Subject: WIPO proposals
sandy@la-hq.org.uk
Date: to 25 heinä 1996 - 19:31:32 EEST
I have examined these proposals and have the following comments.
The EC proposal that the existing treaty language in Art 9 not be modified
does not harm the user community as it will still allow exceptions under
national laws. Article 9(2) presumably stays. The fact that permanent and
temporary storage should constitute an act of reproduction is more
worrying. As Emanuella says, this would affect the sending of faxes and
downloading before printing etc. However, I have been re-reading Seth
Greenstein's personal notes of the WIPO meeting in May. According to
Seth, the EC clarified their position by saying that, although temporary
storage was an act of reproduction, their proposal did not necessarily
require that it be SUBJECT to the right of reproduction. The exceptions of
Art 9(2) would continue to apply. What we have to do is to make sure our
national governments are aware of the practical implications.
PS. Seth's report was posted on the cni-copyright list last May. It's a
better read than the official WIPO report.
Sandy
Sandy Norman
Information Manager (Legal and Parliamentary)
Information Services
The Library Association Tel: 0171 636 7543
7 Ridgmount Street Fax: 0171 436 7218
London WC1E 7AE email: sandy@la-hq.org.uk
United Kingdom
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : ma 29 huhti 2024 - 01:20:14 EEST