Middle powers and new copyright coalitions: better, stronger, more just?

In his Jan. 20, 2026 speech at the World Economic Forum, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney recognized that "multilateral institutions [...] are under threat" and that current crises have "laid bare the risks of extreme global integration."

He recognized that "the story of the international rules-based order was partially false." "You cannot live within the lie of mutual benefit through integration, " he said, "when integration becomes the source of your subordination." 

What should the Government of Canada do? Carney suggested that Canada, as an "intermediate" or "middle power" should "hear the wake-up call, leading us to fundamentally shift our strategic posture" to "build a new order that encompasses our values." 

Canada, he said, should find "different coalitions for different issues based on common values and interests." This, he said, "is not naive multilateralism, nor is it relying on their institutions. It's building coalitions that work – issues by issue, with partners who share enough common ground to act together." "We can build something bigger, better, stronger, more just," he said; "This is the task of the middle powers, the countries that have the most to lose from a world of fortresses and most to gain from genuine cooperation."  

WIPO’s move to open access laudable among international organizations

My latest post on WIPOMonitor.org notes that the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is at the forefront of international organizations in adopting an Open Access policy for its publications.  I suggest that WIPO, and other international organizations, should go further to ensure that all its documents and historical records are also openly accessible under the Creative Commons licence designed for international organizations.  Read the post here.

Intellectual Property and Access to Science and Culture: Convergence or Conflict?

The Centre for International Intellectual Property Studies (CEIPI) has launched the publication of “Intellectual Property and Access to Science and Culture: Convergence or Conflict?”, exploring the relationship between intellectual property (IP) rights and the right to science and culture.

The landscape of copyright in scientific work has changed dramatically in recent years, partly as a result of the emergence of a strong critique of the privatization of scientific knowledge and publications. The issue of access to science has been raised at the UN by UN Special Rapporteur Farida Shaheed, who in 2014 noted that privatizing scientific knowledge could work against the human right "to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits" (UDHR Art. 27). She noted that, from a human rights perspective:

Copyright laws should place no limitations upon the right to science and culture, unless the State can demonstrate that the limitation pursues a legitimate aim, is compatible with the nature of this right and is strictly necessary for the promotion of general welfare in a democratic society. (20)

As Shaheed notes in her introduction to Intellectual Property and Access to Science and Culture, "[a]dopting a human rights perspective on intellectual property issues is both crucial and urgent." The authors of Intellectual Property and Access to Science and Culture discuss the history, origins, and impact of Shaheed's groundbreaking reports, concluding (Christophe Geiger) that a human rights framework requires re-conceiving of copyright as a cultural right that includes a right of access.

Chapter 3 of my book, International Copyright and Access to Knowledge gives further background on copyright and science. Titled "Access to scientific knowledge," it recounts the history of international copyright in scientific works. I note that when the international copyright system was founded, scientific journal articles were placed, by default, in the public domain. This is due in large part to the efforts of Haitian diplomat, doctor, and writer Louis-Joseph Janvier, in fighting for broad and liberal access to scientific works worldwide. My chapter recounts historical debates over the question of whether copyright should apply to scientific works, and traces the transformation of the international copyright system and the narrowing of principles of access to scientific works.

Universalizing fair use: An important Argentinian proposal

The government of Argentina has submitted an important proposal in current negotiations towards an international instrument on limitations and exceptions to copyright at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).

Most international treaties seek to establish minimum standards.  In the case of the current WIPO negotiations, relating to exceptions and limitations to copyright for education and research institutions and persons with disabilities, this means that all countries would agree to permit a minimum set of things, such as permitting photocopying for classroom use or reproduction for classroom display.

As the Argentinian government notes, this often does not go far enough, especially in the online context, since countries invariably differ widely in their implementation of such minimum standards, and digital transactions often involve multiple country jurisdictions.

Many everyday actions done in the context of educational institutions potentially involve multiple jurisdictions, and could be legal in one jurisdiction but not in the other:

• playing an Internet video from a web site based in one country in the classroom of another;
• uses of works in distance education, where students may be based in a different country from the instructor;
• downloading works from a web site in another country for educational purposes;
• making available or sending articles, texts, or digital course packs from one country to another.

Understanding the legality of any of these actions, along with many others, currently involves expensive legal analysis of the copyright regimes of multiple countries--an untenable situation for educational institutions, as the Argentinian government notes.

Argentina therefore proposes that "within the scope of a treaty on limitations and exceptions, lawful conduct in one territory should not be illegal in another. If reproduction or making available is valid under the treaty, it cannot then be invalid under the rules of another State jurisdiction." (p. 4).  The exact wording of the proposal is as follows:

Where performed in accordance with the exceptions and limitations set forth in this agreement, the reproduction or making available of a work shall be governed by the law of the country in which the reproduction or making available occur, without precluding the reproduced work from being delivered to or used by a person or institution benefitting from exceptions and limitations located in another Member State, provided that such delivery or use is consistent with the terms and conditions set forth in this agreement. (p. 4).

The Argentinian government has proposed a solution worthy of serious discussion at the WIPO meeting to be held next week.

Delhi High Court issues historic decision for access to knowledge and education

In September, the Delhi High Court handed down a groundbreaking judgement dismissing Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press, and other academic publishers’ copyright infringement suit against the Rameshwari Photocopy Service and the University of Delhi.  Read my full post about it here on the Cambridge University Press blog.

Fair dealing and course packs: Canadian and international challenges

A draft study presented last week at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is of particular relevance to Canada.  The revision of the Canadian Copyright Act's fair dealing provisions in 2012 to include dealing for educational purposes, as well as a Supreme Court of Canada decision of the same year relating to classroom materials, have led many Canadian universities to conclude, and to adopt the policy, that the inclusion of articles or book chapters, for example, in hard copy and electronic course packs, is fair dealing that does not require permission or payment of copyright fees.  This interpretation is currently being challenged in a Canadian lawsuit against York University.

Is the Canadian universities' interpretation of fair dealing in line with the policies adopted in other countries?  Professor Seng's study should shed some light on this question.  He notes that "Educational anthology limitations and exceptions are found in 94 provisions from 85 member states" (Sheng, 22).  However, some states place restrictions on course pack copying; 12 provisions, according to Sheng, require equitable remuneration to be paid to copyright holders (Sheng, 22).

Seng's study was introduced in the context of discussions toward a possible international instrument on copyright provisions for educational and research institutions.  Numerous states have made proposals for new international norms, some of which relate to the question of course packs.  Finland, for example, has made the main proposal on course packs.  It is very restrictive, in that it would require payment of remuneration, restrict anthologies to print anthologies only, and would allow only the use of works more than five years old (p. 26; see also p. 14).

Many of the proposals currently on the table at WIPO  (relating not only to course packs, but also to the use of copyright works in the classroom, in distance learning, in research, and in reverse engineering) are far more restrictive than current interpretations of Canadian educational fair dealing.  They are, therefore, important to watch.

Canadian universities' current interpretations of fair dealing as it relates to course packs could face two challenges: the first arises from the York University lawsuit, which may take ten years to wind its way to the Supreme Court of Canada.  The second comes from a possible WIPO international treaty or instrument that could reinforce or, just as possibly, restrict educational user rights in Canada.

Canada should take an active role in the negotiations, promoting robust and fair user rights for education.


--
NB: Chapter 4 of my book International Copyright and Access to Knowledge (discount code:Bannerman2015) addresses the history and present politics of copyright in educational works.  Titled "Access to education, libraries, and traditional knowledge," the chapter notes that while, at national levels, the history of Western copyright is strongly tied to the principle of access to education, the same is not true of the international copyright system, Rather, the international system, with its mission civilisatrice, served to restrict copyright provisions for the encouragement of education.

Libraries, archives' role in making orphan works accessible up for debate at WIPO

Discussion of the internationalization of copyright limitations and exceptions, such as expanded exceptions to copyright for libraries, educational institutions, and people with disabilities, continue this week at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)'s Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights.

Discussions of access provisions in international copyright have been ongoing since 2004 and have, so far, resulted in the establishment of the 2013 Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled.  Today's discussions focused on building on the work done under the Marrakesh Treaty to see the possible establishment of an international instrument internationalizing copyright limitations and exceptions for libraries and archives.  International provisions are necessary because, as I note in chapter 4 of my book, International Copyright and Access to Knowledge (Cambridge UP, 2016):

libraries face a number of problems as they attempt to provide both traditional and new services to their users – many related to new technologies. Digitization, license agreements imposed by publishers of electronic journals and books, and Technological Protection Measures (TPMs) all introduce problems of access, preservation,and maintaining copyright exceptions. Moreover, the globalized possibilities of resource sharing, which take place increasingly across borders, are undermined by the territoriality of copyright law. IFLA, the ICA, and others suggest that a treaty is the best way to ensure that a minimum set of limitations and exceptions for libraries and archives exist, and that they apply in cross-border environments. (76)*

One focus of today's WIPO discussions was on the topic of orphan works, or copyright works where the copyright owner can't be found.  Libraries and archives are often the "adoptive parents" of orphan works; they are in a position to facilitate access to these works, especially through digital means.  However, copyright regimes often stand in the way, as can differing national regimes.  The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), which is active at the meetings, notes that:

...there is a lot of progress to be made, with as many different copyright regimes there as there are states, each giving different types and degrees of protection if any at all. Moreover, as digital technologies bring about radical change in the information environment, a failure to act is the same as going backwards. This is why IFLA is engaging in support of change both at the global (WIPO) level, and nationally.

SCCR delegates. © WIPO 2016. Photo: Emmanuel Berrod.

 IFLA is asking for "changes which would give libraries the right to work across borders, to give access to orphan works, and to import books which are available in other countries."  For them, "the goal – an international framework which frees up libraries and librarians – is worth the effort."  After all, IFLA explains, "it’s through exceptions and limitations to copyright that we can do our job."

Current proposals that are on the table for orphan works (see page 34-39 of the current working document) would allow entities such as libraries to reproduce, make available to the public, and otherwise use orphan works.  Some proposals apply these provisions, as well, to retracted works (African Group, Equador, India), and some would require remuneration to authors or copyright owners who are subsequently identified (Equador).  However, there is no consensus among states on such proposals, with the United States and the European Union among the key detractors.

The chair's summary of today's discussion is expected to be disseminated tonight.

Tomorrow's discussions are expected to focus on the internationalization of exceptions and limitations for educational and research institutions and for persons with other disabilities.

For those following the discussion, a number of groups are blogging and tweeting from WIPO:

• WIPO webcasts the meeting live
• WIPO posts pictures from the meeting on flickr
• Follow the #SCCR32 hashtag on twitter
• Knowledge Ecology International is blogging the meetings
• The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) is tweeting from the SCCR
• IFLA held a side-event "Shelves to Servers: Digital Content in Libraries and Archives"
• The Electronic Frontier Foundation hosted a side-event on music and copyright with Imogen Heap

My June 2015 post about these negotiations is here.
* Discount code for International Copyright and Access to Knowledge: Bannerman2015

Sci-Hub and the history of copyright in scientific works

Sci-Hub, the "Napster for academics", is a project based in the notion that scientific knowledge should be made freely available.  John Willinsky, in his recent article for TimesHigherEd, quotes from a letter sent by Sci-Hub's founder, Alexandra Elbakyan,  in which she explains why she founded the hub:

Elbakyan explains that as a student in Kazakhstan, she found the “payment of $32 [Elsevier points out that it’s as high as $41.95] is just insane when you need to skim or read tens or hundreds of these papers to do research”. She adds: “I could obtain any paper by pirating it so I solved many requests and people always were very grateful for my help.”

Willinsky argues, "This right to know is also behind this new, emerging academic publishing economy. It is aligned with the broader social and intellectual movement of open science."

However, the founder of Sci-Hub is currently being sued by Elsevier for copyright infringement.

Chapter 3 of my new book, International Copyright and Access to Knowledge  is called "Access to scientific knowledge." It recounts the history of international copyright in scientific  works.  In the chapter, I note that when the international copyright system was founded, scientific journal articles were placed, by default, in the public domain.  This is due in large part to the efforts of Haitian diplomat, doctor, and writer Louis-Joseph Janvier, in fighting for broad and liberal access to scientific works worldwide.  It recounts historical debates over the question of whether copyright should apply to scientific works, and traces the transformation of the international copyright system and the narrowing of principles of access to scientific works.

As Willinsky notes, Elbakyan carries on a tradition of civil disobedience that represents "a 10-fold escalation of the tragic protest of Aaron Swartz, a gifted US computer scientist and entrepreneur who committed suicide two years ago after being charged with theft for downloading 4 million journal articles to his laptop." Her efforts also reflect a sentiment that can be traced right back to the founding of the international copyright system, to before a time when copyright took a wrong turn.

Upcoming talk @ Ryerson: International Copyright and Access to Knowledge

Here is the poster for my upcoming talk for students at Ryerson University's School of Creative Industries' CREA T.O. speakers' series about my new book, International Copyright and Access to Knowledge.  Thanks to Ryerson student Daphne Chan, who created this terrific poster!

New Book: International Copyright and Access to Knowledge

My new book, International Copyright and Access to Knowledge,  is now available from Cambridge University Press.

The principle of Access to Knowledge (A2K) has become a common reference point for a diverse set of agendas that all hope to realize technological and human potential by making knowledge more accessible. This book is a history of international copyright focused on principles of A2K and their proponents. Whilst debate and discussion so far has covered the perspectives of major western countries, the author's fresh approach to the topic considers emerging countries and NGOs, who have fought for the principles of A2K that are now fundamental to the system. Written in a clear and accessible style, the book connects copyright history to current problems, issues and events.

"Sara Bannerman's thoughtful and compelling book is a must-read for all of those interested in the challenges of increasing access to knowledge. She offers historical perspective on the narrowing of the knowledge commons and identifies opportunities for positive change going forward."
-Susan K. Sell, George Washington University

 International Copyright and Access to Knowledge is available through CUP, Amazon, on Wordery. An excerpt is available here.  Purchases through CUP can make use of 20% discount code Bannerman2015.

WIPO to discuss library and archive copyright provisions

Some interesting proposals will soon be under discussion at the World Intellectual Property Organization that could free libraries, archives, educational and research institutions, and people with disabilities from copyright provisions that hamper their ability to make use of copyright works.  Read my full post about the upcoming meeting on WIPOMonitor.org here.

Who should own big data?

Big data has a lot to offer, from curing disease to fostering economic development to fostering transparency.  At the same time, from government mass surveillance to data leaks, the misuses of big data seem as pervasive as its uses.

Who owns big data?  What rights do--and should--its owners have over what is done with it? Two different answers to this question have been posed.  The first would allow free use of big data for non-profit scientific research.  The second would release IP control of big data for commercial research also.

As noted in a recent paper by Handke, Guibault and Vallbé, the answer to the question of what IP rights subsist in big data varies by country.  Research using mined data may, in some countries, be constrained by copyright and other IP laws, while in others (including Canada and the United States), copyright ownership in data may not stand in the way of researchers seeking to data mine.

Two international initiatives: The Hague Declaration on Knowledge Discovery in the Digital Age and the World Intellectual Property Organization's proceedings toward the creation of a new international instrument on limitations and exceptions for educational, teaching and research institutions and for persons with other disabilities, seek to ensure internationally that copyright does not stand in the way of the ability to mine data for research.

At WIPO, the African Group of countries has proposed that non-profit scientific research be exempted from copyright.  They propose that:

The reproduction and reuse [...] of any lawfully obtained copyrighted work for purposes of not-for-profit scientific research, including storage, archiving, linking, data mining procedures, data manipulation, and virtual scientific experiments subject to attribution of the sources used to the extent reasonably feasible

should not constitute copyright infringement (p. 33; emphasis added).

While the WIPO proposal focuses on non-profit scientific research, a second initiative--the Hague Declaration--would also permit commercial data mining.  Further, it encourages research organizations, universities, and businesses; and those using Creative Commons licenses, to actively make data available publicly available for research.

Corporate owners of big data might be alarmed at the latter declaration.  Should individuals be alarmed as well?

Should we be concerned about giving up IP ownership of personal data?  

Scholar Neil Lawrence has argued that people should have ownership of their data:

There are opportunities and risks with the accumulation of data, just as there are for the accumulation of capital. However, one thing seems clear: we need to increase the power of the people. Banks pay interest; perhaps we should be paid directly for the use of our personal data. We need to be made aware of the value of our data and be given rights to control who accesses it. We need to form a data-democracy: data governance for the people, by the people and with the people’s consent.

Whether this ownership does or should take the form of intellectual property, or some other form, is a question worth considering.[1]  Is a person not the author of their own personal data?

While the two international initiatives outlined  above are likely intended to address corporate ownership of big data, personal ownership of the personal data that makes up big data should also be considered.  

It seems clear that, in an age where privacy laws fall short in constraining mass surveillance and protecting privacy online, a stronger medicine may be required.  As the ethics surrounding big data continues to evolve, throwing away ownership of our data in both commercial and non-commercial contexts may be a precipitous move.  Some form of personal ownership of personal data--especially ownership that would prevent unauthorized commercial use of data--could be a useful tool in an increasingly pitted battle over data ownership and control.

----

[1]. Scholars have considered this question from various angles. Pamela Samuelson has argued that, while an intellectual property approach to personal data may not be appropriate, an approach based on moral rights may be worth exploring. The idea of ownership of personal data, and the problems associated with such ownership, continue to be explored.

WIPO Treaty Should Allow Libraries to Make All Books Accessible to Visually Impaired Patrons

Jim Fruchterman reports that EU countries are standing in the way of provisions that would allow libraries to make or import an accessible version of a book that it has in its collection, even if a commercially available work in that format already exists.  Reports come from the currently-underway Diplomatic Conference to Conclude a Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works by Visually Impaired Persons and Persons with Print Disabilities.

There are proposals on the table that would force some entities, including the visually impaired themselves, to buy accessible copies of works if they are commercially available, rather than making or importing such versions under a limitation or exception to copyright.  Libraries should not be forced to do this.  It would be impossible for a library to purchase an accessible duplicate of every book in the library; such a requirement would prevent and does prevent libraries from making all of its works available in accessible format to the visually impaired.  Such a requirement guarantees the inaccessibility of most books.

As I said in a previous post, two groups are especially affected by visual impairments: children and the elderly.  The new treaty should promote reading by putting in place provisions that ensure any book can be made available by libraries, through import or through making an accessible version - certainly for books that they have in their collection.  The treaty should ensure that everyone can borrow any book from the library.

Private solutions have never solved the access problems for the visually impaired and probably never will.  Both books and the visually impaired have been around for hundreds of years, and the problem isn't solved yet; it is currently estimated that only 5% of works are available in a accessible format.  What's the holdup?  Clearly, it is time for governments to step in.

The Canadian delegation, along with all others, should support provisions that ensure any book can be lent by libraries in accessible format, through importing or making an accessible version, to its patrons.

[updated]

Canada stands up for visually impaired access

Jamie Love of Knowledge Ecology International reports that Canada, along with 16 other countries, is backing measures that would allow the visually impaired to break digital locks in order to have access to copyright works.  The United States, which proposes more restrictive measures on digital locks, is now isolated, according to Love.

This is an excellent move by Canada and the 16 others that is consistent with Canadian provisions that allow the circumvention of TPMs by the perceptually impaired or those working on their behalf. 

This move is made in the context of the currently-underway Diplomatic Conference to Conclude a Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works by Visually Impaired Persons and Persons with Print Disabilities.  See also my posts here and here.

A Balancing Act for the Blind and Visually Impaired

On Monday June 17, a diplomatic conference will be held to negotiate a treaty/international instrument that would allow accessible-format works to be exported from country to country.  Intended to address the problem that currently only 5% of copyright works are currently available in accessible format.  Copyright law in many countries currently prohibits the export of copyright works, including accessible-format works.   This creates a situation where works must be separately converted to accessible formats in each country, or where separate permissions must be requested for each country to create or export the works, inhibiting the flow of accessible-format works around the world.

Recently, I noted that the negotiations have entered troubled waters.  Media conglomerates, copyright lobby groups, the Obama administration, and the European Commission have sought to weaken or derail the treaty. 

The Canadian government continues to stress "balance" in copyright as a way of navigating this issue.  It claims that the current Canadian copyright law, which does contains export measures for the visually impaired, is "balanced".  Indeed, Canada was the first country in the world to put in place such provisions, including provisions that allow the circumvention of TPMs by the perceptually impaired or those working on their behalf.  However, the idea that copyright is "balanced" in addressing the interests of the visually impaired is contentious, as the question of balance always is.  Canada’s act regarding the export of accessible works  applies only to works by Canadian authors, does not apply to large print books or cinematographic works, does not apply if the work is reasonably available in the destination country, and sets out various other restrictions. 

The idea that copyright is currently "balanced" in addressing the interests of the visually impaired is often questioned.  Only 5% of works are accessible to the visually impaired...this is is not balance.  Canada should not take any action that will allow a different or better balance to be achieved in the future by enshrining restrictive or highly bureaucratic measures in an international treaty.

Two groups are especially affected by visual impairments: children and the elderly. This is an issue that affects us all, when we're old and when we're young.  It also affects disproportionately those living in developing countries.  I want to be able to read when I'm old.  I want my friends in developing countries to be able to too.  I want Canadian negotiators to stand up and make sure that happens.

As I said in a January 2011 op-ed in The Hill Times, Canada could do more. It could enable less restrictive laws around the world, ensuring that the perceptually impaired can circumvent TPMs in order to be able to access works.  This is an opportunity for Canada to show leadership and vision, and to emphatically insist on the fullest and most meaningful access for the visually impaired,  unimpeded by TPMs or by other restrictive measures. Canada's position should be based on preserving this policy flexibility for a future of fuller access for everyone.

[corrected June 14 2013][revised June 16 2013]

Discussions of possible new WIPO treaties for schools, libraries, visually impaired underway

This week at WIPO member-states are gathering for the twice-yearly meeting of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR).  The SCCR is one of the most important bodies at WIPO, since it is tasked with the early work in the formulation of possible copyright-related treaties. 

The SCCR's work recently led to the conclusion of a new Audiovisual Performances Treaty (the Beijing Treaty) which ended speculation that WIPO was no longer able to conclude treaties.  (It had not done so since the conclusion of the WIPO Internet Treaties in the 90s.)  In fact, as Michael Geist observes, WIPO was able to conclude this treaty in a far more transparent manner than has been the case for other recent treaties, such as ACTA and the TPP, which have recently hit roadblocks. 

The Beijing Treaty was in fact only the first of a suite of new treaties under discussion at WIPO.  (See IPW's coverage.)  Those next on the agenda include treaties on copyright limitations and exceptions, or what are referred to in Canada as 'user's rights'.  Specifically, three new possible treaties are under discussion:

1. a treaty for the visually impaired and print-disabled users; 
2. a treaty for educational and research institutions; 
3. and a treaty for libraries and archives. 

Any one of these would represent the first time that a WIPO treaty has been primarily focussed on ensuring that a minimum set of rights are granted to users of copyright works, as opposed to the rights of copyright holders. 

Canada's recent Supreme Court Decisions on copyright, released July 12, have reportedly come under discussion at the SCCR meetings.  While the Canadian delegation has repordedly not yet spoken on the issue at the SCCR, the recent decisions of the Canadian Supreme Court have been raised by other actors.  The African Group, according to IPW, suggested - in a proposal that seems inspired by and in line with the Canadian Supreme Court's K-12 ruling -  that individuals and institutes should be authorised "to distribute a copy or copies of all or part of the work, including making available to pupils or students, the originals or copies thereof the work, or copies when these are necessary to illustrate the teaching." 

The possible treaty on limitations and exceptions for educational and research institutions currently under discussion at WIPO should be of particular interest not only to Canada's educational and research institutions as they grapple with the post-Supreme Court-decision environment, but also to those worldwide.  It would seem important for such institutions to follow what is happening at WIPO and to ensure that their proposals and interests are brought forward to the discussions.While many groups and international NGOs have been involved in the WIPO discussions of a possible treaty for the visually impaired and print-disabled, it is equally important for educational and research institutions, and library and archives communities, to be involved in ensuring that their concerns and environments are taken into account in discussions that could eventually set new norms worldwide.

Meeting documents are available here.  The current session, now webcasting is here, along with webcasting/recorded video link and links to documents containing possible treaty language.

Update: new IPW post here

C-32 & the A2K Problem

My op-ed, "The A2K problem: copyright, accessibility and the future of copyright in Canada," appears in today's Hill Times. In it, I argue that Canada's Bill C-32 is an early move among international efforts to address the copyright needs of the visually impaired, easing the difficulties of creating and making available accessible-format works. It could set an example for other countries and international negotiations to follow. However, I argue that Canada could do more to address those needs than what is contained in C-32. Canada’s efforts should rise to the standard of a new age of access to knowledge, instead of becoming part of the A2K problem.

Carleton University has posted the full op-ed here.

Intellectual Property Issues in ICT4D

My report, Intellectual Property Issues in ICT4D, is now available online. Prepared for Canada's International Development Research Centre, this report reviews intellectual property issues in the area of information and communication technologies for development (ICT4D). Issues covered include open access, Creative Commons, free and open source software, copyright limitations and exceptions, traditional knowledge, collective management organizations, competition policy, the WIPO development agenda, and the draft Access to Knowledge Treaty as they relate to intellectual property and developing countries.