Category: Legislation and Government Regulation

US Signs Treaty: "The Marrakesh Treaty Implementation Act"

Karyn A. Temple has published "The Marrakesh Treaty Implementation Act" in Copyright: Creativity at Work.

Here's an excerpt:

The MTIA amends section 121 of the Copyright Act, which has already established limitations and exceptions allowing certain authorized entities, like the Library of Congress’s National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped, to provide published works in accessible formats to those who have print disabilities. The MTIA reinforces section 121's mission and changes some of its key terms and definitions to comply with the text of the Marrakesh Treaty. For example, the term "blind or other persons with disabilities" is now "eligible persons," which is then defined as someone who is blind, has a perceptual or reading disability, or has a physical disability affecting their ability to read.

The MTIA also adds a new section—121A—to the Copyright Act allowing authorized entities to both export and import works in accessible formats between the United States and other countries who have signed the Marrakesh Treaty. Finally, section 121A provides guidance to authorized entities engaged in exporting or importing on establishing and following certain practices and procedures. For a more detailed summary of what the MTIA does, please visit the Office’s FAQ.

Academic Library as Scholarly Publisher Bibliography | Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works | Open Access Works | Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"What’s Next with WIPO’s Ill-Advised Broadcast Treaty?"

The Creative Commons has released "What's Next with WIPO's Ill-Advised Broadcast Treaty?" by Timothy Vollmer.

Here's an excerpt:

Six years ago we wrote a blog post titled WIPO's Broadcasting Treaty: Still Harmful, Still Unnecessary. At the time, the proposed treaty—which would grant to broadcasters a separate, exclusive copyright-like right in the signals that they transmit, separate from any copyrights in the content of the transmissions—had already been on WIPO’s docket for several years. It’s still on the table today, and now some countries are calling for actions to finalise the agreement.

The current text contains many of the same damaging provisions, such as long term of protection (possibly 50 years) and little to no support for limitations and exceptions to the right which could provide needed protections for activities such as news reporting, quotation, education, personal use, and archiving.

But the dealbreaker for CC is the fact that the treaty would essentially invalidate the permissions that users of Creative Commons grant when they share their creativity under open licenses, and instead gift new and unwarranted rights to broadcasting organizations that have added little or no value to the underlying work being transmitted. This is because the rights provided to broadcasters in the treaty would apply separately from copyright, thus permitting them to restrict how the content is shared even if the creator of the video or audio content has already released it under a Creative Commons license, or if it's already in the public domain.

Academic Library as Scholarly Publisher Bibliography | Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works | Open Access Works | Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

European Commission’s OA Plan S: "Academic Freedom and Responsibility: Why Plan S Is Not Unethical"

Stephen Curry, has published "Academic Freedom and Responsibility: Why Plan S Is Not Unethical" in Reciprocal Space.

Here's an excerpt:

Since its announcement on 4th September the European Commission's plan to make a radical shift towards open access (OA) has caused quite a stir. Backed by eleven* national funding agencies, the plan aims to make the research that they support free to read as soon as it is published. This is a major challenge to the status quo, since the funders are effectively placing subscription journals off limits for their researchers, even if the journals allow green OA (publication of the author-accepted manuscript) after an embargo period; Plan S also specifically excludes hybrid open access except in cases where journals have an agreed schedule for flipping to OA. The plan has been welcomed as "admirably strong" by OA advocate Peter Suber, though he has also offered cautionary notes on some aspects. Others have been less enthusiastic. A central charge, from some publishers and some academics is that Plan S is an infringement of academic freedom to choose how and where your work is published and it therefore unethical.

Academic Library as Scholarly Publisher Bibliography | Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works | Open Access Works | Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

US-Mexico-Canada Agreement: "From Copyright Term to Super Bowl Commercials: Breaking Down the Digital NAFTA Deal"

Michael Geist has published "From Copyright Term to Super Bowl Commercials: Breaking Down the Digital NAFTA Deal" in his blog.

Here's an excerpt:

Yet the major copyright change for Canada is the extension in the term of copyright beyond the international standard of life of the author plus 50 years to life of the author plus 70 years. The term of copyright was never going to hold up a major trade agreement and Canada did agree to an extension in the original TPP. However, the cost will be significant, locking down works from the public domain for decades and potentially increasing educational costs by millions of dollars. From a domestic policy perspective, the change should impact the current copyright review as term extension has been one of the top requests from rights holders and areas of concern for users. The extension shifts the copyright balance in Canada and should be factored into future reforms, including the benefits of extending fair dealing to restore the balance.

Academic Library as Scholarly Publisher Bibliography | Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works | Open Access Works | Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"Monographs on the Move?: A View on ‘Decoupling’ and Other Prospects"

Andrew Lockett has published "Monographs on the Move?: A View on 'Decoupling' and Other Prospects" in Insights.

Here's an excerpt:

In the context of the recent debate about the movement towards a monographs mandate for the UK, this opinion piece considers the logic of ‘decoupling’ that underlies it. It also looks at the real opportunities to improve on the current extraordinarily durable high-price system for publishing long-form research. Thinking around decoupled monograph publishing has positioned academic authors as the individual consumers of diverse publishing services (a wide array of which are fast emerging) in the face of significant scholarly caution. Furthermore, a danger of renewed market dominance by price-makers in an open access environment remains, with the risk of inequitable outcomes that may mirror problems that have arisen in journals. Opportunities may also arise for new local initiatives, especially collective and community-based publishing, with academic libraries likely to be in the middle of a fast-changing and contested environment for publishing monographs.

Academic Library as Scholarly Publisher Bibliography | Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works | Open Access Works | Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"In Passing A.B. 2192, California Leads the Country in Open Access"

EFF has released "In Passing A.B. 2192, California Leads the Country in Open Access."

Here's an excerpt:

Under A.B. 2192—which passed both houses unanimously—all peer-reviewed, scientific research funded by the state of California would be made available to the public no later than one year after publication. There’s a similar law on the books in California right now, but it only applies to research funded by the Department of Public Health, and it’s set to expire in 2020. A.B. 2192 would extend it indefinitely and expand it to cover research funded by any state agency.

Academic Library as Scholarly Publisher Bibliography | Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works | Open Access Works | Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"Senator Markey and Congresswoman Eshoo Lead Members of Congress in Amicus Brief Challenging the FCC’s Net Neutrality Repeal"

Senator Edward J. Markey has released "Senator Markey and Congresswoman Eshoo Lead Members of Congress in Amicus Brief Challenging the FCC’s Net Neutrality Repeal."

Here's an excerpt:

Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Congresswoman Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.) and 27 U.S. Senators and 76 members of the House of Representatives filed an Amicus Brief with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) December 2017 decision to eliminate net neutrality rules. The FCC’s decision repealed the 2015 Open Internet rules, which categorized broadband internet access as a telecommunications service and prohibited Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from engaging in discriminatory practices, such as blocking or throttling online content and establishing internet fast and slow lanes.

A copy of the Amicus Brief can be found HERE.

In their amicus brief, the members of Congress, several of whom were instrumental in enacting the Telecommunications Act of 1996, state that under the plain language of the Act, internet providers offer a telecommunications service. Congress also intended that the definition of "telecommunications service" be applicable to changing technologies and markets on a technologically neutral and forward-looking basis.

Academic Library as Scholarly Publisher Bibliography | Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works | Open Access Works | Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap