Online Copyright

Headline

This note summarises comments by Lord Triesman (the new UK Minister for Intellectual Property) to the Social Market Foundation on 27 November 2007 about online copyright. The UK government is keen for rights-owners to be able to control how their content is accessed online, but wants the position of consumers to be respected by the adoption of new business models which suit how people want to access and use content, together with clear communication to consumers about what rights they are buying. New legislation on the duties of ISPs and personal use exceptions are being contemplated.

Notes

Lord Triesman was commenting on the state of the UK's intellectual Property laws approximately one year on from the publication of the Gowers' Review. He focussed, in particular, upon the creative sector and the importance of copyright and the challenges posed to it through online distribution and new media.

The following are highlights from his talk

He does not regard the Gowers' Report as the last word on any of the topics it covers. The system will continue to evolve. However, he agrees with the main conclusion of Gowers that the framework for intellectual property rights in the UK has to be both appropriate and sound. It therefore has to be flexible. He wants the system to anticipate technological developments and not just react to them.

Nowadays, consumers expect immediate open and often free access to goods and services, an example of this being the popularity of online content sharing sites. Sharing of this sort, usually illegally, which fails to recognise the input of the creator has been highly damaging to content owners. However, some of the reactions of content owners have been difficult for consumers to understand and accept. DRM systems are a case in point. If people want a film and cannot get hold of it legally, they will find it illegally.

He regards the two most important next steps as being the development of new business models and communication/education. The new challenges have had positive effects, and he cited EMI's distribution of DRM free high quality tracks as an example of this. However, current lack of intra-operability between the systems can be frustrating for consumers, when they cannot move their content from one platform to another. He does not consider it appropriate for government to regulate the movement between different forms of equipment. Business has to address this. It is up to individual content-owners to decide which business model to apply to their work and then the public has to respect that choice.

Gowers recommended relaxing the law on format shifting. The government will shortly be consulting on this and other Gowers' recommendations. The consultation will include the review of exceptions to copyright [though it was unclear from Lord Triesman's speech whether this was simply in respect of the position of ISPs or all the exceptions] as he wants to "early understanding of the scope. He acknowledged that to some extent that what the UK could do was limited by international agreements and in particular the relevant EU Directives. However, he seemed to feel that there may be some leeway within those which could provide a useful answer. He also felt that the enforcement of criminal law mechanisms could be changed more readily in order to assist and reach a solution. Lord Triesman emphasised however, is that the new laws will not include a right to copy, only in exception of a limited nature. This will not override any terms agreed to between the content supplier and the end-user.

If consumers fail to respect the right and to act responsibly then other ways will need to be found, and will be found, to ensure that they do so. He referred to aspects of IP crime, that dealing with it was seen as important because it was related to organised crime, and to the new Trading Standards powers and funding.

He then moved to the position of ISPs. He cited with approval YouTube's having entered into the MCPS/PRS licence, and that others such as Microsoft and Disney had agreed to use content filtering technology. These technologies will have their place. He urged businesses not to confuse consumers however, and to communicate effectively with them. Consumers must know what they are buying and what restrictions apply. Changing the underlying culture is what is required and this is difficult. It requires engagement and a sophisticated set of approaches which may vary according to the content involved.

He sees the answer as very much to do with working with other industry groups. He was pleased that the content owners were working with ISPs. Industry-wide agreements will provide the most effective approach. But the government has announced that it will not wait around for those agreements indefinitely. It is already working on legislation to put in place should an agreement not be reached. He explained that the values which would guide this legislation would be that significantly illegal activities should be stopped but each individual user of unauthorised content should not be pursued. He also wished to prevent organised crime making use of file-sharing in some way. In terms of a timetable for this, any new legislation would have to be signposted in the next Queen's Speech, in November 2008. It then would take approximately a year to put legislation in place. He felt that this should be enough time for an industry-wide agreement to be put in place.

He mentioned briefly "commons licensing" schemes such as Creative Commons. He said that more thought was required as to what types of content should fall within such regimes, both economically and culturally. He made an analogy with the human genome, where open access led to great benefits.