WS 146 Intellectual property rights and the freedom to share: are the two compatible?

Thursday, 8 November 2012. Thursday, 8 November 2012.

NEW SPEAKER: So I think we are ready to start. Good morning everyone and welcome to this workshop 146 intellectual property rights and the freedom to share are the two compatible m my name is Luca Belli I am a PhD candidate at the PRES Sorbonne university and I am an ambassador as well and I will be the moderator of this workshop, so the today we have a group of distinguished panelists that will help us to explore the tension between this fwo fundamental operations of the human beings that are on one hand intellectual property rights and on the other hand what we have called freedom to share that is the technique that we have used to rejuvenate the freedom to receive and impart information. So, I will start by introducing my distinguished panelists, in alphabetical order, so I will start with Hannah broad bent that is policy and research officer at child net international na is together with Jack pass mother and reb ka that are our distinguished yunl panelists and then we have Fatima from Argentina she as lawyer and visiting professor at the faculty of law in the national university of {Inaudible} and then we have Stuart Hamilton from the international federation of library associations and institutions he as director of policy and advocacy at theive la and then we have Mr. David Hughes, senior vice president of the technology of the recording industry association of America, and that he has a co-panelist with him that is Mr. Car shen an da from the office of intellectual property enforcement and we thank him for being here as well. Then we have James lawson from the human rights centre of the council of Europe, and Markus Kummer is the vice president for public policy and he is the former executive co-ordinator of the Secretariat of the IGF, and then we have Paul Muchene peb entrepreneur and he works at the i hub and open innovation space in Nairobi Kenya and last but not least obviously we have Maciej that is policy officer at the D G connect and European Commission and he works with accountant and media freedom and {Inaudible} so before we start I will ask Markus to say a couple of words because this workshop has been ork organised by a group of alumni of the ISOC next generation leader programme and has been mentored by Markus and by ISOC, so please Markus.

MARKUS KUMMER: Yes thank you Luca and good morning, it is a great mraesh to be here and really our role has been minimal in the whole effort has been driven by luck his colleagues and I am also equally happy to see that there are some young people around this table. Daj tall naf I was some call them, I am clearly a digital immigrant. And there is one friend once explained to me that's the main difference between the on-line and the off line world, in the off line world the laws are made by the natives and in the by the immigrants, whereas in the on-line world the laws are made by the immigrants and not the digital natives and this is I think also a little bit o n the underlying tension of what we are addressing here. The Internet we often say it is a very much a disruptive technology, it is disrupts traditional ways of addressing policy issues, traditional modes of governance, but it also challenges existing business models and in this particular case the international regime of intellectual property, with what is set up in a different century before the Internet existed and in a century which was very much based on national sovereignty and national borders and the Internet ignores national borders and this obviously creates some underlying tensions. But back to you Luca I look forward to hearing your discussions.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you Markus, well, first of all I would like that all the attendees speak activity to this workshop. You have a list of questions that we will cope with during the workshop in front of you and n o chairs. So feel free to raise your hand and to jump in if you want to share your stand point and if you want to contribute to the discussion. The workshop will be

articulated in 3 different sections, we will start discussing corporate and private in pyre asy sorry, and then we will pass to IP R gfance and finish with some alternative models and some suggestions. I would like to start by asking to Rebecca and Jack our distinguished young panelists, to say a couple of words with regard to the down loading and sharing and the the perception of the loading and sharing as something legal or not, because we know that I mean, the first step is to understand what is the perception of youngsters with regard to down loading and sharing practice, so over to you.

NEW SPEAKER: Is this working? Well, we were discussing this earlier, and we were saying that we are aware that down loading and sharing on-line is illegal, however there are some like blurred boundaries when it comes to the knowledge about it. I mean, many young people don't understand the finer details of copyright when it comes it streaming, using content for personal use on like YouTube or YouTube conversion even; like, we want to know why content is available on-line for us to use if it's illegal. And why illegal content isn't taken down or strictly moderated on sites that child and things like that, that is the kind of things err lines that are blurred for us in our views. Thank you.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you Rebecca. So, one of of the questions that we were also thinking of was if you have the opportunity to attend some on-line safety education courses because we know that in several countries in Europe is on-line safety is part of the school curricula since some years, and we also have some other examples of this in other countries, so do you attend this kind of courses at school or is it something that you were not used to do at school?

NEW SPEAKER: Well, personally, we haven't in my school I haven't had any education about on-line safety or anything, we just something we tackled in our workshop we chaired yesterday. There is a significant lack of education for young people in especially in England as we are that's where we are operating from. I don't know about Beth, I think locking most things in -- yes, so basically, there is I think there needs to be more education, because something that was mentioned the other week is that schools are becoming paperless, and so everything is being accessed via tablets and computers and things like that, so I think we need to be, young people need to be educateed a little more than what is happening now, but also to have that education teachers need to know about it more, than I think is happening at the moment.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you and we know that ISOC has recently released an interesting paper on children and the Internet. Markus, do you want to add something on top of what they have said with regard to this paper and the need of education for children? MARKUS KUMMER: Obviously thank you for giving me this opportunity for commercial. This is very much I think also our position. We called the paper children and the Internet, we wanted to go away from the discussion of protecting children; we think children need to be empowered, educated and it's part of parenting. I mean parents teach children how to cross the road, not to take sweets from strangers and so on. And the same applies to the Internet. And to give them a solid founding to work with them and this is part of it also to tell them what they are allowed to do and what they are not allowed to do and what is good manners on the Internet as their parents tell them what is good manners off line. Thank you. And please read our paper! {Laughter}.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you Markus. So I see we already have a question at the this gentleman at the end of the room, can someone bring, thank you?

FROM THE FLOOR:

LUCA BELLI: We cannot hear you.

FROM THE FLOOR: Now it follows with user group I would just quickly remark that in my country the education materials that I have seen are pretty much one side. They talk so much about what is illegal to do and so little about the many things that are actually legal at least in my country, that some conditions under which sharing are legal, there are conditions under which down loading is legal and so somehow the people who write that don't get paid for writing about that. Thank you.

MARKUS KUMMER: Yes indeed it's true, a good education material should strike a balance of between what are the rights and the obligations of children, not just the obligations. So well I would go further taking the opportunity to ask a couple of you about what could be the elements the components that could make it more compelling to for children to utilise legal services on-line to share and down load? So Jack and Rebecca, do you have a remark about this?

REBECCA: Well we were thinking that something needs to come with if you down loading an all bum, say, something needs to come with it for a young person to want to buy it, to be motivated to buy it. I mean, if it is just the same bog stand sdard album you are going to get or movie or anything like that you are going to get anywhere else, then young people don't see the need, they think, Oh okay, well if I buy this is it's the same as me illegally down loading it, I won't get anything extra from buying it so how will do benefit it me, that seems to be a youth view that seems to to be popular, if a posters come with an album I am going do go buy the album, whereas if they don't, they think Oh well, I am not going o get anything, it is not going to benefit me that much. So I would why would I need to do it?

NEW SPEAKER: We also discussing I know it's a little bit unreasonable, but things I think something a service would need to be free or very close to fwree because we can access these things albeit illegal, we can access them free from other places so it is not going tock very col pel if you are going o offer something with payment, where you can, well this is just going to convince young people to go and down load the album or muse you can content elsewhere.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you, so now I would like to focus on some other kind of potential pirates, so I would like to ask Stuart to say a couple of words about the fact that librarians usually have to cope with some difficulties in the corporate framework it understand which are the limitations and exceptions that they can exploit to fulfil their role in the public interest of spreading knowledge and the access to the information?

STUART HAMILTON: Thank you Luca. Erm, yes, the quick word I guess about why the librarians have ended up in the copyright and piracy section. I have been to a few panels where liab registrar yarns have been introduced as the original pirates, the groups of people that wanted to share knowledge and to make it available. And I guess you know, that is a raison d'etre, that's what we want to do and you would think that digital technical tolling and all of the new services that we have make our lives easier and make our services more attractive and yes, that is indeed true. But we are also finding that we have a major problem, more and more as I think Jack mentioned, education systems are going to be paperless, people are going to be interacting with digital forms of information on-line. And libraries need to step up and have our services available. All of us here know that when we are talking about piracy and sharing music, that the Internet has no borders, we are really talking about a system that doesn't respect national borders any more and the problem we have is that the copyright systems that libraries operate in are very much hedgeed to the analogue world, very much designed for where we still have national jurisdictions for copyright, and they are really not being up dated to reflect our new interaction with digital information. Libraries rely on exceptions to copyrights to be able to

provide our information to users, that enables us to do all sorts of things, including make backup copies of old books that are deck ag and tattered, and lend books to users, shift books between one library to another. And in many countries we are now finding that the copyright laws are not being up dated to make the exceptions work with digital material. Some countries in Europe America have pretty reasonable pretty flexible exceptions. They are quite forward thinking, they are perhaps not all the way there, but they are pretty good. But a why post study in 2008 showed that actually if you take the world as a whole, our colleagues in Latin America, in Africa, in parts of Asia, really don't have any legal certainty, don't have any flexibility when it comes to being able to preserve material and this is mankind'ss's cultural hery tarnl we are talking about and we all know how quickly actually digital information breaks down, we all know how important it's to format shift if you can imagine that task of transferring your VHS video collection at home over to a digital, I am sure we have all been there, we have to do that for national culture. And we don't have a legal certainty needed. So actually we don't believe that the current copyright system is ready to help liar libraries or for better services to tomorrow researchers and we are working at why po on an international treaty that would raise the level of exceptions for all of why po's member states to give nem or to give countries at least mandate them to have exceptions in the areas that we want. So, thank you very much.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you Stuart, so I think that we are moving into the direction of an understanding of need of rejuvenation for the classic copyright frameworks, in order to fit in the on-line sharing environment and sorry, I see that.

NEW SPEAKER: I have a very brief question for Stuart. So the uncertainty do you feel that for the library community that that is a theoretical uncertainty? Because in my experience at least in music business I don't know if of a single time we have ever litigated against a library or anything?

STUART HAMILTON: Unfortunately it is not theer et calm and I will give you the example of a fairly specific library issue called orphan works, which is when library seeking to digitise their collections, it's okay if the works are out of copyright, we can go ahead and we can do that. What tends to happen though if we have work still in copyright, that we want to digitise and make available and of course copyright term extension is just got longer and longer over the last 50 or so years, we need to track down the people who hold the rights to every single work. And that takes a huge amount of time and a huge amount of money, and it means that well, libraries as many of you will know do not have the deepest pockets, so we are seeking a solution that enables us to do this. We leave our soefs in very uncertain legal territory if we go ahead and digitise somebody's work without taking their permission. So, I think I will leave it at that one but I can give you some more.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you Stuart and thank you David. So, well I would like to move further and to enter in the second section on IP R governance and to speak a little bit about how to rejuvenate copyright, how to make copyright fit into the digital eco-system and so I in the last year we had this a lot of controversial proposals but national pieces of legislations like superPippa and international agreement like acta and so the first question to try to understand the framework is have this policy this design while we are elaborating this bit of legislation have they undertaken a multi steak holder approach to elaborate them and I would like to ask this question first to Roxana and then to Mr. {Inaudible} .

NEW SPEAKER: The brief answer is no, but let me just expand a little bit on that. We have seen this series of legislative proposals that have been highly debated this year in which basically in

some cases we found out about them by wiki leaks in some other cases we found out more about them but people going out in the street or initiating the first on-line strike, and this is interesting to notice that the degree of awareness about this negotiations going place behind closed doors and the degree of willingness to get involved has increased which is the positive side of it. But unfortunately we continue to have negotiations that are not open up to the public and with very little civil society involvement.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you rngs and Mr. Snideer would you like to add some comments?

NEW SPEAKER: Yes, sorry. My name is Karl I work for the state departments office of intellectual property enforce plenty and I would like to emphasise I am a US diplomat, I represent the United States, so I represent the totality of American interests overseas and so secretary Clinton for instance has delivered several speeches on Internet freedom which he has talked about, the importance of Internet freedom and but the need that they are fully consistent with protection of intellectual property rights on-line with privacy and some cyber security and all the other things we want to do, last year assistant secretary pos near who's our assistant secretary for labour democracy and human rights attended the Nairobi. G F and delivered some very eloquent remarks along the same lines, and I think one of the speakers here I think Markus talked about IP R being intention unquote with the Internet. I prefer to say IP R it is a challenge. The president Obama appointed Victoria est per nel to be his intellectual ens forcement co-ordinator and the there is a reason she's has that title, she's called enforcement co-ordinator, we believe that although the interflet is without borders most countries in the world have assumed international commitments, through their world trade organisation commitments through their trips obligations they have committed themselves to effective enforcement of intellectual property rights including effective enforcement of IP R on-line. Now we don't take a position as to how countries should do that. The United States doesn't opine on how this should be done necessarily. We for example one of the things that the enforcement co-ordinator has done is tried to encourage what we call voluntary best practices in the United States which involve the private sector so there is something called the centre for copyright information which will send alerts to Internet subscribers. We think this will have a very important educational impact including hopefully for young people. So, you know, in the interests of time, I think well I will just make one more point, because this is very important. This is the whole multi stakeholder approach thing. The United States is fully committed to that. One of the important documents that has come out in recently has been the organisation for economic and co-operation and development, OECD Internet policy making principles which talk about the multi stake holder approach that's what we try to do in the United States, that's what we try to promote overseas. So I will leave it at that.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you very much Karl. So the next question is to explore a little bit what could be the unintended sequences of strong IP R enforcement on creativity on-line and also for other countries, other than the ones that elaborate this piece of legislation, so I would like to come back to racks Roxana to say a couple of words.

NEW SPEAKER: Let me briefly tackle this. I think we can only agree it a large extent our current culture is based on {Inaudible} in content and we do that very creatively most of the cases but I think it's more and more difficult to do that with the increase in the copyright protection period and with the degree of access that is blocked to copyright material. So, this idea that the derivative works are no longer necessarily done at the extent it could be done. That's the first implication of it. But I think we can even go beyond that and think about maybe in line with we can think about the creation of this category of on-line pirates and we label this very negatively

and the attach it to the young people who are supposed to be the driver of our future societies. And I see other implications with it which would be nice to get the idea, yeah. Maybe we talk can talk more about it later on?

LUCA BELLI: Karl, do you have any remark on this?

NEW SPEAKER: Yes, it's very interesting because I was just at another panel earlier this morning where we discussed some of the same issues. I mean I would just like it make the broader point that you need to have the right legal structures in place which creates a sort of culture which enables provides an enabling environment for legal on-line content offer. You also have to recognise that you have to have different systems for different types of content, you know, for user generated content is in fact different from professionally developed content. So I think you know there needs to be different models for that. But there does need to be an adequate legal infrastructure as I said, you note United States take a position as to what the details of that legal infrastructure should be but we do think there needs to be an adequate infrastructure, thanks.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you. So we will, yes, I would like to come to Paul Muchene and maybe after also to hear on this side of the questions. To know which kind of sequences this strong enforcement o could have on developing countries.

NEW SPEAKER: Okay, thank you Luca. Let's look at the acta treaty that was rejected in the EU, and I feel that such a very strong because acta extreme lae let's say punitive measures for copyright infringement and also for intellectual property it was actually wider than just copyright infringement. You find that even let's say generic drugs themselves making a generic drugs could actually be can I say penalised and it also could have affected even open source, softer, so we find that some of this treaties do have the detrimental consequences in developing countries because one of the problems we have in developing countries is that the ownership of perhaps intellectual property most of it is owned in the western hemisphere or in the developed world and you find that most people rely on very cheap and very free almost free alternatives to in order to actually get along. So you find that for example as an entrepreneur I usually use a lot of open source software I can't afford maybe the costly licences that perhaps propriety software comes with and you may feigned a good number of people in sub Saharan Africa they actually require jer enyou can drews they may not be able to buy designer drugs straight from the firms in the west so you may find treaties like this they may come in and affect this affect and people may actual find the consequences detrimental. Thanks.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you very much Paul. I will are you draw some questions over here, so maybe James Lausanne, yes thank you?

NEW SPEAKER: Of course in the council of Europe we look at these things from a human rights perspective and things like cutting off access to the Internet can have serious repercussions for enjoyment of human rights. The Internet is used as a means of veriesing oneself that means the freedom to receive and impart information and that includes cultural information, regardless of frontiers so if you are cut off the Internet you have some serious limitations to that. Of course something like freedom of expression is not limitless and one of the reasons why free dochl expression may be limited is to protect the rights of others. And of course there is a right to property, which covers intellectual property, which is there, so we have to balance these two apparently conflicting rights and coming back to the issue on acta I think what many people are saying is that the lack of transparency or apparent lack of transparency in the negotiations

leading up to that was felt very much to be the detriment of the end user to their free dochl expression to their freedom of association. Because sharing on-line is an element of association and so the, so we think that the council of Europe a multi stakeholder approach to governance which means involving all the actors and I am very happy to see young people here in the podium having this multi stakeholder approach to policy development, from the very early stages, bringing in governments international organisations, the rights holders and the users is an essential part of that. And so yeah, there are serious consequences when enforcement is carried out with a heavy hard hitting hammer.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you for that.

NEW SPEAKER: I will be quick because I think that was excellently put and I can't really add to that, I did want to return about the Karl saying about the multi stakeholder approach in the US and we have been lucky to completely benefit from the outreach that the US delegation has had on the library issues, and we have really enjoyed the fact that we are consulted as an nos nos and can have input into the process; with something like acta and with the transPacific partnership agreement though intellectual issues have been taken out of that arena and taken somewhere else entirely, where it has been extremely difficult for civil society and NGO to have any unpit as was mentioned over here so I was wondering with the United States commitment to the multi stakeholder approach and you seem to be very clear on that, why is the public perception almost something completely different in the case of acta and the T P P because certainly civil society feels they have had absolutely no imerr input into the negotiations for those agreements?

NEW SPEAKER: Well I should say at the out set I am not personally involved in those particular negotiations. It is puzzling to plea because I do know colleagues who were at Liz burg which is where the last trans Pacific partnership negotiations took place, well that's what I can comment on and you know there were I think 87 NGOs present there or something like that, so it was a heavy NGO presence there but I think one thing I would like to see one thing about the multi stakeholder approach and that is United States is firmly committed to the multi stakeholder approach when it comes to Internet governance and everything related to the Internet governance, and it is I would say it's sort of an extension as to how we try to do policy in the United States and how you know, democratic countries all over the world try to do policy all over the United States, you hold hearings when you are considering legislation you collect information from different interest groups and interested parties, but at the end of the day a multi stakeholder approach doesn't necessarily mean you agree with everybody but you listen to everybody, and you listen to everybody's concerns and so you know, access to the information and ability to provide input doesn't necessarily mean that everybody's opinion is going to be you know, taken, taken into account but you you won't necessarily accept that person's or organisation's opinion and there may be a misunderstanding in that regard.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you Karl. I just want to I know that David has another commitment so I think that he wanted to tell something also about maybe some memorandum of understanding that the recording association has recently signed to enact in response to the US [...check].

DAVID: Okay, I want to start by making a comment, I love Markus's term digital immigrants, I am trying to think what I am! I decided I am a digital settler, I helped to create the infrastructure that these young people grew up with, so I was there from the beginning but I didn't grow up with it. I wanted to make one high level comment, the title for our session was, I p. R and freedom to share and win thing I think we missed from the agenda I am going to touch on is the

ideas like creative comments and I personally am very big fan of creative comment, we use it for our technical standards but sometimes things like creative comments don't go far enough to empower the professional content creators who depend on the revenue for their livelihood and this is the sort of if you follow me around any of the other sessions you will hear me say the same thing everywhere. I am very happy to talk about reforming copyright and there are certainly issues that I personally believe like extension of term and so on that need to be revisited. And clarification for libraries and so on. But there is an underlying issue here about how if we are going to have a multi stakeholder approach how do we work together to do that. And I think the approach that my industry has tried to take and it sounds as though the US government endorses is really try to get voluntary best practices and so on, so the most recent development in the United States was over the past four and a half years, the entertainment industry has been negotiating with the Internet service providers and some of the related business partners. And came up with what we are calling the copyright alert system. Some people will call it the 6 strikes system, it is not strikes; because in a strike system you actually get put out of the game at least in base ball. In this case, it is a level of increasing notification and it is really focused on increasing awareness and education of people who are on-line and for young people as we said Markus we have a responsibility as educators and parents to teach our kids, and not just saying that this as bad thing, don't do it. But at the same time trying to point them in the right direction and this is also being incorporateed in the copyright and alert system so when somebody gets a message they will be given a link that will point them to legitimate services and I am quite hopeful that some portion of the on-line user community who is now engaged in infringing consumption, will start shift their behaviour and there are many good options at least in the music space including spot fy, I want to ask the young kids do you use spot fy? But there are many people who are not aware of that perhaps. So that's what I am about and the larger picture I suppose what I really look for from the multi stakeholder community is to make it a little bit harder to infringe on copyright and a little bit easier and clearer to know what you are supposed to do, how you are supposed to do it and I am hoping that these kind of dialogues will push us in that direction. I am sorry I have been double booked so I have to go to the next room in a couple of minutes but I will be here for five more minutes if somebody has asks.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you David, there was Markus I think who wanted to provide a comment on top of this?

MARKUS KUMMER: Yes, on acta and T P P. In a previous life I was also involved in trade negotiations and there were all behind closed doors, ID standards I think T P P is reasonably transparent and same thing in European Commission representatives said we gave briefings to several society for acta, what is the problem? And by traditional standards this is reasonably transparent. However, and that is a big however - here we are not in this traditional environment. We moved into a multi stakeholder environment, this table is a very good illustration, this is part of the Internet governance forum and this is Internet governance and tunis and heads of state government said all issues related to Internet governance shall be dealt with in an open strarn apparent multi stakeholder manner and that would include negotiations such as T P P and acta. Now I do understand this is not in the DNA of trade negotiaters that they have to understand that Internet users expect more transparency and in Europe they to the they tubing to the streets and they said we want more transparency we do not accept that any more, so tts dawn of a new age.

NEW SPEAKER: I wanted to much agree with Markus, the way I would have worded it would have been a little bit different but I am not familiar with acta but I was quite familiar with sopa in particular in the United States. The approach that was taken was one of the standard operating procedure for drafting a Bill and make ac new law and if the law ras about anything else it would have gone through the system, it would have passed the immediately apparent stakeholders would have been consulted, the law would have been drafted revised and passed nothing would have happened but I think it hit a nerve and there was a large group of people who realised wait a minute, this affects me. How come I didn't know about this? As opposed to the other hundreds of laws that would be passed that they didn't even know exist. And when that happens I think that we have to tb sensitive to the needs of the society if there is that many people that are outraged they weren't involved in the process then we have to look at a different way.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you very much David. I think that Karl wanted to add something and then Stuart.

NEW SPEAKER: Yes, just a brief 30 second thing on the copyright alert system. Victoria has said, it has been very important that anything that's developed in this area and other areas includes a due process component so it does have that, so you know, people who receive alerts have the opportunity to appeal or to provide their opinion, there is a low cost way of doing that. Very committed to trying to do something along those lines. Thanks.

NEW SPEAKER: I think Markus kind of summed up what I wanted to say anyway about the T P P and acta but these issues about the complexity and the consequences of digital copyright legislation aren't particularly new, if we looked at when Naps came out in the end of the nineties on wards this has been on policy makers radar for not just the last 2 or three years and there is a legitimate oversite we didn't realise we were going to get into making a law using the traditional sort of methods. This is something which is really been visible for the last decade. So, I find it some what strange even though I do accept it was taken forward as a trade agreement not a piece of legislation that was a why po or traditional multi accept stakeholder thing but some of the people involved in the beginning of these agreements didn't think there would be an outcry. So, that to me is the bit that doesn't quite add up, its not a new issue, people use digital material all the time and people and you know the actual idea this could be kind of kept secret doesn't really fit with the Internet environment that we have and have had for almost a decade.

LUCA BELLI: As we have the opportunity of having someone that is directly involved in the European Commission's work, would you like to provide us a brief comment on this, thank you?

NEW SPEAKER: I was just, sorry, I was just wondering when to intervene, we the problem is that also I am not involved in the national international negotiations concerning intellectual property rights as it's completely different entity within the European Commission. But we are trying to convince this mess yangage at least in my entity in digital connect we see this is an important issue, we see the multi stakeholder approach in the area of intellectual property is essential and we need to consult stakeholders on different issues. As I said the problem is that up to date international negotiations in this area are held by a completely different people, who are used to, who are used to negotiate in a completely different manner. And they have very often a valid points why sometimes the there a need to hold those negotiations but at the same time we need to also elaborate a new mechanism for this multi stakeholder involvement.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you. So I would like to let's say analyse a little bit more in detail this response and the various technique that have been elaborated and to know which kind of technique -- of sorry, of effect they can have on sharing and what kind of sequences they can have on on public access, so Stuart would you like to tell us something about the fact that the response technique 6 strikes could have on the public access to the Internet and on the library?

STUART HAMILTON: Yes, so, I am going to start off by assuming that everyone has a passing familiarity with graduated response, it's the idea that after a number of violations of copyright on-line you're Internet access to could be slowed or potentially cut off. At first glance it doesn't really seem like something that libraries could be connected with, but then we have started monitoring {Inaudible} this France, in particular we started monitoring the digital Act in the UK and we noted that the way that these laws were drafted particularly the digital economy Act was going to treat public providers of Wi-Fi access as if they were individuals; the wording in the law was so vague that in the UK a library university library that could serve tens of thousands of students could be held basically responsible for the actions of one user and in theory have its Internet access slowed down or cut off. And this to my mind showed quite poor policy making for a start. Showed a lack of awareness of the value that public access to the Internet providers actually bring to people who don't have their own computers or students who need to go to a central space to use the Wi-Fi on their hand held devices or whatever, so we are a little bit worried about the fact that these sort of laws tackle or have the potential to tackle public providers in the same way as individuals. And I think there is a bit of a slippery slope there because the other option would be to treat a library as a subscriber, which has a slightly different set of rules under the digital economy act but that would mean we would then needs to monitor our net works install expensive equipment and monitor the action of our users and become copyright police and librarians kind of hold these article 19 freedom of expression, privacy we hold these things very, very dear to the actual idea we would be spying on our users in order to prevent copyrighting finningment is really something we want it steer clear from so there are some consequences there we are worried about but I should point out the digital economy Act are having so many b products in the UK where it's going to get rolled out that we may miss the bus, we will see.

LUCA BELLI: Yes and this is really difficult to understand kwl this kind of response has is an efficient technique or not, I would like us to speak about the example of the other {Inaudible} that was cost 13 million Euros in 2011 and has produced according to was a success because starting from the one million e.mail of warning that were sent they just arrived to 300 dossier of people that were per pep rating this copyright violation but two other people that are not so involved in IP that looks like a huge defeat because they realise that although you can send the first million of first e.mails cannot keep on tracking this million of people because there are some privacy issues that are raised so the actually it should be particularly lucky to identify twice the same person, the same Internet user violating a copyright, so it is kind of it is kind of tricky issue to know if it is really efficient or not.

NEW SPEAKER: Let's not forget na a lot of these things are done on IP addresses and there is a lot of legal unsrnity about whether you can tie an IP address it a specific individual. So that is another area which is particularly –

LUCA BELLI: Yes, quite. So well, I would like to spend this, yeah, there is question? Yeah, two questions from the floor, so could someone kindly bring the mic to the end of the room? Thank you. FROM THE FLOOR: Hello. I hope that everyone can hear me, my name is Constantine and I am with the Internet society, and however I think I am going to put my academic hat on which I

held until at least four months ago in the UK. I have heard a lot about graduated responses and voluntary schemes and self regulation and as an academic I did a lot of research on that and I am very much in favour of self regulation, especially when it comes to the Internet, they have great advantages, especially relating to jurisdiction but there as big but. There are self regular rate re schemes and self regulatory schemes so if we take for example the Irish example in the graduated response, it is a very, very bad system based on self regulation because it lax any sort of safeguards. And I also in the context of copyright I personally feel that we really need to be a little bit cautious also when we use the term education, because automatically the question that appears in my head is who will be educated? And this is very, very important. And that is why due process is also of paramount importance and in the context of adoby the fact that it was public regulation and it was not private regulation, allowed the constitutional court to intervene and actually say that for whatever sanction you impose from the slap in the hand until you disconnect someone from the Internet, there needs to be a court decision, meaning that a court a judicial body that has the authority and that's the only body that has the authority to actually determine whether someone is doing something illegal is and will be able to do that. So, it's very important to understand that self regulation needs to have similar if not the same safeguards in order to make sure for those of you tiny cases for the one or two cases that self regulation fails, that this users are protected mistakes do happen, there is no system that is perfect, and we really need to frame discussions on that basis and the last point I would like to make is there is also a very big slu of course. Who is bearing the cost for all these issues for all these schemes that are appearing? If ultimately it will be the users, then we have a problem. Because for many, many people around the world Internet access and I have that yesterday we had a meeting with various chapter and potential chap per members from around the world where actually Internet access is not a given because it's very expensive and there are competition issues and there are regulation issues that make access to the Internet even more expensive, compared to what I am experiencing for example in within Europe. So if we have an additional cost to an already expensive system, then we automatically discriminate against people who need to have access to the network, thank you.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you very much. I see there is another question at the end, this lady, yeah?

FROM THE FLOOR: My name is Claudio and I am from digital rights in Chile and I have this two quick brief comments. The first one it is one of the most important topics that I have heard not just in this table but in the prior ones, its about the copyrighting frinment as a phrase, the copyright infringement and I have the feeling that maybe this concept has not been really clarified when we are talking about copyright, because what copyright infinningment is is what copyright says and at least from our perspective in Latin America what copyright says is not what a multi stakeholder table like this says. In the last 40 years all the copyright systems has been exclusively expanded and taking into account especially the interest of just big players on the discussion and for instance, the example that you have said about the liab registrar ease is a very clear example about the lack of exception and limitation that our copyright scheme has. And I am talking about the especially Latin America, so the koim right infringement as a concept it is pretty important to just to take it into account this topic but the expansion of the interest of private sector in our copyright Acts has been clearly jeopardised the uses of our Internet users, users and especially the scope of exceptions and limitations on copyright. So it's a very, very important topic when we are talking about copyright infringement we are not talking about something neutral, we are talking about something very direct, very important but has a very important effect to the Internet users and the second point is about the due process criteria that talking recently and this is very important point. Actually was a table that I was into yesterday

about this topic specifically and the due process of law as a criteria I would say has been a very, very important concept to just has been exclusively jeopardised also; because of international treaties over the last years, the example of acta for instance on the example of T P P that you have been certainly recently said I will say there is very very key and very important examples about the due process of the law. And it is very important because when you are talking about the recent reforms of our copyright Acts in Latin America, you can say a very important trend, just continue this trend taking into account just one side of the table when you are talking about copyright. So I think it's very important to just keep this things in mind about the first one what copyright infringement is and secondly the due process is not just a problem to just have a very quick response on copyright infringement but the due process of law is a very important constitutional criteria when there is from the mental health rights involvement in all these topics.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you very much. I would like one second just like to ask Fatima to provide us with short comment on what are the consequences that the copyright enforcement could have in developing countries or in South America or could you provide us with a short comment with regard to the Argentina and South America?

NEW SPEAKER: Fatima: Can you hear me? The situation is similar that Claudia said, Argentina is neighbour to {Inaudible} and the infringement relation of copyright is not related to the reality in our country because we have all legislation that it is not quite to the reality to the rights in the environment this is -- this is the environment.

LUCA BELLI: I think there was another gentleman that wants to add a comment on top of it?

FROM THE FLOOR: Hello, can you hear me? I think one I was just going through the list of questions and I apologise for coming late, but I think one thing that's missing is a focus on development and excessive copyright on issues of development and from the perspective of developing countries. The best report I have seen on piracy period is this report called media piracy in emerging economies that S R CC has looked out come years ago which looks at Mexico Bolivia and India, it looks at wide variety of questions including the role that piracy place in cultural markets and eco-systems, what consumer demands drive piracy, how much piracy sl dl is, what the losses are how effective enforcement is, as a mechanism of combating piracy, how different kinds of piracy differ and this I think is particularly useful for what I heard being discussed, how important education is as an anti-piracy strategy and what role organised crime they play. Now they found that enforcement has almost no effect on piracy in any of these countries, increasing enforcement drives periodic raids etc.etc., doesn't have an effect at all. Increasing in education you would think is a better strategy and they found that even that has almost no effect whatsoever. What did have an effect on piracy is cheaper availability of non-pyre ated material and that for some reason is something that is completely missing from the dialogue really and because to me it really seems to be about you know, creative people and the pirates and what about people who aren't pirates but perhaps are forced to be pirates just because they can't otherwise be included in the cultural economy and they are completely missing from the dialogue and I wish that they were included in the dialogue again.

LUCA BELLI: I think there was a comment from {Inaudible} and the comment from the end of the room?

NEW SPEAKER: I was just wondering when to intervene exactly on this point as we are going o have I understand a separate discussion alternative models but I really like this intervention, I

think this is exactly where important things concerning intellectual property rights, please don't get me wrong - I understand that from the mental rights are essential to be discussed concerning copyright but then I think that what we really need especially in those times when we have economic crisis to have a further discussion about economic aspects of intellectual property. And I think that we can find many examples where copyright prevents actually innovation, and we can show how for instance there are form of copyright can help us to secure growth and jobs in times when you have economic crisis. So I think this is exactly the point that also the Europe even commission would like to advocate and for us would be very important to have the discussion on economic aspect of intellectual property rights. Yes.

LUCA BELLI: To encourage new reform, it is not just something that interest developing countries but also at the European Union and should be the first provide an example. So I think there is another question at the end of the room?

FROM THE FLOOR: So, first of all we are from Brazil, and I want to say that we are not pirates. I have been used this {Inaudible} on my eye and I don't have a sword and p I don't put down ships in the middle of the seas, another way maybe I can do an agreement to don't follow unreasonable laws. This copyright laws may be doesn't have effects directly in development countries but you know, in democratic countries regimes, some sort of local laws are trying to re-produce what this main copy rights in the world try to do. In France in Germany and Spain and even in Brazil we have a a lot of laws trying to cut off the freedom of access to Internet to down load content to produce content, so in sort of ways this kind of laws are this kind of forces of the big players in the world are trying to control us. In Brazil right at this moment we are trying finally to prove a law call it the {Inaudible} of Internet, it is a kind of huge step to regulate the civil rights of civilians in Brazil to the Internet. And I am very ashamed to give you this news but the dark forces just will step yesterday, this law has a very, very break down in this and I am very ashamed from Brazil in this very moment and I just wish you to know that this is forces may be maybe in a huge coincidence, maybe because it is stars just align in the right way. These laws are just starting to get in the agenda in all countries in the democratic way of doing things. So be aware, this is something very, very dangerous, and please don't call yourselves especially us the development countries. We are not pirates. We are just defending our rights. And believe me, I don't want to be educated, I am not a dog. If in any case education means debate understanding knowledge and discussion then I don't want to be aware of T maybe I want to discuss the problem. I believe she wants to say something too.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you very much.

FROM THE FLOOR: I only want to make some remarks I am from Brazil also. On this Internet framework for civil rights yesterday they were about to approve this law, but there was a huge mobilisation from the civil society because there was a provision regarding notes and take down and the main issue is that we have notes and take down with court order for everything except for copyright, which exposed the copyright law in Brazil and how strong they are and that's very shameful and very bizarre at the same time because in Brazil the practice now is that all the process regarding ISP liabilities are passing through courts and through judicial process. So, that's why we are saying that it was very shameful and very very strange and the other thing I have a question for you, is there any of spending time and money instead of spending time and money discussing copyright law enforcement, why not come up with some new models that we have around the world such as the legalisation of the peer to peer and power sharing, I mean have like five or 6 models around the world right now and we are discussing one in Brazil, so

since we are going to have a reform of the copyright law we are going to propose the fire sharing legalisation I think that could be a good solution for this problem.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you very much. That was really interesting kchl I see we have triggered reaction from all the left part of the room. So, there is this lady first and then two gentlemen at the end. FROM THE FLOOR: Well, I confess I have been a law making process for, well, 40 years, making laws, so not a politician but a writer of the laws and it sounds to me with Internet the same situation with the pirates and with the if you are a thief or not. Is it criminal? Are you a criminal or not? It is like with the taxation. In every country we know that those people who pay taxes they are poor people, people in the middle class. But those who are in a higher level they suddenly don't pay a lot of taxes because there is the taxation planning which is, it's a good process and it is, well, it's part of of the law system to plan your taxes, taxations. It is with the Internet, the same. It sounds to me. Those who make millions, billions, at the high level with the content of the Internet they take it free of charge. They just steal it if I put it very briefly; from all those content producers but then if you are a little boy or girl wherever in the world, well, poor or at the middle of classes if I put it, then you are talking if you are a pirate or a thief. Isn't it a little bit the same? Sorry to say after 40 years making the law.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you very much. {Applause}.

FROM THE FLOOR: My name is John I am a professor at north western university in cuta, in that capacity I have experienced both from the library perspective as well as the student perspective issues relating to the copyright, plus I spend two different countries because I am from north western university more properly so we operate under US law but also have to respect local laws as well. Copyright as a whole is it as sort of a mess. It is really, really difficult to deal with; o n a whole a lot of levels, north western in {Inaudible} teaches amongst other things film studies, screening films for students distributing content for students to be able to see those films, really, really difficult. Our libraries spends an enormous amount of time trying to figure out the legal implications and the legal requirements that they can use to distribute content. Content distributors especially for E books which would loof to use more often, they are putting requirements on how many copies and how often you can learn electronic content. The other thing which has not risen really in this conversation so much is that E content for the most part you are not actually purchasing content. You are licensing content. You are leasing content for an indeterminateant period of time and that can be revoked at any time, if the actual right holder lose sz the right. This happened a number of times with various Amazon things so we are not even talking about purchasing actual physical goods or even purchasing electronic goods. We are just given permission to view those for us for a short period of time or for an extended period of time. In talking with my students, they have no problems file sharing and down loading or pirateing because gaining ashz to content through legal ways is difficult onerous if not impossible. Some of the work we do as faculty requires us to get content that is no longer publicly available, movies that are out of print that studios are not producing any more we have to jump through hoops to try to dub off of an old VHS tape to show for a class. It is really, really difficult and the way the copyright is right now it is only going to get more difficult for the foreseeable future unless something is done. And yeah, I mean, I am speaking from a multi cultural perspective and from an educational perspective and it's all very, very problematic. Don't have any solutions, sorry!

LUCA BELLI: Thank you for this encouraging perspective! And I see there is a question, Chris, yes?

FROM THE FLOOR: I am Chris, with the ISOC, I am actually I was about to examine exactly what the these two persons actually mentioned before but I am also a professor in the university of maur yishs, one thing that actually I think has actually triggered a lot of discussion about copyright infringement has been as the lady mentioned before the big companies and one of them is we know the word is Microsoft actually started that. But you know, when you have software which is really expensive, with why would you the expect the poor country to do so to get that and you would expect people to go, what, which is really expensive, they would go, it is not really pirateing really but they want to call it pirate but they would actually go find a way of doing that is that is where the hackers come in but actually they are doing a favour to other countries if a way. But when they get to that point, it is actually pushing people to do something what they don't really want to happen but that's actually happening but they can't really comment because they are marketing their products as well, but we have seen the same thing happening with some other African countries where they get in they get the software for free and after a year they say come and pay, if you don't pay you don't get it any more, so come and buy it. But on the other hand I have seen other modes that seem to be work I am not going o it say I am an Apple fan completely, but they have got a nice model which I think well if you look at the met tricks these days a lot of people actually buying from iTunes and if you look at the prices they are practising, a lot of people actually buying a lot of, in the early days people pirateing that as well. But flou if you look at statistics people actually buying a lot from the iTunes store f you look at the price, I mean, less than a dollar people seem to think it's cheap, it's okay, at least people are doing it, so, what my point was here if we look at the economic mode from the other way round it would probably help daushl daul on the copyright and IP R infringement, that's what I have to say. Bell billion thank you very much Chris. I see.

LUCA BELLI: I see there is another comment there from the lady in the corner?

FROM THE FLOOR: To pick up on, can you hear me? To pick up on the point that was made over there, the power balance is completely shifted even more so now in the favour of the right hoarders because of these licensing models. And we have now a lot of very restrictive D R M technologies in place, which are impeding our fair use fair dealing rights. I think this is a really important point to make, in this discussion because what otherwise would be legal activity is now being criminalised and I don't think that's fair at all.

LUCA BELLI: I think we have a comment and an answer maybe to this comment from Paul?

PAUL: Okay, what I just wanted to mention is that because of the nature of the Internet and the way it's very disruptive you have are finding that people are less likely and even if they can afford to buy copyright items they are less likely to do so, and you find that we have reached a point where as long as something is maybe almost free or it is just it will not cost you a diem, that's when you are more likely to actually get that. So, maybe that's why iTunes is as one model is working, that's why maybe open source is another model is very attractive. And so perhaps if you are looking at maybe trying to prevent copyright infringement you may have to actually adjust and look at maybe new models that will encourage feem pay the least amount. It may not be beneficial to the rights holder but it could actually it's more beneficial now to you know, to the end user.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you very much. There is a comment and.

FROM THE FLOOR: My name is {Inaudible} from {Inaudible}. Just a little comment. About the title of this workshop, it says IP R and freedom to share I want to comment the word freedom to

share is not free, it nos a freedom, it as right of the owner. So, starting from the language and below everything must be {Inaudible} in my perspective. About the copyright regime and alternative models because I just don't want to put my boxing gloves on the wrist of the issues. The video game industry is taking a little shift on the copyright models and the last ten years they invested a lot on D R M technology to force the people not to pirate the games and just buy pay the 50 dollars that are a video game cost these days and in the last 2 or three years they have been invested on added value to their product by for example adding new on-line features that only you can get it if you can can buy the game instead of the isolated experience when you get when you buy a single game or pirated. So this is a kind of sign that the business model is the one that is not working in the right way in copyright issues. Because if you shift it to something more attractive to the public the public will buy the product and say a song or an album a movie or a video game, so my the idea I have in the back of my head is that in the copyright industry is just another industry that is not willing to change and it is they can smell the death of the old model when you see the amount of money they are spending on congress lobby advertising campaigns, pointing people like pirates and stuff like that. So that's the reflection I want to leave on the table yes.

LUCA BELLI: Bell I would like to have one more comment and I would like to ask if the other panelists would like to add something because we are running out of time. Erm, well, and react maybe what I think –

FROM THE FLOOR: Sorry about that. A PC. Just firstly just to show to respond to the comment on digital rights management. I have a son that plays games and I think generally it is really regarded that gaming is a way of building innovation and text skills and young user generated applications and he in I am in South Africa where we pay for band width so he can't actually play many of these games he can't play the multi user component and so it has a sort of deskilling effect and my question is really about sharing and how do we define sharing in a context where the Internet becomes a space where people make friends in a different way, you know it is not like taking a book from your shelf and giving it to your neighbour. So on the one hand we encourage this community formation, through the network and on the other hand we discourage sharing via it and how do people see that contradiction and how do you see it evolving into the future?

LUCA BELLI: Thank you. Last comment okay, thank you.

NEW SPEAKER: Thank you. I am a diplomat covering intellectual property rights but I am now I am speaking in personal capacity. I want I hope that the all the participants here can make some careful study about the current intellectual property rights legal system. There are huge imbalance of this current legal system as we all know that the developed countries hold are the biggest knowledge holder and I mean, in terms of the teshgologies and movies such kind of cultural products but the developing countries it's great holder of traditional knowledge generic resources. But the current legal system just to give protection to the developed countries, with IP system they are protecting the video producers like the big movie companies, they are protecting the big printing houses and their products but the traditional knowledge generic resources, all the many, many countries developing countries are pushing forward some legal protection for this kind of knowledge but we were blocked, we were, we cannot get any fruits in this kind of legal construction. Please further study about the intellectual property.

LUCA BELLI: I would like to ask to the panelist if it's they want to add some final remarks to workshop if anyone wants to add something? Karl?

NEW SPEAKER: Yes, thanks, so much such a rich and varied debate. A couple of things. Just to reiterate, you know, in the countries that I am familiar with that have sort of more flourishing legal Internet on-line offer tend to also have stronger IP own forcement regimes so to the extent that developing economies go that route as well I think you will find more companies establishing themselves in those countries and offering legal on-line content. There was a comment from I think the person from north western university about copyright law being a mess; and you know, that may be but on the other hand it is certainly the contribution of the copyright intensive industries to the economy is incredibly high and strong. So, it's a it may be a mess but it is an important mess. The other thing is I was going to say a lot of complaints about the complexity I think of the system, and the fact that and the people are looking for a simpler way of doing things, I think that we sort of have to accept that life is complicated, I mean people for example have talked about you know banking regulation. In the United States we had something called the Glass Act which was 40 pages back in 1932, the dod fract bill is 1,000 pages and it doesn't include the implementing regulations, maybe that's bad but that's just the way life is. So I will leave it at that.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you.

NEW SPEAKER: On that up beat note!

LUCA BELLI: Stuart?

STUART HAMILTON: I think I wanted to conclude by saying a couple of words about speed or lack of it. We understand that we are talking here about sharing information across global net works. And yesterday when we were kind of warming up for this workshop we went into a huddle in the gentleman David from the R I A was way more reasonable than I actually anticipated and we got talking a little bit about the need for up dated global frame works. Blue then he mentioned that whilst him and his colleagues would be kind of in favour of that, the way that a lot of the rights are administered by collective management organisations is on a national level. Those organisations make a lot of money. Those organisations will not want to change their business model any time soon. And what we have I think in this discussion and what we have seen in the last few years we are at the beginning of a change and things will change, because the way that we use technology the way we share information is undoubtedly going to out pace the speed with which we can create any new regulations to keep up with it. But it's going it take quite a long time. If has been working at why poe on this library work for nearly a decade. And we have got the issue on the agenda about 18 month ago properly that was tremendous work on our behalf and that requires NGOs with limited sources to go to Geneva one of the most expensive places in the world, for significant period at a time in order to engage in these processes. So, everything seems to happen very, very slowly, where technology change happens very, very quick and the two things can't match and I wonder what is going to give as we move towards a solution which eventually will get here but I am not entirely sure that everyone is going to survive the trip.

LUCA BELLI: Thank you for this encouraging perspective {Applause} and any other of panelists add something otherwise I think as we are running out of time, I will just like to say that the discussion has been extremely reaching a lot of comment has been extremely interesting, I think that the key issues that have emerged are education, need for legal clarification and harmonisation and promotion of new models that can re-distribute the wealth that the creative industry is creating amongst stakeholders and everyone. Thank you. {Concluded}