COPYRIGHT HUB


“IF LICENSING IS EASIER, THERE WILL BE MORE AND BETTER SERVICES ON THE INTERNET, FIXED AND MOBILE.”


that 41 percent of all Internet users aged 12 and over claimed to be “not particularly confident”, or “not at all confident”, about what is or is not legal online.


Tis figure is down from 44 percent from the first wave of research, which considered data gathered between May and July 2012.


Te report also found that 24 percent of Internet users would stop infringing if it were clearer what is and isn’t illegal content.


Te Hub’s second objective is to make it easier for users to find out who owns the rights to what works, and get permission to use them. Visitors to the Hub can log on, look for the right they want to license, and get a list of links to organisations they can contact to do so.


So far, companies including music licensing group the Performing Right Society for Music, the BBC and Getty Images have connected to the Hub, and Hooper says other businesses are showing interest.


Finally, the Hub seeks to make licensing easier for individuals and small businesses. Requests for licences will be simple to make, and transaction costs will be low, in line with the relatively low value of the licences themselves.


It is hoped that because of the Hub, it will be easier to search for creators’ works and they will subsequently be reimbursed for their creations.


Licensing


Phil Sherrell, partner at law firm Bird & Bird in London, says that these “low value/high volume” licensing transactions may not be common at the moment, “either because use is being made on an unlicensed basis, or because the potential users are


26


dissuaded by the perceived difficulty of identifying the right licensor and obtaining a licence”.


“Te Hub should, if successful, lead to a higher total volume of licensing, with the use of private practice copyright experts remaining focused largely on higher value bespoke transactions and disputes.”


For rights owners, this could open a wealth of new opportunities. Steve Lake, chairman of the British Association of Picture Libraries and Agencies (BAPLA), which represents the UK’s picture libraries, said he supports the Hub’s potential to attract new business from smaller users, such as bloggers and social media users. “If they can be brought into the fold and brought towards picture libraries to license the images that they hold, then that’s obviously a positive thing, from our members’ point of view,” he said.


Peter Leathem, chief executive of music licensing company PPL, told TB&I: “We are delighted to be involved in the Copyright Hub.


“It will build on structures and databases across the creative sector, becoming a valuable tool to further assist copyright users in obtaining licences and finding out more about copyright and licensing. Tis will hopefully contribute to the further growth of a creative sector that is already culturally and economically crucial for the UK.”


Difficulties


With such an open approach to licensing, is Hooper concerned about less scrupulous individuals abusing the Hub? Is there a screening process in place to ensure the site keeps its integrity?


To date the Hub has not been pushed to make any “editorial decisions”, Hooper says, though


Trademarks Brands and the Internet Volume 2, Issue 3


he accepts there may be some “lively moments” when the Hub has to refuse low quality material.


“Tat has not happened to date and I hope it won’t happen,” he says.


Hooper is enthusiastic about providing access to ‘orphan’ works via the Hub. “Te UK IP Office has announced that it wants to work closely with the Hub on orphan works and I think an orphan works registry would be a marvellous application for the Hub,” he says.


Orphan works are copyrighted works for which the author can’t be found. Te Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act of 2013, passed in April this year, has allowed the licensing of these works in cases where the author may not be found aſter a “diligent search” has been made.


Some rights holders, particularly those in the image industry, have raised concerns about this recent change in the law.


At the time of production, digital images oſten have information about the author and their copyright and contact information


written


into them. Tis digital watermark, known as metadata, is crucial for photographers who want credit for their works that appear on the Internet.


However, some media outlets and social media sites use soſtware that erases metadata. With the author’s name lost, it can be difficult to determine who owns rights to the image.


“We were staggered by the fact that metadata was stripped from photographs by web publishers,” Hooper says. “How would you like it if your copyrighted work goes on to the Internet, your authorship is immediately lost and nobody knows how to find you, so people start pirating it?”


www.worldipreview.com


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44