Hi Ben

Sorry for joining this conversation a bit late. I haven't seen the Minister's invitation for submissions (is there a reference?) so make a few comments in ignorance.

For me one of the critical issues facing the Irish public currently in relation to copyright is the cost of access to school textbooks and what seems to be the generally corrupt relationship between the educational publishing industry and the state. It seems we have been through a decade or so where the state has funded the production of learning materials which produce handsome profits for publishers at considerable expense to learners (and their parents). Perhaps this is a more general question around who gets to enjoy the fruits of public expenditure, similar to the patent issue and publicly funded research, but I wonder is there anything in the act, or its proposed revision, which deals with state copyright and/or the public domain? In most cases copyright revisions globally tend to act as a sort of a one way ratchet in the way they have systematically contracted public domain rights in favour of private rights, disregarding whatever delicate balance might exist. Strengthening fair use rights (if that is the intention) would be a good thing. But it would be good to see this in a broader context of positive recognition of the public domain - recognizing the vital importance that the public domain plays in the cultural and economic life and potential of society. Mostly of course, I'd like to see measures in the law whereby state funded educational material, like school textbooks, at least can be produced under a positive copyright regime where learners and teachers have free access to them. Perhaps such measures already exist, if so excuse my ignorance ..

The current fascination with electronic textbooks worries me quite a bit in this regard. It would be good to have assurance that school kids being prescribed electronic books are not in some way losing any fair use rights (under DMCA like provisions) that they might previously have enjoyed. (I'd probably need to read what is being proposed to perhaps understand this better).

Two minor comments inline ...

On 11 July 2011 22:34, Ben North ben@redfrontdoor.org wrote:

Hi,

Thanks to Malcolm and Glenn for feedback.  A couple of days left, so any thoughts on the below?  It does bang on about the DMCA in the USA quite a bit, but it does give good illustrations of the sorts of Bad Things that might happen here.

---

Dear NNN,

We would like to respond to the minister's invitation for submissions regarding a review of copyright and related rights.

The Irish Free Software Organisation represents the interests of Free Software in Ireland.  Here, 'Free' refers to freedom rather than price --- Free Software confers on its users the right to run, study, change and distribute it.  A great deal of innovation and technological progress has been made possible by Free Software.

Might be good to also emphasise the current and potential economic value that is realized in free software. And how vital it's protection is to Irish internet based economic growth opportunities ranging from IP telephony to virtualized on demand software services - avoiding the term 'cloud' out of some deference to RMS :-)

We welcome the minister's reference to a US-style 'fair use' doctrine, and we urge him to learn from the unintended consequences of their DMCA legislation.  Purchasers of, for example, DVDs have fair use rights, but cannot enjoy them because of the encryption on DVDs.  Creators of tools for unlocking DVDs, restoring consumers' ability to exercise their fair-use rights, have been sued, and products withdrawn, thereby harming innovation and competition.

IFSO acknowledges the need to prevent commercial-scale copyright infringement.

Call me radical, but I'm not too sure if the above accurately reflects our (at least my) position. Are we saying non-commercial copyright infringement is OK? Or are we rather saying that we want to keep alive a set of reasonable actions which are not infringing on this or any proposed copyright law. Quite regardless of whether those actions are for commercial gain or not. The distinction between commercial and non-commercial is anyway easily blurred. We've all seen efforts over the past five years to portray free software as being somehow ok for non-commercial use. I think one of the strengths of the GPL (and most OSS licences as well) for example is it's refusal to discriminate between commercial and non-commercial use. I would rather say something along the lines of:

IFSO acknowledges that creating the legislative conditions for a just society and dynamic economic growth requires that holders of legitimate copyrights are assured those rights receive requisite protection. But ...

At the same time, the public's rights must be protected. The 'anti-circumvention' measures in the current law strike the wrong balance, and we urge the minister to reinstate the principle of s.374 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000, whereby 'rights protection measures' could not interfere with 'permitted acts'.

Quite regardless of anything I have suggested above ... good work and thanks for taking this effort forward.

Cheers Bob

The public must also have the right to use their own electronic devices as they wish.  Often this means using different software to that which the manufacturer supplied, but doing so in the USA has proved legally risky, because of abuse of the DMCA.  For example, Texas Instruments threatened people who described how to write and use new software for its calculators.

Computer software is playing an increasingly important role in many products.  In the US, this has opened the door to abuses of the DMCA, with the result that beneficial innovation and competition is hindered. The printer manufacturer Lexmark, aiming to maintain its monopoly position in the lucrative market for refills, sued under the DMCA to prevent a company distributing a component which would have enabled other manufacturers to create compatible refills.  As another example, Microsoft is currently trying to use the DMCA to stifle the market for accessories for its Xbox, to give itself a monopoly.  These cases, and other similar ones, illustrate how copyright law is being abused to prevent competition and innovation.

Although some such cases were ultimately resolved in favour of the innovator, the fear of being drawn into a very costly legal battle has a chilling effect.  We urge the minister to ensure that legitimate competition in all markets is encouraged.

Finally, in the area of computer security, high-quality academic research in the USA has often been suppressed because it exposes flaws in a product.  It is generally accepted that computer security, vital in this age where more and more business is conducted online, is best advanced by full and open discussions.  We urge the minister to ensure that the carrying out, publication and discussion of security research is permitted.

In summary, we hope the minister will seize this opportunity to restore balance to copyright law, allowing the public to enjoy their rights, and fostering innovation and competition.

Thank you for your consideration of this submission.

Yours faithfully,

IFSO. _______________________________________________ fsfe-ie@fsfeurope.org mailing list List information: http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/fsfe-ie Public archive: https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-ie

Apparently there was a public meeting a week or so ago on this consultation. A report has been posted:

http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2011/07/hot-of-press-todays-public-consultat...

Predictably, rights-holders were against 'fair use' provisions.