IP AND DISABILITY - A TRICKY INTERFACE


The BBC reports that a programmer has removed his accessible version of the data on the Odeon’s website after a letter from the cinema’s lawyer. Matthew Somerville found that it was impossible to use a screen-reader with the Odeon site when Explorer was used as a browser, so he used a scraper to remove the details of the Odeon’s films, times and booking system. He then posted the information on his personal website under the name “accessible Odeon”. The Odeon objected, pointing to its intellectual property rights.

It has been pointed out that, since the Odeon’s official site is not accessible to the blind, it may be in breach of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. However, it’s not clear whether that Act applies to online content. Likewise, although the Copyright (Visually Impaired Persons) Act 2002 allows people with visual impairments to make accessible copies of printed materials, the situation for online content is not clear.

The IPKat adds that if accessible copies of commercial information are made, as well as reproducing copyright works, the maker is likely to be reproducing the trade marks of the undertaking to whom the information relates. The IPKat isn’t aware of any discussion of whether there is a need for a trade mark exception in the interests of the disabled, though such use may fall within the descriptive use defence.

Details of the Copyright (Visually Impaired Persons) Act 2002 here and here
The original Odeon here
IP AND DISABILITY - A TRICKY INTERFACE IP AND DISABILITY - A TRICKY INTERFACE Reviewed by Anonymous on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 Rating: 5

2 comments:

  1. There is nothing in the Copyright (Visually Impaired Persons) Act 2002 which restricts its effect to works originally published in hard, as opposed to electronic, form. Mr Somerville's difficulties may stem from the fact that he is not an "approved body" as required under s.31B CDPA 1988.

    There is nothing in the trade mark point because s.10(6) of the TMA 1994 permits using a trade mark to refer to a trade mark proprietor so long as such reference is honest.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "However, it’s not clear whether that Act applies to online content." - the DDA Code of Practice explicitly states websites of service providers are covered. http://www.drc-gb.org/uploaded_files/documents/2008_223_drc%20cop%20rights%20of%20Access.doc

    ReplyDelete

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.