Copyright Term Extension News

Welcome to the Sound Copyright campaign!

Becky Hogge — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 06:11:04 -0800

The Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Open Rights Group have set up this website so that EU citizens can air their objections to copyright term extension.

If you haven't already, please sign our petition to the major institutions of the European Union to stop copyright term extension and keep copyright policy sound. And if you have signed the petition please spread the word among your friends and colleagues.

If you want to learn more about the issue, please read our resources page, and this quick summary of the problem.

We'll be blogging about the campaign here over the coming months (subscribe to our RSS feed for regular updates). If you'd like to get involved, or know of an organisation in your country who cares about sound copyright policy, please get in touch, using the contact details on our about page.

Together we can fight copyright term extension!

A last throw of the dice?

Peter Bradwell — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 06:05:34 -0700

Term extension: it comes, it goes, it comes again

Back in April we asked ORG supporters to write to their MEPs to help prevent a Directive passing that would extend the term of copyright protection in sound recordings (for the reasons why, see our previous post: http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2011/copyright-term-extension-you-ca...).

We had a fantastic response, with thousands of letters sent to MEPs across Europe. Since then the trail has run a little cold. The European Parliament did not get a new vote. The Directive remained in play, on the verge of being passed.*

Now it seems that the proposal will go before the 'Coreper' meeting on 7th September. The small group of nations that were blocking the proposal have changed their position, so it is likely to be waved through and become EU law. (See Martin Kretschmer's blog for more http://www.cippm.org.uk/copyright_term.html).

This comes only a couple of months after Professor Ian Hargreaves' review 'Digital Opportunity' recommended evidence-based IP policy and picked out 'term extension' as one of the clearest examples of where IP policy has ignored the available economic evidence.

In July, the Minister for Culture, Communications and the Creative Industries Ed Vaizey MP told the BPI AGM that the Government will 'continue to support moves in Europe to extend copyright in sound recordings' (See his speech here: http://www.culture.gov.uk/news/ministers_speeches/8274.aspx)

This was only a month or so after the publication of Professor Hargreaves' report. The review highlights that 'the UK Government's own economic impact assessment...estimated that extension would cost the UK economy up to ?100m over the extended term'. The Government recently set out their response to Professor Hargreaves' findings, suggesting that they accepted his recommendations. So it is a peculiar decision to support the Directive's passing.

We have written to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State for Business to set out our concerns, and to request that the UK opposes the Directive. We'll keep you posted on developments this week.

* As is often the case with EU policy making, there's a complicated story behind this. The MEP Christian Engström (http://christianengstrom.wordpress.com/2011/04/12/a-game-plan-against-co...) tried to get the European Council to give the European Parliament another vote on the Directive. He argued, under a slightly obscure rule of EU procedures, that this was required as a new Parliament was voted in after the original vote in 2009. Whilst he managed to get the requisite number of signatures, he did not manage to secure a new vote. Trying to understand the machinations of the European Union's democratic institutions can be quite a slog. We blogged about this in April here: http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2011/copyright-term-extension-you-ca...

Sound Copyright now available in English, French and German

Becky Hogge — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 06:16:24 -0800

To help push our campaign to stop the extension of copyright term across Europe, Sound Copyright is now available in English, French and German. On the main pages, just use the icons "en", "de" and "fr" in the righthand corner of the website header to switch between languages.

This couldn't have been possible without the help of people who are so concerned about this issue, they dedicated their time for free to get information about copyright term extension out to different language-speaking communities. Thanks, then to Cédric, Christoph, Owen and Richard for all their help translating the Sound Copyright website.

We've already had an offer to translate the site into Italian. If you're interested in translating Sound Copyright into your local language, please get in touch - email info@soundcopyright.eu.

Growing the petition and movement for Sound Copyright

Michael Holloway — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 04:44:17 -0800

As Professor James Boyle writes in the UK's Financial Times,
Charlie McCreevy's proposals must be opposed. The economic evidence
shows clearly that extension will cost music fans - who will have to
pay more to buy recordings - but not benefit musicians. Elderly
recording artists, portrayed by lobbyists as penniless and in need of
additional income to supplement their pensions, will lose out to the
tight contracts and opaque accounting methods of record labels and
collecting societies.

Despite encouraging signs in the past few years that politicians and
civil servants were finally learning to apply evidence to intellectual
property policy, it seems entertainment industry lobbyists still
dominate these debates. Fortunately, the public movement against
extension is gathering momentum. Our next step is to broaden the base
of this campaign - by connecting with campaigns across Europe, and
talking to local digital rights activists, consumer groups and
cultural conservationists about how this issue affects them. And of
course, we'll keep pushing to get as many signatures as possible on
the petition.

If you've launched a campaign in your local area to reject the
proposal to extend copyright term, please tell us. Email info [at]
soundcopyright.org and let us know how you're fighting for Sound
Copyright.

10,000 people sign petition against term extension. We ask Commissioner Vivian Reding to support them

Becky Hogge — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 04:01:23 -0700

Over the next few months, Commissioner McCreevy will be preparing to make a formal proposal to the European Parliament to nearly double the copyright term in sound recordings, from 50 years to 95 years. This preparation period gives his fellow Commissioners time to examine his proposal, to make sure it is serving the interests of Europe as a whole.

We don't think copyright term extension is a good thing for Europe. So we wrote to Commissioner Viviane Reding, whose job is to look after Europe's Information Society. We asked her to consider the evidence against copyright term extension.

We also pointed to the 10,000 people who have signed our petition opposing term extension and asking European legislators to take their concerns into account. Our letter was signed by the Director of the Adelphi Charter, and senior figures from Knowledge Ecology International, the UK's National Consumer Council, and the Green Party (England and Wales).

Here is a copy of our letter:

19 March 2008

To: Viviane Reding
Commissioner, Information Society and Media
DG Information Society and Media
European Commission
B-1049
Brussels, Belgium

Dear Commissioner Reding

SUBJECT: COPYRIGHT TERM EXTENSION IN SOUND RECORDINGS

We write to express our strong concern about the recent proposal announced by Commissioner McCreevy, Commissioner for the Internal Market, to nearly double the term of copyright protection in sound recordings (1). We strongly believe that this will be to the detriment of citizens, consumers and the information society. We therefore urge you to oppose this proposal and do the future of the information society a great service. We set out briefly below the evidence for our case.

As you yourself have observed, “Copyright is a cornerstone of the information and knowledge based society” (2). The future of the information society rests in the respect that every European citizen has for copyright law. This respect will in part come from the enforcement of copyright law. But it will also come from the extent to which copyright law is drafted in the public interest. The public interest requires a balance between the public domain and private rights. We draw your attention to the Adelphi Charter (3), prepared by an international commission of experts from the arts, creative industries, human rights, law, economics, science, R&D, technology, the public sector and education, which states that

“In making decisions about intellectual property law, governments should adhere to these rules:

There must be an automatic presumption against creating new areas of intellectual property protection, extending existing privileges or extending the duration of rights.

The burden of proof in such cases must lie on the advocates of change.

Change must be allowed only if a rigorous analysis clearly demonstrates that it will promote people's basic rights and economic well-being.

Throughout, there should be wide public consultation and a comprehensive, objective and transparent assessment of public benefits and detriments”

The current approach being taken by Commissioner McCreevy would appear to violate every one of these conditions. We believe that in proposing an extension to the term for which copyright in sound recordings is enforced, Commissioner McCreevy has ignored vital evidence that this proposal will not promote economic well-being, and will instead discourage innovation, stunt the reissues market, and irrevocably damage future artists' and the general public's access to their cultural heritage. We refer you in particular to the Institute for Information Law (University of Amsterdam) study The Recasting of Copyright & Related Rights for the Knowledge Economy (4), commissioned by Commissioner McCreevy's own DG Internal Market, and to the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (University of Cambridge) study Review of the Economic Evidence Relating to an Extension of the Term of Copyright in Sound Recordings (5). Both studies come out clearly in favour of the status quo. We have yet to see any compelling evidence that refutes these findings.

If the European Commission proposes to extend term despite this compelling economic evidence, it risks alienating a large proportion of European citizens from the law, putting the future of the information society in jeopardy and reducing once again the size of the public domain. In this respect, we draw your attention to the ten thousand individuals who have so far signed a petition (6) opposing term extension and asking the European Commission to ensure that policy in this area reflects all concerned stakeholders, including consumer and public interest organisations, and not just the commercial rights-holders who advocate for extended copyright term.

We hope that having considered the case made above, you are prepared to use your powers to oppose the proposal to extend copyright term. Should you have any questions regarding the content of our letter, or would like to meet in person with representatives from any of our organisations, please do not hesitate to contact us. We look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Becky Hogge, Executive Director, Open Rights Group (UK)
Jill Johnstone, Director of Policy, National Consumer Council (UK)
John Howkins, Director, Adelphi Charter (International)
Michelle Childs, Head of European Affairs, Knowledge Ecology International
Danny O’Brien, International Outreach Coordinator, Electronic Frontier Foundation (International)
Tom Chance, Spokesperson on Intellectual Property, Green Party, England & Wales (UK)

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/08/240

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/07/788

http://www.sitoc.biz/adelphicharter/adelphi_charter.asp.htm

http://www.ivir.nl/publications/other/IViR_Recast_Final_Report_2006.pdf

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/B/4/gowers_cipilreport.pdf

http://www.soundcopyright.eu/petition

We'll blog here just as soon as we get a response - Commission protocol dictates that we should get a response within 15 working days of sending the letter.

Sound Copyright now available in Italian and Dutch

Becky Hogge — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 03:08:43 -0700

Thanks to the enterprising folks over at p2p forum Italia, the Sound Copyright website is now available in Italian. This is on top of a new Dutch translation of the site put up at the beginning of this week. Thanks to everyone who has helped out with translations so far.

If you don't see this site in your native language, and you'd like to help spread the word about sound copyright, please email us (info@soundcopyright.eu), and let us know!

Commissioner Reding responds positively to our request for support

Michael Holloway — Tue, 20 May 2008 06:14:02 -0700

Earlier this month, we received an encouraging response from Commissioner Reding to our request that she protect the interests of the Information Society by re-examining the evidence against an extension of the term for copyright protection and opposing the plan to subsidise the record industry. Here is the response in full:

Brussels, 5 May 2008

Dear Mrs Hogge

On behalf of Mrs Vivianne Reding and further to my initial response to you on 7 April 2008, I thank you for bringing the concerns of the Open Rights Group in relation to the announcement made by Commissioner Mc Creevy in February of his intention to submit a proposal to the Commission for the extension of the protection of performers' rights.

Any re-examination of the protection of performers' rights will have to take due consideration of the outcome of the most recent reports which have addressed this question and analyse the impact and possible drawbacks of such a proposal. It should also ensure that the interests of all stakeholders involved, including public and cultural institutions, are duly considered and balanced, together with the interest of society at large.

In this context, we recognise the efforts of the Open Rights Group to highlight to a large number of users, the importance of preserving a public domain which includes musical works. We have taken note of the principles outlined in the Adelphi Charter, to which you draw our attention in your letter of 19 March 2008.

As the Commissioner for the Information Society and Media, Mrs Reding is particularly sensitive to the need to improve the conditions for a robust and dynamic digital content sector which to a large extent relies on affordable access to musical and other works involving performer's rights.
Yours Sincerely

Writing to Commissioner Kuneva to support Sound Copyright

Michael Holloway — Tue, 20 May 2008 10:03:24 -0700

Following on from our positive exchange with the European Commission, we have today written to Commissioner Meglena Kuneva, who looks after the interests of Europe’s consumers. We ask that she join Commissioner Reding in opposing the proposal to extend copyright protection, highlighting the lack of evidence in favour of extension. The full text of this letter, which was co-signed by Danny O’Brien of the EFF, is below. We expect two other powerful consumer-protection organisations, TACD and BEUC, to send similar requests to Commissioner Kuneva within the next fortnight.

20 May 2008

To: Meglena Kuneva
European Commissioner for Consumers
DG Health and Consumer Protection
European Commission
B-1049
Brussels, Belgium
Dear Commissioner Kuneva

SUBJECT: COPYRIGHT TERM EXTENSION IN SOUND RECORDINGS

We write to express our strong concern about the recent proposal announced by Commissioner McCreevy, Commissioner for the Internal Market, to nearly double the term of copyright protection in sound recordings (1). We strongly believe that this proposal is not in the interests of European consumers. We set out briefly below the evidence for our case.

We refer you to the report into The Recasting of Copyright & Related Rights for the Knowledge Economy (2), which was commissioned by Commissioner McCreevy's own DG Internal Market and Services. It observes that extending the term of copyright protection in sound recordings would mean that, “ultimately, the revenues that phonogram producers and performing artists would recap from term extension... would have to be paid by users and consumers of sound recordings”. The report makes clear that these would constitute additional revenues, and not revenues necessary to fulfil the initial goals of related rights (that is, to incentivise the creation of the sound recordings in the first place). It further establishes that until there has been reform in the area of contract law, the majority of performing artists would be unlikely to receive any of this added revenue. Rather, the revenue would flow from consumers' pockets directly to the world's four major record labels.

The proposal to extend term appears to have little supporting evidence that it will bring meaningful benefit to performing artists, in the face of significant evidence that it will harm consumers. In 2004 the Commission concluded that, “public opinion and political realities in the EU are such as not to support and extension in the term of protection. Some would even argue that term should be reduced”. We sincerely hope that you, as the representative of consumers in Europe, feel compelled to ask Commissioner McCreevy what has changed since then, such that consumers should be expected to pay these extra costs for another 45 years.

If the European Commission proposes to extend term despite compelling evidence that this is the wrong thing to do, it risks alienating a large proportion of European consumers from the law. To the extent that the enforcement of private use of copyrighted works relies on a social contract between rightsholders and consumers, we believe this is highly damaging. In this respect, we draw your attention to the ten thousand individuals who have so far signed a petition (3) opposing term extension and asking the European Commission to ensure that policy in this area reflects all concerned stakeholders, including consumers, and not just the commercial rights-holders who advocate for extended copyright term.

We hope that having considered the case made above, you are prepared to use your powers to oppose the proposal to extend copyright term. Should you have any questions regarding the content of our letter, or would like to meet in person with representatives from either of our organisations, please do not hesitate to contact us. We look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Becky Hogge, Executive Director, Open Rights Group

Danny O’Brien, International Outreach Coordinator, Electronic Frontier Foundation

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/08/240

http://ivir.nl/publications/other/IViR_Recast_Final_Report_2006.pdf

http://ivir.nl/publications/other/IViR_Recast_Final_Report_2006.pdf

We will of course update the blog with any further word from the Commission, particularly as Commissioner McCreevy prepared to formalise his proposal.

Term Extension "will damage Commission's reputation", top legal advisers tell Barroso

Gavin — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 04:12:35 -0700

Today, the leading European centres for intellectual property research have released a joint letter to EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, enclosing an impact assessment detailing the far reaching and negative effects of the proposal to extend the term of copyright in sound recordings. With the confusion and disillusionment of Ireland's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty still ringing in the Commissions ears, the letter states:

"This Copyright Extension Directive, proposed by Commissioner McCreevy, is likely to damage seriously the reputation of the Commission. It is a spectacular kowtow to one single special interest group: the multinational recording industry (Universal, Sony/BMG, Warner and EMI) hiding behind the rhetoric of "aging performing artists".

"The Commission is required to conduct an impact study for each directive it proposes. We, the leading European centres for intellectual property policy research, have collectively reviewed the empirical evidence. Our findings are unanimous. The proposed Copyright Extension Directive will damage European creative endeavour and innovation beyond repair."

Read the letter and impact assessment in full. Further Details are available from the Centre for Intellectual Property and Management.

EU Commission proposes copyright term extension and ignores all the evidence

Gavin — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 07:11:38 -0700

Disregarding the evidence-based findings of their own advisors, the UK government's independent analysis, and those of Europe's leading intellectual property research centres, the EU Commission has formally accepted DG Internal Market's proposal to extend the duration of copyright protection for sound recordings.

Copyright term is a quid pro quo, designed to balance the interests of consumers and creators. Confusing this with contractual issues and pension schemes while ignoring the evidence gives Europeans a raw deal. Europe's citizens are entitled to more than a privatised cultural heritage.

Recent evidence such as DG Internal Market's own review of the Database Directive 2005, has confirmed that granting further intellectual property rights without a proper basis delivers no real benefit to the competitiveness of the EU.

While granting unending intellectual property rights may sound good, a fair and balanced approach means that legislators must avoid dismissing economic rationale and the traps of faith based policy and voodoo economics that simply grant IP rightsholders requests for more. Adhering to the same standards that environmental and pharmaceutical regulation are held to is essential, because the significant losers will not simply be consumers, but also voters.

Following its adoption the proposal will proceed to the Council of Ministers and to the European Parliament. Please show your support and sign our petition as we continue to oppose term