Broadcasting Treaty in Washington Post
The Washington Post has a story on the proposed WIPO Broadcasting Treaty.
If television broadcasters and webcasters have their way in international treaty talks, they would gain new, 50-year rights to virtually any video they beam out, even if no one owns the rights to the content. So, for example, say ABC or Yahoo offers a broadcast or webcast of a movie no longer under copyright protection, historical footage of a news event or a live feed of a breaking story — no one could make a copy of that program and rebroadcast it to others.
Err… so material that is in the public domain would return into private hands through the simple act of broadcasting? This would quickly drain the underbrush of creations and ideas that are available to everyone and let our culture function.
The article nicely outlines a few basic positions, making clear the corporate broadcaster’s hipocrisy:
Broadcasters and webcasters insist that the balance of fair use and public domain works will not be upset by the treaty. Even if the treaty passes and the United States signs it, Congress then must pass implementing rules, and the broadcasters and webcasters say they have no desire to change U.S. laws.
The whole point of the treaty is to change the law in the US – and everywhere else. Otherwise, what value would there be for the broadcasters in seeking the treaty?
Though the questions at issue are dramatic, the story points out another aspect, which has enabled the treaty’s proponents to fly under most people’s radar so far:
The minutiae and complexity of rights and treaties in those matters are enough to cure a small nation of insomnia.
And once they have us all asleep, they’ll try to push it through. Set your alarm clocks. You can stay alert to the issue, eg. via the Access to Knowledge website.
thanks, Jamie and Thiru!