1. Executive Summary

1.1. The Roundtable

• Subject: "Internet, Copyright and Freedom of Information: Problematics of the EU Directive and MAI"
• Date:  9 October 1998
• Place: The Finnish Institute in London
• Organisers: Charter 88 (UK), Scarman Trust (UK) Finnish Library Association (Finland), Katto-Meny Cooperative (Finland) and the Finnish Institute in London
• Participants: 28 invited persons, including citizens of Britain, Finland, France, Norway and Sweden
• Chairman: Prof. Brian Groombrige (Scarman Trust, London)
• Keynote speakers: Dr Paul Sturges (Loughborough University, UK); Ms Petra Wikström (Brussels)
• Convenor: Mr Mikael Böök (Katto-Meny Cooperative, Helsinki)

1.2. Context and timing

• the intense lobbying in Brussels, and within the individual states, on the EU Directive on the Harmonisation of Copyright. The draft of the Directive dates fromDecember 1997;
• the differences in opinion and attitude on the issues of copyright and access to information between e.g. associations of authors, publishers, library professionals, consumers, industrials etc.;
• the international consciousness raising movement against OECD's proposed Multilateral Agreement on Investments (including, especially, its provisions on "Intellectual Property"); this movement gained momentum during 1998 and led, ultimately, to the collapse of the negotiations on the MAI in October.

1.3. Findings

1. 1 Authors organisations and the library community tend to look very differently at new legislation on copyright in the digital environment.
• The library community wants to participate in and exercise influence on the building of the information society while  the organisations of the authors take a much more defensive and/or passive stand (a "wait and see"-attitude);
• Librarians fear that the public interest will be sacrified on the shrine of economic profitability in the name of copyright. Authors fear that they will be forced to give up their rights under the pretext of serving the public interest.
• Librarians and concerned citizens emphasize that the EU Directive is de facto political, i.e. that it is a means to regulate the power relations and the social structure of the information society. Author's organisations, in turn, say that is a strictly juridical directive on the protection of the author's rights in the digital environment, and that no political decisions are involved.
2. 2 Yet there is consensus on the need to defend a) the rights of the author as defined by the Berne Convention, and b) the public library as an institution of democratic society. There is also agreement on the need for increased contact and cooperation between authors, librarians and concerned citizens on the information society issues. The roundtable should continue and/or other similar meetings be organised.
3. 3 The definitions of 'author' and 'rightholder' in the EU Directive, and especially the frequent use of the phrase 'authors and rightholders', which blurs the important distinction between the two, are vague enough to allow the worst possible scenario to happen: a) the author looses his right to the rightholder;  b) the rightholders i.e. corporations own all information and sell it  to the public by the bit and/or the minute.

1.4. Website