DigitalKoans

In a survey conducted by the British Library, 87% of respondents supported copyright use exceptions and fair use (called fair dealing in UK) for digital materials. (Thanks to the ResourceShelf.)

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

87% of respondents stated they should be able to use exceptions and fair dealing in the digital age. Fair dealing is the 'right' to make a copy from an in-copyright work without permission from, or remuneration to, the rights holder for non-commercial research, private study, criticism, review and news reporting. For example, most individual copying by researchers at university for academic purposes is done under the fair dealing provision in UK law. 68% of the survey respondents are opposed to having different fair dealing laws for material in paper or electronic format. The British Library will be putting these points, on behalf of researchers, to the UK Intellectual Property Office in the current consultation on copyright exceptions. . . .

The British Library's position in the IP debate has been guided by five principles:

1. Public Interest

Public interest policy formation must consider the impact on the creator, the citizen, the economy, the education system and our culture—for today, and for future generations to come.

2. Balance

Creativity, innovation and a democratic civil society requires copyright law to strike a balance between the private interest of the creator being recognised and remunerated for their work, and the interest of the citizen in ensuring access to information and ideas.

3. Digital is Not Different

Copyright law should enshrine the principles of creativity, access, recognition and remuneration as it always has done. Exceptions should apply to all formats including digital formats.

4. Law Aligned with Realities

Rationalisation and simplification of the law will lead to understanding and respect for copyright.

5. Technology Neutral

Copyright law must be informed by technological advances, but must be kept generic as opposed to specific technologies being enshrined in law.

The British Library will be submitting its response to the UK Intellectual Property Office's consultation on copyright exceptions on 8 April 2008.

The European Parliament's Cultural Industries in Europe Committee's Cultural industries in the Context of the Lisbon Strategy report now includes a proposed amendment that:

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to recognise that the Internet is a vast platform for cultural expression, access to knowledge, and democratic participation in European creativity, bringing generations together through the information society; calls on the Commission and the Member States, therefore, to avoid adopting measures conflicting with civil liberties and human rights and with the principles of proportionality, effectiveness and dissuasiveness, such as the interruption of Internet access.

This is far cry from an earlier amendment by Chris Heaton-Harris that was pro-blocking, pro-filtering, and pro-disconnection that was voted down by the committee.

Read more about it at "EU Politicians Strikes Back against Three Strikes" and "Sweden Rejects Sarkozy’s War on File Sharing."

Of late, there has been increased attention by the courts about the legality of having digital music files in P2P software folders where other P2P users could retrieve them.

Noted copyright attorney William Patry has reviewed three cases (Atlantic v. Brennan, Elektra v. Barker, and London-Sire v. Doe) involving this issue in "The Recent Making Available Cases."

Joi Ito, an entrepreneur, venture capitalist, and free culture advocate, has been named CEO of the Creative Commons, replacing Lawrence Lessig. Lessig is leading a new effort, Change Congress. He will serve as a Creative Commons board member.

The organization has received a $4 million grant from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation ($2.5 million of general funding for five years and $1.5 million to support ccLearn).

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

"Although I have changed my focus, I’m still very much committed to Creative Commons and the Free Culture cause," Lessig said. "The work I intend to do with Change Congress is in many ways complementary to the work of Creative Commons. Both projects are about putting people in power and enabling them to build a better system. I could not be more pleased to hand off the leadership of Creative Commons to the extraordinarily passionate and qualified Joi Ito."

"Under Larry’s management, Creative Commons has grown from an inspirational idea to an essential part of the technical, social, and legal landscape involving organizations and people in 80 countries," said Ito. "With it, the organization has grown in size and complexity, and I am excited to increase the level of my participation to help manage this amazing group of people. The Hewlett Foundation has been a major supporter of ours from the beginning and we could not be more grateful for their support going forward into the future."

Founding board member and Duke law professor James Boyle will become chair of the board, replacing Ito, who remains on the board. "Jamie has demonstrated his commitment to Creative Commons from its founding," said Lessig. "He led the formation of Science Commons and ccLearn, our divisions focused on scientific research and education respectively. There is no person better suited to lead the Creative Commons board."

Boyle is optimistic about Creative Commons' future. "If one looks at all the amazing material that has been placed under our licenses—from MIT’s Open Courseware and the Public Library of Science to great music, from countless photographs and blogs to open textbooks—one realizes that, under Larry's leadership, the organization has actually helped build a global 'creative commons' in which millions of people around the world participate, either as creators or users. My job will be to use the skills of the remarkable people on our board—including a guy called Larry Lessig, who has promised me he isn’t going away any time soon to make sure that mission continues and expands."

The Hewlett Foundation grant consists of $2.5 million to provide general support to Creative Commons over five years and $1.5 million to support ccLearn, the division of Creative Commons that is focused on open educational resources. "The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation has been a strong supporter of openness and open educational resources in particular," said Catherine Casserly, the Director of the Open Educational Resources Initiative at Hewlett. "Creative Commons licenses are a critical part of the infrastructure of openness on which those efforts depend." The Hewlett grant was a vital part of a five-year funding plan which also saw promises of support from Omidyar Network, Google, Mozilla, Red Hat, and the Creative Commons board.

Creative Commons also announces two other senior staff changes. Diane Peters joins the organization as General Counsel. Peters arrives from the Mozilla Corporation, serves on the board of the Software Freedom Law Center, and was previously General Counsel for Open Source Development Labs and the Linux Foundation. She has extensive experience collaborating with and advising nonprofit organizations, development communities, and high-tech companies on a variety of matters.

Vice President and General Counsel Virginia Rutledge, who joined Creative Commons last year from Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP, will take on a new role as Vice President and Special Counsel. In her new role, Rutledge will focus on development and external relations, while continuing to lead special legal projects.

In its 2007 "Safe Harbor Provisions for the Use of Orphan Works for Scientific, Technical and Medical Literature" position paper, STM (International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers) outlines how orphan works searches should be conducted.

Here's an excerpt:

The publishers do believe that in virtually all cases searches and reviews must be conducted of these kinds of resources identified generically as:

• Published indexes of published material relevant for the publication type and subject matter;
• Indexes and catalogs from library holdings and collections;
• Sources that identify changes in ownership of publishing houses and publications (see below comment on imprints) including from local reprographic rights organizations;
• Biographical resources for authors;
• Searches of recent relevant literature to determine if the citation to the underlying work has been updated by other users or authors;
• Relevant business or personal directories or search engine searches of businesses or persons; and
• Sources on the history of relevant publishing houses or scientific, technical or medical disciplines.

In "Orphan Works Legislation: Round Two," Georgia Harper calls this procedure "daunting." She goes on to say:

It was clearly designed with other publishers in mind, given their corporate resources, and their likely intent to profit from the use of the work contributing to their willingness to spend considerable time and money chasing down every rabbit track. This does not seem like a good idea for nonprofit entities making nonprofit uses. As I commented at the time, the proposal suggested that all the rigor of adopting real human orphans should be applied to making even nonprofit uses of abandoned copyrighted works.

In a ruling in the Elektra v. Barker case, United States District Judge Kenneth M. Karas has ruled that having digital music files in a KaZaA shared folder is a violation of copyright holders' distribution rights. EFF attorney Fred von Lohmann said that the ruling was an important precedent.

Read more about it at "New Ruling May 'Grease the Wheels" of RIAA Litigation Machine."

The Section 108 Study Group has released the The Section 108 Study Group Report.

Here's the group's charge from the "Executive Summary":

The purpose of the Section 108 Study Group is to conduct a reexamination of the exceptions and limitations applicable to libraries and archives under the Copyright Act, specifically in light of digital technologies. The group will study how section 108 of the Copyright Act may need to be amended to address the relevant issues and concerns of libraries and archives, as well as creators and other copyright holders. The group will provide findings and recommendations on how to revise the copyright law in order to ensure an appropriate balance among the interests of creators and other copyright holders, libraries and archives in a manner that best serves the national interest.

Here's an overview of the document from the "Executive Summary":

The Study Group’s recommendations, conclusions, and other outcomes of its discussions are described in this Report in three separate sections: "Recommendations for Legislative Change" addresses issues for which the Study Group agreed a legislative solution is appropriate and agreed on recommendations for legislative change. These recommendations often are subject to the resolution of related outstanding issues, discussed in detail in the body of the Report. "Conclusions on Other Issues" addresses issues on which the Study Group had substantive discussions, and agreed a legislative solution might be appropriate, but for which it has no specific recommendations on the major issues. "Additional Issues" addresses additional important issues that the Study Group discussed.

The Berkman Center for Internet & Society has released a digital video of the Lawrence Lessig and Jack Valenti debate about "The Future of Intellectual Property on the Internet" on October 1, 2000.