Provisions for ACTA – According to Office of US Trade Representative

By |March 25th, 2008|

According to Oct. 2007 USTR "Fact Sheet", the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) would contain the following provisions: International Cooperation, Enforcement Practices & New Legal Framework....

ACTA’s Misguided Effort to Increase Govt Spying and Ratchet-Up IPR Enforcement at Public Expense

By |March 21st, 2008|

IP Justice Comments to the U.S.T.R. on the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). IP Justice firmly believes that ACTA’s costs to the public far outweigh any public benefit it might provide. The financial expense to tax-payers to fund ACTA would be enormous and steal scarce resources away from programs that deal with genuine public needs like providing education and eliminating hunger. ACTA would burden the judicial system and divert badly needed law enforcement and customs resources away from public security and towards private profit. Unfortunately the zeal to “beef-up” enforcement measures on which ACTA rides often leads to the violation of privacy rights, bypassing due process protections, and cutting-off the free flow of information. ACTA proposes to set new international norms to lock countries into pre-determined policy choices when flexibility is needed.

Text Adopted by WIPO Copyright Committee on Exceptions and Limitations

By |March 13th, 2008|

Brazil, Chile, Nicaragua and Uruguay presented a proposal which elaborated further the proposal by the delegation of Chile (SCCR/13/5). Many of the delegations who took the floor supported the proposal, in whole or in part. Other delegations expressed support or opposition to specific elements of document SCCR/13/5, which are reflected in their interventions in the report of the meeting....

WIPO Member States Request Agenda for Copyright Exceptions and Limitations

By |March 10th, 2008|

A group of developing countries submitted a proposal for a work program for WIPO's Standing Committee on Copyrights and Related Rights (SCCR) on 10 March 2008. The new proposal from Brazil, Chile, Nicaragua and Uruguay, calls for work on three areas: identification from members’ national IP systems of models and practices on exceptions and limitations; analysis of exceptions and limitations needed to promote and disseminate creation and innovation; and establishment of an agreement on exceptions and limitations for the public interest, as a minimum in all national legislatio

Joint NGO Statement at the 2nd Special Session of WIPO’s SCCR

By |June 20th, 2007|

We call upon WIPO delegates to reject the proposed WIPO Broadcast Treaty. After more than 9 years of discussions, efforts to find a treaty formulation that deals with piracy of broadcast signals, but which does not harm copyright owners and the legitimate users of broadcasts have failed.

EU Weighs Copyright Law (PCWorld)

By |March 20th, 2007|

Companies from across IT face criminal sanctions, including prison time for employees, if their networks, software programs or online services are ever used to carry illegally copied material such as music or film, according to a draft law from the European Commission supported Tuesday by a committee of the European Parliament. ...

Broadcasters Challenge US Streaming Rules (AP)

By |March 19th, 2007|

Radio Stations and Online Broadcasters Challenge Copyright Ruling on Internet Royalties -- A wide array of broadcasters and online companies on Monday challenged a ruling from a panel of copyright judges that they say could cripple the emerging business of offering music broadcasts over the Internet. Clear Channel Communications Inc., National Public Radio, and groups representing both large and small companies providing music broadcasts online were among those asking the Copyright Royalty Board to reconsider key parts of its March 2 ruling. That ruling, the challenging parties say, would greatly increase the amount of royalties that online music broadcasters would have to pay to record labels and performers as well as put unreasonable demands on them to track how many songs were listened to by exactly how many individuals online.

Internet Royalty Rate Could Kill Webcasting

By |March 10th, 2007|

On 2 March 2007 the US Copyright Royalty Board (a 3-judge panel) sided with the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and against Web-casters, musicians and consumers with a ruling on the new web-casting royalty rate. The CRB took the highly controversial position of adopting a pay-per-play rate for streaming digital music instead of the current percentage of revenue model. Web-casters report that the fee hike will put them entirely out of business and kill Internet radio since it amounts to more than 100% of their revenues.

Power-Grab: ICANN to Become Internet’s “Word Police” — Top-Level Domain Policy to Bypass National Sovereignty and Free Speech

By |February 27th, 2007|

Civil Society Proposes Amendment to Protect Civil Liberties and Innovation ICANN’s Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) submitted a proposal to protect freedom of expression and innovation in the introduction of new generic top-level domains (gTLDs). ICANN’s policy council, the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), is currently developing policy recommendations to regulate the introduction of new top-level domain names on the Internet. NCUC is troubled by the GNSO’s draft recommendation to create string selection criteria that would prevent the registration of a new gTLD string that contains a controversial word or idea. ..."

Power-Grab: ICANN to Become Internet’s “Word Police” – New gTLD Policy to Bypass National Sovereignty & Free Speech

By |February 27th, 2007|

"... Unless reformed, this ICANN policy will prevent anyone in the world from being able to use controversial words like "abortion" or "gay" in a new gTLD if a single country objects to their use. The proposal would further prevent the use of numerous ordinary words like "herb" and "john" in a string since they can have an illegal connotation in certain contexts. In addition to any country in the world being able to stop a new gTLD string, ICANN staff would also be able to prevent any idea that it deemed too controversial to exist in the new domain space. The 13 Feb. proposal (Term of Reference 2(x)) gives ICANN staff the important job of making preliminary determinations as to whether a string is inappropriate and who the "legitimate sponsor" of a domain name (such as .god) should be. "The 13 Feb proposal would essentially make ICANN the arbiter of public policy and morality in the new gTLD space, a frightening prospect for anyone who cares about democracy and free expression," said Robin Gross, Executive Director of IP Justice, an NCUC member organization. "The proposal would give ICANN enormous power to regulate the use of language on the Internet and lead to massive censorship of controversial ideas." ...