‘‘
It is common to hear that copyright reform would be disastrous for the creative sector.
Knowledge Rights 21
Oh, the things they say… Why we should stand up to arguments against copyright reforms
The Knowledge Rights 21 programme is focused on bringing about changes in legislation and practice across Europe that will strengthen the right of all to knowledge. It is built on a conviction that knowledge is essential for education, innovation and cultural participation, and that everyone should have the possibility – in particular through libraries, archives and digitally – to access and use it. It exists with the generous support of the Arcadia Fund.
G
ETTING copyright right matters for libraries. It’s arguably one side of the same coin as funding, determining what we
can do with our resources, and so how far readers, researchers and learners can enjoy eff ective library services.
However, there is also an industry that has been built on maximising revenues from holding copyright, often opposing such steps. It can certainly be uncomfortable to be going up against players claiming to act in writers’ interest, even if there is a discussion about how far this is the case. But it is also generally bad public relations to attack libraries, even if this is forgotten sometimes. This article shares some examples.
“Libraries are thieves” While many in the copyright industries recognise the value of libraries’ work, the logic of extracting every last penny from rights is still powerful, and can leads to claims that libraries’ work and reform priorities are tantamount to piracy. This was the case when the then Publishers Association head accused the British Library and UK Research Councils of ‘tawdry theft’, for demanding pro-research copyright reforms (
www.thebookseller.com/ news/pa-criticises-tawdry-theft-copyright). Similarly, the European Commission’s assessment (
https://bit.ly/3Kyicyy) of the evidence around its future text and data mining rules noted rightholders’ claim that an exception would “facilitate the misuse and piracy of their content and make them lose business opportunities in future”.
“It’s the end of the world” It is common to hear that copyright reform would be disastrous for the creative sector. For example, there has been a noisy campaign for Canada to
March 2023
roll back library-friendly education exceptions. Arguments have focused on the idea that falling photocopying fee revenues (at a time of a strong shift from physical to licenced digital materials) was somehow indicative of a major problem. The Canadian Parliament’s Industry, Science and Technology committee gave this short shrift, noting that: “Despite the volume and diversity of evidence submitted throughout the review, the Committee observed a problematic lack of authoritative and impartial data and analysis on major issues. Multiple witnesses either overestimated how strongly the data they presented supported their arguments or failed to disclose its limitations.” (
https://bit.ly/2WqoPev)
“Marrakesh was a bad idea” It’s a matter of almost universal consensus now that the Marrakesh Treaty, that provides for the removal of copyright barriers to the making and sharing of accessible format copies of works for people and print disabilities, was a good idea.
However, this wasn’t always the case. As Corporate Europe Observatory (
https://bit.ly/2MFunvs) has noted: “In the years before the Treaty was negotiated and fi nalised, the publishing and entertainment industries around the world were vociferous in lobbying against it”. Instead, they called for a voluntary approach that had patently failed up to that point, and recruited wider industry players to lobby in this sense. (www.
keionline.org/28242).
Clearly, the change of heart is welcome, but it is worth remembering that we can expect opposition even to things that later will seem obvious.
“We’re not the big guys” Finally, despite the fi repower available to opponents of reform, we often see claims that they are actually the underdogs.
INSIGHT
Stephen Wyber is a member of the Knowledge Rights 21 Management Committee (
www.knowledgerights21.org).
However, Corporate Europe Observatory has pointed out (
https://bit.ly/2T0up2j) that the top six groups meeting the European Commission to discuss copyright issues ahead of the Directive were all rightholder organisations.
There can also be a tendency to claim little control over markets, as was the case in the proposed (US) merger of Penguin Random House and Simon and Schuster. As reported in Vox, “Over the course of the trial that ensued, publishers would continue to insist on their existing public image as helpless incompetents at the whims of larger companies and an irrational market. The government, meanwhile, stuck to the narrative that the publishers were savvy operators who knew exactly what they were doing with their billion-dollar companies. Their story has now won.”
Summing up
These are just some of the arguments thrown at libraries. But as highlighted in the introduction, just because someone is noisy in opposing better conditions for libraries, this does not mean that they are right – rather the opposite! Librarians should be confi dent in their engagement in favour of reform, knowing that they are acting on behalf of our individual users, and our society as a whole. IP
INFORMATION PROFESSIONAL 51
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 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
