 |
 |
I feel that I must make some comment on these messages. I hope you will understand that my hands are to some extent tied, but since the present government has made no policy announcements about copyright so far I do not think there is a problem. The previous government made several policy proposals on copyright. These were contained in a strategy paper published in October 2009 and in specific proposals for reform published in December 2009. I represented the SoA (and now, I suppose, I represent the ARA) and TNA on the Libraries and Archives Copyright Alliance, which I also chair. LACA has for many years been active in speaking to the Intellectual Property Office on behalf of libraries and archives, and it has an agenda for reform. If you do make comments to the government LACA would be most grateful to be copied in. Details about LACA are available at: http://www.cilip.org.uk/get-involved/advocacy/copyright/pages/default.aspx Reform of copyright is not entirely in the hands of the UK government. It is bound by several international treaties and also by EU directives. It is not possible to escape those constraints without leaving the EU and reneging on our treaty obligations, which seems unnecessarily drastic. There are three principal areas where reform is possible, reasonably likely and would benefit archives: · application of the standard terms for the duration of copyright to all works. In particular the removal of the provision giving protection until 2039 at the earliest for all unpublished literary, dramatic and musical works. The standard terms are life plus 70 years for works by known authors; and creation or (if made available to the public within 70 years of creation) making available plus 70 years for works by unknown authors. This would remove large numbers of works in archives from copyright protection at a stroke, with minimal impact on rights owners. · extension of the exceptions aimed at libraries and archives. In December the then government proposed legislation that had some significant problems of detail, which the Intellectual Property Office recognised. In particular it was concerned to ensure that users did not appear to be permitted to make copies of sound recordings and films for purely entertainment (as opposed to research and study) purposes. One possible solution would be to abandon the amendment of fair dealing and to rely on libraries and archives as trusted intermediaries. I do not know what the present government plans to do, but messages urging action in this area would be valuable and suggestions to get around the problem of films and sound recordings would no doubt be welcome. The IPO proposed to legislate to permit: · preservation copying of any type of work (including artistic, films, sound recordings); · more than one preservation copy to be made, in any format, so permitting digital reformatting and refreshing of digital files, so long as the result is not that more people have access at one time than had access to the original; · the extension of fair dealing for purposes of research and private study to films and sound recordings, but with a limitation on research and private study to educational contexts; · copying for users by libraries and archives of unpublished films and sound recordings and by libraries of parts of published films and sound recordings, with the same limitation on research and private study; and · copying for users of unpublished artistic works by libraries and archives. · action to limit or prevent the use of contract terms to restrict the use of exceptions and limitations to copyright by users. The previous government was considering this issue but made no decisions. A report was recently published by the Strategic Advisory Board on Intellectual Property Policy (which has since been abolished). The report is available at: http://www.sabip.org.uk/home/research/research-copyright/research-copyright-contractlaw.htm I think that the issue that tends to arouse most archivists concerns the use of declaration forms for copying. Their use would of course decline somewhat if the term of copyright were reduced. I appreciate that the forms appear to be a bureaucratic burden, especially as (so far as I know) not a single one has been consulted or relied upon in the 21 years since the present Act was passed. Moreover, there is no other country in the world that requires them; I believe Canada did for a while, but then stopped. You are welcome to agitate for removal of the requirement, but please bear in mind that: · the use of the form makes archivists and librarians different from other people who copy copyright material, and gives rights owners greater confidence in our trustworthiness. It makes it more likely that libraries and archives can be accepted by all sides as trusted intermediaries; · the act of infringement, under the statute, is the act of copying, which is done by the librarian or archivist. The purpose of the form is to transfer responsibility for any infringement from the person who makes the copy to the person who requests it. The form is the legal document recording that transfer. Without it, the rights owner has no cause of action against the person requesting the copy. Its existence protects the librarian or archivist from being sued for infringement: it provides a complete defence against an action unless the rights owner can show that the librarian or archivist knew, or ought to have known, that it was falsely completed. Any proposal for reform would need to address these issues. Tim --------------- Tim Padfield Copyright Officer and Information Policy Consultant The National Archives +44 (0)20 8392 5381 www.nationalarchives.gov.uk From: Archivists, conservators and records managers. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Rene Kinzett Sent: 20 July 2010 11:52 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Copyright and the "legislation bonfire" An excellent issue for those of us involved in advocacy for the sector to take up. I like the issue as it brings in issues relating to efficiencies, red tape and bureaucratic burden, professional interest, customer service and the user interest. I would urge any individuals, as Chris suggests, to make their own comments via the Government's "Your Freedom" website. The "centre" ie ARA can then consider this matter and where appropriate back this up with direct contact with the Deputy PM's Office and also through our relationships with Ed Vaizey and Lord McNally, two key Ministers for our sector. I would also request that if anyone has specific examples as to where existing legislation in this field has led to poor customer experience, added cost or delay to a process or otherwise added to inefficiencies, please let me know as Ministers do like good case studies. Regards Rene Sent via BlackBerry® from BT ________________________________ From: Steven Davies <[log in to unmask]> Sender: "Archivists, conservators and records managers." <[log in to unmask]> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:43:28 +0100 To: <[log in to unmask]> ReplyTo: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Copyright and the "legislation bonfire" Dear Chris I don't think there is anything wrong or unduly provocative in putting opinions forward while the opportunity is there - I certainly would agree that the law as it stands creates a not insignificant extra administrative burden on searchroom staff; that it restricts our outreach agenda; and is a constant source of frustration and disappointment for customers (unfortunately taken out on staff!) As it applies to archives at present it all seems overly cautious and the disadvantages appear to outweigh any benefits. How one would change that while safeguarding copyright holders' rights is another matter but I agree we should at least put our "on the ground" points of view forward. (My personal opinion.) Steven Davies Archivist / Archifydd Flintshire Record Office / Archifdy Sir y Fflint Tel./Ffôn: (01244) 532414 Chris Pickford <[log in to unmask]> Sent by: "Archivists, conservators and records managers." <[log in to unmask]> 16/07/2010 12:46 Please respond to Chris Pickford <[log in to unmask]> To [log in to unmask] cc Subject Copyright and the "legislation bonfire" A provocative question, and one that perhaps doesn't need a public answer (at this stage, anyway) But what is being done to alert the Government to uphelpful aspects of copyright legislation - i.e. those with unintended (e.g. unduly restrictive) consequences for archives - in the context of the legislation bonfire? Isn't this an opportunity to flag up problem areas - especially those that inhibit the archival contribution to other aspects of government policy, and those that create unnecessary work (with associated costs)? Just as a reminder, there is a website for the "Your Freedom" project - http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/ - and it asks three main questions: :: Which current laws would you like to remove or change because they restrict your civil liberties? :: Which regulations do you think should be removed or changed to make running your business or organisation as simple as possible? :: Which offences do you think we should remove or change and why? This doesn't need to be tackled centrally. All of us can make submissions as individuals. Many archivists, I suspect, feel that current Copyright law restricts our ability to get our "stuff" out there to the public and creates an irksome administrative workload. Now is an opportunity to comment direct to Government. However, in doing so we do need to be clear about what the specific problems are (and ideally cite legislation / regulations that relate to them). Moreover, solutions do need to be based on continuing respect for the rights of copyright owners. There is some press and public cynicism about the "bonfire", but friends who have made submissions (on non-archival topics) do say that they get the feeling the Government is in listening mode. Be assured, this message is intended as a positive contribution (so please don't dismiss it as mischief making). I have hesitated before pressing the "send" button, which I am now doing in the belief that this MAY chime a chord with many who feel inhibited from airing their views. Is there a groundswell of opinion out there that a lightening of copyright controls would be beneficial to our work? If so, then I believe we need to mobilise it now And also health & safety, employment law, etc, etc - there are opportunities there too, but that's another matter Chris Pickford Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask] For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a holiday) see the list website at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra ********************************************************************** Opinions advice, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of Flintshire County Council shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it or on its behalf, and consequently Flintshire County Council shall bear no responsibility whatsoever in respect thereof. Deellir na fydd unrhyw safbwyntiau, na chynghorion, na chasgliadau nac unrhyw wybodaeth arall yn y neges hon, nad ydynt yn berthnasol i waith swyddogol Cyngor Sir y Fflint, yn cael eu cynnig na'u cadarnhau ganddo nac ar ei ran, ac felly ni fydd Cyngor Sir y Fflint yn derbyn unrhyw gyfrifoldeb am y rhannau hynny o'r neges. ********************************************************************** Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a holiday) see the list website at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes. Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a holiday) see the list website at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- National Archives Disclaimer This email message (and attachments) may contain information that is confidential to The National Archives. If you are not the intended recipient you cannot use, distribute or copy the message or attachments. In such a case, please notify the sender by return email immediately and erase all copies of the message and attachments. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do not relate to the official business of The National Archives are neither given nor endorsed by it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask] For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a holiday) see the list website at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra