of works for
• Internal use
• Non commercial use
• Example: Student’s need for a chapter of a book
• Dilemma: Ban or Licence?
12. Why are photocopies made?
Need for just a small part of the work
Need to update information
Material not available
Material no longer on sale
Increased flexibility
15. RRO
Collective Licence complements individual licence
• Individual licence when One to One / Many
• Collective licence when individual licensing is
• Impossible
•Many to Many = Collective licence
• Impracticable
• Insufficient •Clearly Defined Rights
•Proven Advantages
• RRO licence complements Rightholder
licence
17. Rightholder requirements for
collective management
• Access on an orderly basis
• Protection of rights, moral and
economic
• Support for business models
19. RROs -Reproduction Rights Organisations
Set up/Governed jointly by Authors and Publishers
• Operate on the basis of mandates from;
governed by
• Creators and Publishers
Writers including translators; Visual artists; Composers
Publishers (Book, journal, newspaper, magazine, music)
• Legislation
• Key facets of RRO activities
• Awareness raising; Copyright enforcement
• Licence, collect and distribute revenues;
• Reprography; certain digital uses
21. Authority to obtain mandates
• RROs’ constitution
• Voluntary membership
• Statute law
• Circumscription and approval
• Rightholders’ authority
• National treatment
22. Process for conveying mandates
• Individual mandates
• Through rightholder organisations
• Through statute
• Combination of approaches
23. Content of mandate
• Photocopying
• Digital
• Download
• Store
• View
• Print
• Internal and external distribution
• Opt in/out
• By sector/territory
28. IFRRO’s mission, purpose, tasks
IFRRO
The International Federation of
Reprographic Rights Organisations
29. IFRRO – MEMBERSHIP
127 Members in 64 Countries
RROs (72)
• RRO Members (58)
• Mandate to licence reprography
• Represent publishers and creators
• Associate Members (14)
• “RRO”s representing publishers or creators
• Authors and Publishers Associations
(55)
• International
• STM, IPA, ENPA; EWC, IFJ, ICOGRADA
• National
• AAP, Authors Guild, ARS
34. Transition to digital
• RRO origins in photocopying
• Markets switch to digital technology
• Analysis of strategic issues for RROs
• Majority of RROs now licensing digital use
• Good practices shared
• RRO to RRO
• Within IFRRO
35. Digital sources and applications
• Sources
o Analogue o Online
o Electronic carrier o Internet download
• Applications and uses
o Scan o PPT
o Printout o Whiteboard
o View o VLE
o Store o Redirect to content
o Email o RRO content database
36. Access for people with reading
impairment
• WIPO VIP Stakeholder Platform
• Trusted Intermediaries (TI) pilot project
• EC VIP Stakeholder Dialogue
• MoU; TI model
37. Library Digitising projects
Bookshelf project (Norway)
37
• Contract National Library – RRO (Kopinor)
• Mandate from authors and publishers
• Extended Collective Licence
• Digitise and make available 50,000 books
• Published in: 1790-99; 1890-99; 1990-99
• Including Orphan Works and Out-of-Print works
• User access
• Registered library users
• Norwegian IP addresses
• View; No download, print-out or copying
• Purchase opportunities
• Other countries
39. • Access to knowledge is a shared goal
• Collective licensing can complement the
original offer from the right holder
• Solutions for the different uses in the
analogue and digital world can be found
• Dialogue is the best way forward
40. Thank you for your attention
Ingrid.debaucourt@ifrro.org www.ifrro.org
Hinweis der Redaktion
Good Morning I first would like to thanks YRCI for organising this seminar that IFRRO is very happy to sponsor and I am happy to start the day on this very important topic that is Access to knowledge. Knowledge is intimately linked with creation, a central activity for any country and for many reasons. This is why copyright legislation has been developed at national and international level.
Indeed, Creative industries play a major role for the society as they contribute to defend cultural value by protecting national identities through in the written sector fiction or non fiction works (science, information, technology, education) or poetry, drawings, photographs, etc. It covers many different aspects of lives, knowledge, culture and entertainment. To sustain this creation which ultimately has an impact on the country’s economy, cultural industries rely on the protection of their work.
But creation makes no sense without wide dissemination and proper access to it. Indeed, access to written works, books, journals, magazines or newspapers leads to societal and cultural autonomy and empowerment of all citizens.
Access to any type of literature is indispensible for research and the further development of knowledge.
Access to books and other written material is fundamental for education and lifelong learning.
How to access these works? Are they protected by copyright? Are they in the public domain? What is the public domain?
A well-functioning copyright system is supported by three pillars. The first of these is legislation. Without appropriate legislation, a copyright system supporting the moral and economic rights of rightholders cannot be sustained. The second pillar is management. Rights must be managed in ways that are transparent, fair, and effective. Both individual and collective management may play a role in supporting the copyright system. The third pillar is enforcement. When legislation has been enacted, and effective management systems are in place, appropriate enforcement mechanisms are essential in ensuring that rights are properly respected and protected.
The second issue to address when we oppose the notions of public and private is to talk about the exceptions to the copyright legislation. Exceptions do not mean a work is in the public domain but that certain act do not require the permission of the rightholder to be made. The legislation at international and national level authorizes certain exceptions to the exclusive right. In the Berne convention, article 9, 2 introduces the so-called 3 step test. Exceptions can only be introduced in certain special cases that do not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and do not prejudice unreasonably legitimate interest of the rightholder. These 3 conditions are cumulative. The most frequent exceptions are private copy; fair use/dealing; library privileges; statutory regulations for educational copying It is not because a State introduces an exception that it does not go along with a fair remuneration of the author. For example, private copying exception in Europe may only be introduced by Member states if a fair remuneration is given to the rightholder. Outside those cases, how to access copyrighted works?
Let’s focus on reprography now, as this is more relevant to IFRRO’s work
An enormous amount of copies are made each year and it is impossible to stop this process. The digital world is not facilitating the task. How to authorise copies of small portions of a work for internal and non commercial use? For example, how to give access to a portion of a book to a student? Should it be simply banned or should rightholders propose alternative solutions?
It is important to understand the reasons that justify the need for copying. Generally speaking, it is not the entire work that is copied but a portion of it to have updated information or because the work is no longer available or on sale. Copies also allow for more flexibility.
As said by Charles Clark: if you cannot beat them license them Licensing is thus a solution. It indeed offers alternative access to works guaranteeing a remuneration to authors and publishers. Today reprographic rights organizations are presents in 64 countries and licensed in 2009 for 1.3 billions USD.
To offer acces, rightholders will generally license directly their content or sale copies. Alternative access can be offered by collective management organisation typically when it is impossible to licence (orphan works) or it is impracticable(mass copying or private copying) or it correspond to user’s specific needs (course packs, press cutting,etc). In one sentence, RRO licenses can complement the individual licence from the rightholder. What are the user’s needs, wishes?
RRO are set up by creators and/or publishers or by legislation to manage (license, collect and distribute revenues) the rights of of their constituents. Moreover, they have activities of awareness raising of governments, schools, etc and play a role in the enforcment of the rights.
How RRO can get a mandate to license collectively?
Among the 60-plus countries with RROs, the process of conveying mandates from the rightholders to their national RROs has evolved in various ways. The form of process chosen is entirely at the discretion of national rightholders, within the constraints of practicality and national legislation which will generally influence, or may stipulate, the form which collective management should take – whether voluntary or statutory, for example. However, no two approaches are necessarily mutually exclusive. In the USA, for example, collective management is organised entirely on a voluntary basis, and individual mandates are collected. In Germany, there is a legal licence – but the collection of individual mandates is still undertaken on a huge scale, which thereby legitimises international agreements. In Sweden and Jamaica, mandates are collected through rightholder organisations. In the UK, mandates are conveyed both individually and through rightholder organisations – but the law states that, in the absence of a collective licence, educational establishments could copy limited proportions of works without seeking individual permissions.
The basic mandate would be for photocopying without which, even in this digital era, no RRO could function. Almost universally though, rightholders would now be asked also to grant a digital mandate , recognising the technological and usage practicalities of the marketplace. The digital mandate would normally permit downloading , storage within agreed time limits, viewing on screen, and printing. Usage could also include making available on a passworded intranet , and controlled external distribution . The rightholder may also require the right to opt in or opt out of individual schemes, by sector or by territory .
IFRRO’s role in fostering dialogue leads to its involvement in a range of stakeholder-focused mutually beneficial initiatives, including: Support for an orphan works solution that should be applicable to all kinds of protected works. lead partner in ARROW (Accessible Registry of Rights Information and Orphan Works) – an EC project aiming to clarify the rights status of orphan and OP works. range of tools to help RROs in assisting authors and publishers to provide legal access to their works by people with print disabilities (available to IFRRO members only). development of common standards and formats , including involvement in the International Standard Text Code (ISTC), the International Standard Name Identifier (ISNI), and applications of the ONIX format. supportive positions on Traditional Knowledge , and on accessibility for Least Developed Countries , and with WIPO, a Strategic Partnership to Enhance a Book Culture in key countries.
Before concluding, I would like to browse quickly through the latest developments in licensing and show you how dialogue can lead to new licenses.
I would like to repeat myself, access to knwoledge is fundamental and the entry into the digital era has fostered new needs. Most RROs started by licensing photocopying, and obtained photocopying mandates. Photocopying until recently, and in some cases still, formed the basis of their activities and of their fee collections. However, photocopying increasingly relies upon, or is being replaced by, digital technology. This has led RROs, individually and under the IFRRO umbrella, to explore the strategic issues around the digital reproduction and distribution of IP. A recent IFRRO survey among the 60-plus countries with RROs indicated that a majority of RROs now licence digital uses. Individual digital licensing schemes have been developed by RROs working closely with their rightholders and users. There is ongoing information exchange from RRO to RRO, and within IFFRO through frameworks such as the IFRRO Business Models Forum. Good practices are shared and built upon, and are codified when appropriate with the rightholders bodies in membership of IFRRO.
The digital sources permitted by RROs’ licences may include: Scanning from analogue original to digita l format Digital to digital , including: Copying from carriers such as CDs and DVDs Copying from online sources Downloading and copying from the internet The corresponding uses and applications would typically cover: Scanning and printing out Viewing on screen by authorised persons, and storing within limits Emailing internally, and in certain cases externally Creation of slide shows in PPT or similar Display on white boards or smart boards Access for students via Virtual Learning Environments, and similar internal networks Some RROs license redirecting to publishers’ content, and a few from their own content database.
Another area which sees important developments is access to works by VIPS WIPO established in January 2009 a platform to develop solutions for enhanced access to work by people with reading impairment. Representatives of the visually impaired communities including the DAISY consortium, IFLA, IPA, EWC, RROs and IFRRO participate. The platform recommends a solution based on TIs which will be piloted as from later this year with India, Brazil being one of the pilot countries. An enabling technology is also being developed as a joint stakeholder project. Also the EC has a stakeholder dialogue which also aims at implementing a system of TIs. To this end a MoU has been signed on 14 September, this year.
Finally, we see the development of new license to allow the creation of digital libraries. One example is The Bookshelf (Bokhylla) project in Norway. It allows the National Library to digitise and make available all 50,000 printed books in its collection published in the three decades 1790ies, 1890ies and 1990ies under a contract with Kopinor, the Norwegian RRO. Kopinor has been mandated by Norwegian authors and publishers to enter into the agreement which establishes remuneration to the rightholders based on an annual fee per digitised page. The licence is extended by law to cover the works of non-mandating national and foreign rightholders (Extended Collective Licence), who are granted the right to opt out of the agreement. Any user with a Norwegian IP address may view and read the book on the screen which is made searchable via search engines. No download or print-out is allowed of works in copyright; the user is provided with information that will facilitate the purchase or the borrowing of the books. This is not the only project. Germany is looking into it and the RRO, VG WORT that represents authors and publishers are currently negotiating a license covering works from 1965 and before. France is also looking into developing solution based on extended licensing to authorise libraires to digitise and make available certain categories of works.
To conclude, I would like to say that access to knowledge is a shared goal by all the stakeholders, creators, publishers, users and RROs. If some consider copyright to be a barrier and the necessity to introduce new and wide exception to the legislation, I have shown through my presentation that alternative solutions to give access exist with collective licensing. These solutions can be shaped for the analogue and the digital world and are best developed in a climate of dialogue between stakeholders.