[A2k] Fwd: Pranesh Prakash CIS Intervention at the WIPO SCCR 23 on Broadcast Treaty

Manon Ress manon.ress at keionline.org
Tue Nov 29 10:22:52 PST 2011

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:  <mailman-bounces at lists.keionline.org>
Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 11:37 AM
Subject: Content filtered message notification
To: a2k-owner at lists.keionline.org

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Pranesh Prakash <pranesh at cis-india.org>
To: A2K List <a2k at lists.keionline.org>, IP Enforcement List
<ip-enforcement at roster.wcl.american.edu>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 16:36:45 +0100
Subject: CIS Intervention at the WIPO SCCR 23 on Broadcast Treaty
Permalink: <http://goo.gl/6bUq2>

The twenty-third session of the Standing Committee on Copyright and
Related Rights is being held in Geneva from November 22, 2011 to
December 2, 2011. Pranesh Prakash delivered this statement on a new
proposal made by South Africa and Mexico (SCCR/23/6) on a treaty for


The Centre for Internet and Society would like to thank the South
African and Mexican delegations for their hard work on this text before us.

We wish to reiterate the statement on principles provided last SCCR by
many civil society non-governmental organizations, cable-casters and
technology companies opposing a rights-based Broadcasting Treaty, and
would like to associate ourselves with the statements made today by
Public Knowledge, Computer & Communications Industry Association,
Knowledge Ecology International, International Federation of Library
Associations, eIFL.net, and the Canadia Library Association.

## Broadcasters Already Protected Online

Broadcasters make two kinds of investments for which they are protected.
 They invest in infrastructure and they invest in licensing copyrighted
works.  The first investment is protected by 'broadcast rights', and the
latter investment is protected by copyright law.

Broadcasters, being licensees of copyrighted works, generally already
have rights of enforcement insofar as their licence is concerned.
Therefore there is no need to provide for additional protections with
regard to broadcasters in order to enable them to proceed against acts
that violate existing copyright laws: they already have those rights by
way of licence.  This is often forgotten when talking about rights of

The investments to be made in infrastructure in traditional broadcast
and in IP-based transmission are very different, even if it is the same
'traditional broadcasters' who are indulging in both.  Given that this
investment is the basis of additional protection for broadcaster over
and above the rights provided to underlying copyright, IP-based
transmissions should not be covered in any way even if it is traditional
broadcast organizations that are engaged in them.

Providing rights to large broadcasters for their online transmission, as
is currently being done via the provision on 'retransmission' while
excluding small webcasters will create a hierarchy without any basis in
either principle or existing laws.

## Support Countries' Concerns

We also wish to support the amendments suggested by the Indian
delegation.  As we were reminded by the Indian delegation, the General
Assembly mandate of 2007 only extends to traditional broadcasting and to
a signal-based approach.  In this regard, we also wish to support the
question posed by the United States delegation between signal-based and
rights-based approaches, as also the strong statement by the Brazilian
delegation on the need to ensure that cultural diversity and competition
are protected and promoted by any international instrument on
broadcasting, and we would like to add 'preservation of a vibrant public
domain' as provided by Paragraph 16 of the WIPO Development Agenda.

Thank you, Chair.

Pranesh Prakash
Programme Manager
Centre for Internet and Society
W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283

Manon Anne Ress
Knowledge Ecology International
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20009 USA
manon.ress at keionline.org

More information about the A2k mailing list