[nfb-talk] Fw: [BlindLikeMe]CopyrightTreatyBackingE-Books Survives Resistance From US and EU

John G. Heim jheim at math.wisc.edu
Thu Jun 11 19:43:33 UTC 2009


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ray Foret jr" <rforetjr at comcast.net>
To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 12:11 AM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Fw: [BlindLikeMe]CopyrightTreatyBackingE-Books 
Survives Resistance From US and EU


> Well, I myself am a conservative, to the core.  I don't think one could
> equate going barefooted with either the left or right; or for that matter,
> with blindness or sightedness.  As for the sentiment I expressed earlier, 
> I
> hold to it firmly.  I am very much disappointed that we would rely on such
> as the Huffington post and or Cory Doctorow (who seems to have relied on 
> it
> for this post of his) for our fact checking.  to be fair, let me state
> categorically and without reservation that if this had come from a right
> wing post, I would have been just as disappointed.  Why?  Simple.  So far 
> as
> I am concerned, it's not about the right or left; rather, it's a question 
> of
> how thoroughly this was vetted.  I called Dan Fry and expressed my extreme
> disappointment over the matter.  To be fair to Dan, he did respond; and, I
> think it's only reasonable and fair to put out here what his response was.
> He said, "Thank you for your perspective."  My friend, if I wanted to 
> attack
> the left on this list, I can sure think of better ways of doing it; 
> however,
> that's not what I'm about and I end my own thoughts here.  Why?  I feel it
> would be redundant to say anything  more.  I offer the above as a way of
> trying to show that my feelings are not based on the factors which some 
> may
> perhaps suppose.  I just wish this matter had been vetted a lot more
> thoroughly before putting it out there.
>
> Sincerely,
> The Constantly BAREFOOTED Ray
>
> "Old friend, what are you looking for?  After those many years abroad you
> come With images you tended Under foreign skies Far away from your own 
> land"
> George Seferis
>
> Phone or Fax::
> +1 (985) 360-3614
> Cell:
> +1 (985) 791-2938
> e-mail:
> rforetjratcomcastdotnet
> Skype Name:
> barefootedray
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dan Hicks" <danjhicks at yahoo.com>
> To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 10:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Fw: [BlindLikeMe] CopyrightTreatyBackingE-Books
> Survives Resistance From US and EU
>
>
> Ray, it looks to me as if you are just attacking the Huffington Post 
> because
> it is a liberal publication, but I would be the last to call it
> "anti-American." Aren't you constantly barefooted guys usually liberals?
> <smile>
>
> Actually, over the years and as the print newspapers have cut back on 
> their
> hard-news reportage,  I have been impressed with the Huffington Post's
> accuracy, considering they have to be operating on a very small budget.
>
> Cory Doctorow is an author whom I admire and I am glad to see that he is
> with us on this treaty. His posts and blogs are followed by many avid
> readers and it is good that he is exposing this issue to public scrutiny.
>
> Dan Hicks
>
> "If you are going to walk on thin ice,
> you might as well dance."
>                        - Inuit Proverb
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Ray Foret jr" <rforetjr at comcast.net>
> To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 9:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Fw: [BlindLikeMe] Copyright TreatyBackingE-Books
> Survives Resistance From US and EU
>
>
>> Well Joseph, I agree with you; especially when you consider the real
>> source
>> of this article.  It was written by a fellow named Cory Doctoro.  What 
>> did
>> he rely on for his information?  I'll tell you.  He relies on something
>> called the Huffington Post.  What's that?  It's an anti American Anti
>> Catholic web site filled with hate, hate, hate and more hate.  For the 
>> NFB
>> to officially rely on such as this is quite frankly beneath our usual
>> standards of professionalism.  I am not just disappointed, I'm extremely
>> disappointed!!! I thought we vetted things better than that.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> The Constantly BAREFOOTED Ray
>>
>> "Old friend, what are you looking for?  After those many years abroad you
>> come With images you tended Under foreign skies Far away from your own
>> land"
>> George Seferis
>>
>> Phone or Fax::
>> +1 (985) 360-3614
>> Cell:
>> +1 (985) 791-2938
>> e-mail:
>> rforetjratcomcastdotnet
>> Skype Name:
>> barefootedray
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "T. Joseph Carter" <carter.tjoseph at gmail.com>
>> To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>> Cc: "NFB of Florida Listserv" <nfbf-l at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 3:42 PM
>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Fw: [BlindLikeMe] Copyright Treaty BackingE-Books
>> Survives Resistance From US and EU
>>
>>
>> My question is why does the Vatican oppose it?  The Vatican does
>> nothing without a reason, and going around denying scholarly pursuit
>> to people with disabilities isn't the sort of thing cardinals do
>> without justification.  This suggests to me that there is something
>> in particular that the treaty requires, and it may not be obvious to
>> us sitting here talking about it.
>>
>> I'll enquire next week of the appropriate office.
>>
>> Joseph
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 02:47:17PM -0400, Sherri wrote:
>>> I don't understand why the U.S. opposes this policy. Guess they don't
>>> want blind people to read.
>>>
>>> Sherri
>>> ----- 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
>>>> resistance
>>>> Copyright treaty backing e-books for disabled readers survives US and 
>>>> EU
>>>> resistance
>>>> 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
>>>> works."
>>>> 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
>>>> disabled'.
>>>> "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
>>>> opportunities?"
>>>> 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
>>>> enthusiastic.
>>>> "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
>>>> law."
>>>> "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
>>>> owners."
>>>> 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." <
>>>> http://www.out-law.com/page-10059
>>>> ___________________ _
>>>>
>>>> This is an Announce only list. Subscribers are not able to post to this
>>>> list.
>>>> Recent Activity
>>>>  a..  2New Members
>>>> Visit Your Group
>>>> Sitebuilder
>>>> 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
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/our-safe-haven?hl=en
>>>> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfb-talk mailing list
>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfb-talk mailing list
>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>
> 





More information about the nFB-Talk mailing list