[nfb-talk] Fw: [BlindLikeMe] Copyright Treaty Backing E-Books Survives Resistance From US and EU

David Andrews dandrews at visi.com
Wed Jun 10 22:53:23 UTC 2009

Don't flatter yourself (smile.)  We are not that important to any of 
them.  This comes from the publishers who don't want to loose any 
money.  We are just unintended fallout.


At 01:47 PM 6/10/2009, Sherri wrote:
>I don't understand why the U.S. opposes this policy. Guess they 
>don't want blind people to read.
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Claudia" <cdelreal1973 at sbcglobal.net>
>To: <our-safe-haven at googlegroups.com>; 
><makinghouseworkeasier at googlegroups.com>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 6:15 PM
>Subject: Fw: [BlindLikeMe] Copyright Treaty Backing E-Books Survives 
>Resistance From US and EU
>>----- Original Message ----- From: Victor
>>To: Blind Like Me Listserv
>>Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 4:52 AM
>>Subject: [BlindLikeMe] Copyright Treaty Backing E-Books Survives Resistance
>> From US and EU
>>Cross-Border Sharing of Books for Disabled Users Survives Resistance From
>>the EU and US
>>Copyright treaty backing e-books for disabled readers survives US and EU
>>Copyright treaty backing e-books for disabled readers survives US and EU
>>OUT-LAW News, 03/06/2009
>>A proposed treaty that would change copyright laws to allow the supply of
>>books across borders for the benefit of blind people has survived resistance
>>from the US, UK, France, Germany and other countries.
>>A committee of the World Intellectual Property Organisation agreed on Friday
>>"to continue without delay" its work on "facilitating the access of blind,
>>visually-impaired and other reading-disabled persons to copyright-protected
>>At the heart of this work is a treaty proposed by the charitable
>>organisation World Blind Union (WBU) and written with the help of the UK's
>>Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) .
>>RNIB campaign manager Dan Pescod attended the five-day meeting in Geneva.
>>Pescod told OUT-LAW today that the UK and the US were among a group of
>>countries that did not support the treaty and preferred 'soft options',
>>though they stopped short of formally opposing it.
>>Around 95% of books are never published in any format other than standard
>>print, according to the WBU. But visually impaired people need books in
>>other formats, such as large print, Braille and audio. People with other
>>disabilities, such as cognitive impairments, can also find themselves 'print
>>"Imagine if you walked into a bookshop or library, and were told that you
>>were only allowed to choose from five percent of the books on the shelf,"
>>said WBU president Dr William Rowland in a speech last year. "What would
>>such a limited choice do to your education, to your leisure reading
>>The WBU, RNIB and others have prepared a draft treaty that would relax
>>copyright restrictions to allow the creation and supply of accessible books
>>without the need for prior permission from the copyright owner. The treaty
>>requires this generally to be done on a non-profit basis.
>>In some countries, it is already legal to create accessible books without
>>permission. It was made legal in the UK by the Copyright (Visually Impaired
>>Persons) Act, passed in 2002. But that law is limited in scope. The rights
>>are limited to visually-impaired persons - so while a person with dyslexia
>>might benefit from a large-print book, or an electronic book which can be
>>played using text-to-speech conversion software, the law does not facilitate
>>that person.
>>Also, the UK law, like equivalent laws in other countries, does not allow
>>the supply of a digital book to a customer overseas.
>>The WBU treaty, if signed and ratified in its present form, would lift these
>>restrictions. It seeks to protect all 'reading disabled' persons and it
>>allows the supply across borders of accessible works, as a Braille hard copy
>>or as an e-book. At present, a tiny fraction of books that are available in
>>accessible formats can be supplied across borders because their export
>>requires the agreement of rights holders.
>>Pescod said publishers have until recently seen little money to be made from
>>converting books into accessible formats, meaning that the work is normally
>>done by voluntary organisations like RNIB.
>>"If we make an accessible version of a book in the UK and want to send that
>>to another English-speaking country where they don't have the resources to
>>make books accessible, we should be able to do that," he said. "But the
>>copyright law as it stands doesn't allow the transfer of that accessible
>>info. The exceptions in place in national legislations stop at the border."
>>The preamble to the treaty notes that "90 percent of visually-impaired
>>persons live in countries of low or moderate incomes." These countries tend
>>to have the most limited ranges of accessible works, hence the need for a
>>right to supply across borders.
>>Pescod said that voluntary organisations in Chile, Columbia, Mexico,
>>Nicaragua and Uruguay have only 8,517 books in alternative formats between
>>them. However, Argentina has 63,000 books and Spain 102,000. All these
>>countries speak Spanish. . Spain and Argentina will not share their
>>libraries with their Latin American colleagues, though, for fear of breaking
>>copyright laws, he said.
>>The proposed treaty would also allow for the circumvention of digital rights
>>management (DRM) where necessary to render a work accessible. Some books are
>>published in a digital format that is not compatible with the assistive
>>technologies used by disabled people.
>>Lobbying for legislative change in the UK, the RNIB noted recently that DRM
>>schemes "can react to assistive technology as if it were an illicit
>>operation." It also said that "while e-book readers may have the facility to
>>reproduce synthetic speech, the rights holder can apply a level of security
>>which prevents this from working."
>>The WBU treaty would allow a company to buy an e-book, hack the DRM and
>>redistribute a DRM-free version of the work, provided copies are supplied
>>exclusively for disabled customers.
>>Pescod said that main objective of RNIB and the WBU for the week was to have
>>the treaty formally proposed within the WIPO committee. Their second
>>objective was to have it accepted as a viable proposal. "These were met," he
>>said. "Brazil, Ecuador and Paraguay tabled the treaty as a proposal."
>>That put the treaty before WIPO's Standing Committee on Copyright and
>>Related Rights. It was strongly supported by delegates representing South
>>American, African and Asian countries. "India and China were particularly
>>supportive," said Pescod. Wealthier countries, it seems, were less
>>"Many publishers and rights holders and some states say we need a 'soft'
>>solution," said Pescod. "RNIB should work with rights holders and others to
>>resolve this, they say."
>>Pescod said these groups want a 'stakeholder platform' to discuss the
>>sharing of files, but not a treaty. "We're more than happy to speak," he
>>said. "But where we part company is that the stakeholder platform is looking
>>at one set of solutions only." It would address some technical challenges,
>>he said; but it would not address other issues, including the production of
>>unprofitable Braille works, or the extra work needed to describe images.
>>"We're insisting that you need to work with rights holders - and we'll
>>continue to do that - but we still need a treaty which would do three
>>things: encourage national copyright exceptions for disabled people in all
>>countries; allow transfer of accessible books in all countries; and allow
>>tightening of rules on DRM systems that can block accessibility."
>>"No country opposed the proposal [for a treaty] outright," said Pescod.
>>"Those who wanted to suggest that they weren't happy with it used more coded
>>language, like saying discussions were 'premature' or that they wanted to
>>take it back home and discuss it [at a national level]."
>>The published conclusions of the committee include the unattributed
>>objection "that deliberations regarding any instrument would be premature."
>>"Those attacking this [treaty] fear it is going to undermine copyright law,"
>>he said. "We disagree completely. Ensuring access for a bunch of people who
>>the market was not selling to in the first place doesn't undermine copyright
>>"This whole idea that it's 'premature' is bizarre," he said. "A WIPO and
>>UNESCO working group looked at this in 1982. If that's premature, at what
>>point does it become mature and ready to go?"
>>Pescod said that support for the stakeholder platform instead of a treaty is
>>coming only from those who are not disabled. "They're not blind and they
>>know better? I would question that," he said.
>>The UK was represented in two capacities: as a member of the European Union
>>and as a member of the so-called 'Group B' countries, a WIPO term that
>>refers to 17 EU member states, the US, Australia, Canada, Japan, New
>>Zealand, Norway, Switzerland and the Vatican. Neither the EU nor Group B
>>representatives supported the proposal. "Both are sceptical," said Pescod.
>>According to another meeting attendee, James Love of Knowledge Ecology
>>International, a group that promotes access to knowledge, the opposition
>>from the US and other high-income countries "is due to intense lobbying from
>>a large group of publishers that oppose a 'paradigm shift', where treaties
>>would protect consumer interests, rather than expand rights for copyright
>>Ville Oksanen, a member of European digital rights group EDRi said Group B
>>and the EU "did their best to derail the process of getting the treaty under
>>serious consideration." He described the given reasons as "rather
>>perplexing" and described them as excuses designed to avoid being seen as
>>opposing help for disabled people.
>>"It remains to be seen how sceptical they will be next time," said Pescod.
>>"At the end of the day, though, we are happy with the way things went."
>>On Friday night the WIPO copyright committee reached agreement to discuss
>>the treaty at its next meeting in November, in spite of the objections. In
>>the meantime, the committee's conclusions note that "Member States will
>>continue to consult on these issues at national level and report on the
>>activities and views on possible solutions."
>>James Love is confident that the treaty will make progress.
>>"Group B came in the May [copyright committee] meeting to block any
>>agreement to discuss a treaty," he told OUT-LAW. "We'll be back in November,
>>discussing a treaty. The members of Group B will not be able to consistently
>>avoid dealing with the treaty proposal. They will have to say yes or no in
>>terms of moving this forward, and to explain why."
>>"The core issue will be, what will it take to liberalize the cross-border
>>movement of accessible works created under copyright limitations and
>>exceptions?" said Love. "Given how harsh the access reality is for people
>>who are blind or have other reading disabilities, Group B cannot long avoid
>>addressing this topic. There will be more and more data, and fewer and fewer
>>chances to claim strategic ignorance." <
>>___________________ _
>>This is an Announce only list. Subscribers are not able to post to this
>>Recent Activity
>>  a..  2New Members
>>Visit Your Group
>>Build a web site
>>quickly & easily
>>with Sitebuilder.
>>Dog Fanatics
>>on Yahoo! Groups
>>Find people who are
>>crazy about dogs.
>>Support Group
>>Lose lbs together
>>Share your weight-
>>loss successes.
>>You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>Groups "Our-Safe-Haven" group.
>>To post to this group, send email to our-safe-haven at googlegroups.com
>>To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>>our-safe-haven+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
>>For more options, visit this group at 
>nfb-talk mailing list
>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus 
>signature database 4145 (20090610) __________
>The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

More information about the nFB-Talk mailing list