IS THE NEW GERMAN COPYRIGHT LAW A BASKET CASE?

The Register reports that Germany’s plans to implement the EU Copyright Directive have met with considerable domestic criticism. Legislation concerning the first part of the Directive was recently enacted in order to comply with the EU deadline for implementation; however the controversial issue of anticircumvention mechanisms was left out. This is to be addressed in the forthcoming “second basket” of copyright laws. The fear though is that the anticircumvention provisions will rule out the current right to make private copies and to make other uses that would be considered fair use under traditional copyright law, such as use by journalists. As the proposal currently stands, rights-holders also will not need to provide access to schools, libraries and the disabled for one year.

The IPKat is worried by the lack of mandatory fair-use type provisions in the circumvention sections of the EU Copyright Directive. The effects of this will be felt in all the Member States of the EU. Particularly worrying is the impact that this will have on educational use – a much relied-upon but seldom litigated copyright defence . The IPKat notes that all of the Member States of the EU are signatories to the Berne Convention, which expressly calls for specific fair use exceptions to copyright and wonders whether the Copyright Directive is in compliance.

Baskets here, here, here and here


IS THE NEW GERMAN COPYRIGHT LAW A BASKET CASE? <strong>IS THE NEW GERMAN COPYRIGHT LAW A BASKET CASE?</strong> Reviewed by Anonymous on Tuesday, September 23, 2003 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.