Read on Twitter
Copyright often seems like a joke. I see ppl infringing it on here literally every few minutes, posting photos and videos that aren't theirs.
But this will not last. Although technology has enabled mass infringement, it is now getting better at finding those infringements.
But this will not last. Although technology has enabled mass infringement, it is now getting better at finding those infringements.
We need to be prepared for an age of mass enforcement.
Already, it has begun. Tens of thousands of people now receive automated demands for unpaid licence fees, for fairly innocuously posted photos. As recognition software improves, music and video will soon be next.
Already, it has begun. Tens of thousands of people now receive automated demands for unpaid licence fees, for fairly innocuously posted photos. As recognition software improves, music and video will soon be next.
As I set out in my paper for @TenThinkTank (linked), UK copyright requires change.
For if we do not adapt it in response to changing technology and social norms, it will harm creativity and innovation - the very things it was set up to protect. https://www.tenentrepreneurs.org/research/fixing-copyright
For if we do not adapt it in response to changing technology and social norms, it will harm creativity and innovation - the very things it was set up to protect. https://www.tenentrepreneurs.org/research/fixing-copyright
Copyright is extraordinarily strong.
It is automatic, from the moment creation is fixed: when u put pen to paper, hand to clay, or finger to key.
The creators' monopoly over copies is near-total.
And it can last well over a century: the life of the creator +70 years (usually).
It is automatic, from the moment creation is fixed: when u put pen to paper, hand to clay, or finger to key.
The creators' monopoly over copies is near-total.
And it can last well over a century: the life of the creator +70 years (usually).
Now, there's not much that can be done about those things, due to international treaties. And copyright does have its uses.
But there are ways we can adapt it, to create win-win scenarios for owners, creators, and users. And Brexit may have even helped with this.
But there are ways we can adapt it, to create win-win scenarios for owners, creators, and users. And Brexit may have even helped with this.
There are precious few policies that the UK could not already have implemented before it left the EU. But tweaking copyright policy is actually one of them.
The gov has said it will not adopt the 2019 EU Directive on Copyright. So the divergence has already begun.
The gov has said it will not adopt the 2019 EU Directive on Copyright. So the divergence has already begun.
This is good. It means the UK will not be requiring online platform services to use upload filters, and it won't implement a "link tax", charging websites for showing snippets of articles they link to. That should continue.
But other parts of the directive should be adopted.
But other parts of the directive should be adopted.
For example, Article 14 of the directive stipulates that for something to be copyrighted, it must actually be original. This reflects a European (and American) legal tradition, but not a British one. We should adopt something like it.
Why is that important?
Why is that important?
Well, as @arthistorynews and @marinamaral2 have pointed out, museums & galleries can otherwise photograph centuries-old material that's already in the public domain, and claim the images as their own copyright. We need something similar. Public domain should mean public domain.
In some respects, the UK is also just behind other countries in implementing certain measures, such as allowing people to shift the formats of material they have already legitimately bought, for their own personal use. It should catch up.
But in other respects, it can innovate.
But in other respects, it can innovate.
When it comes to text and data mining by AI, for example, in the US it is claimed as fair use. But it faces legal uncertainty.
In the UK, we currently only exempt non-commercial applications. We could provide a broader and certain exemption, and so reap the economic benefits.
In the UK, we currently only exempt non-commercial applications. We could provide a broader and certain exemption, and so reap the economic benefits.
More broadly, the American system allows "transformative uses" of copyrighted material to be exempted under fair use, to encourage innovation and creativity.
But the fair use system leads to litigiousness and uncertainty - novel fair use claims must be tested in court.
But the fair use system leads to litigiousness and uncertainty - novel fair use claims must be tested in court.
The UK should try to create a system that take the best of fair use, without the pitfalls.
I suggest an exemption from copyright for sufficiently transformative uses, so long as they don't damage the market & are not derogatory of the original.
But how to avoid litigiousness?
I suggest an exemption from copyright for sufficiently transformative uses, so long as they don't damage the market & are not derogatory of the original.
But how to avoid litigiousness?
I suggest the Intellectual Property Office become a more proactive and anticipatory regulatory body, on a model proposed by @nesta_uk. It would give guidance on the boundaries of what counts as transformative, allowing copyright in general to react faster to changing tech.
Lastly (and this is closest to my heart), there are an estimated 91 million works still under copyright, but whose owners cannot be traced. A pitfall of such long copyright terms.
The gov created an Orphan Works Register in 2014. But a paltry <1,100 works have been registered.
The gov created an Orphan Works Register in 2014. But a paltry <1,100 works have been registered.
As someone who has tried to track down the owners of many orphan works, the conditions for would-be users are far too onerous. It generally just dissuades any use of the material.
I propose a win-win that should result in more licensing payments, while lowering barriers to use.
I propose a win-win that should result in more licensing payments, while lowering barriers to use.
The details would take a tweet thread of their own. But throughout, actually, I have generally tried to find policies that are win-wins for owners, users, and especially creators. So that copyright overall encourages innovation.
Full report here: https://www.tenentrepreneurs.org/research/fixing-copyright
Full report here: https://www.tenentrepreneurs.org/research/fixing-copyright
