[LINK] USA, Canada and the EU attempt to kill treaty to protect blind people's access to written material

Tue Nov 17 20:21:24 AEDT 2009

At 08:08 PM 17/11/2009, Kim Holburn wrote:
>The Canadian Professor Michael Geist has some interesting things to
>say about WIPO and ACTA here:
>http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4530/125/
>
>It seems that some push back at WIPO by countries like Brazil has led
>to the main western beneficiary nations moving to use ACTA to bypass
>WIPO.

Thanks, Kim. Maybe I need to follow up with the Minister on that 
front and press the question.

Jan

>On 2009/Nov/17, at 9:11 AM, Jan Whitaker wrote:
>
> > Linkers, I received a reply in the post to this message. My original
> > message was sent as shown, 30 May. The response was received
> > yesterday, 16 November. Who knows *what* they've been doing in the
> > mean time in Canberra. The response is from the AG. I've reproduced
> > below.
> >
> > My original message:
> > At 11:30 AM 30/05/2009, Jan Whitaker wrote:
> >> At 08:48 PM 29/05/2009, Kim Holburn wrote:
> >>
> >>> http://www.boingboing.net/2009/05/29/usa-canada-and-the-e.html
> >>
> >> Sent to Bill Shorten today:
> >>
> >> Dear Mr Shorten, I wish to bring to your attention a current effort
> >> occuring in WIPO [World Intellectual Property Organisation]
> >> regarding removing the right of vision impaired persons to access
> >> information without a copyright breach. The US, the EU, and
> >> Australia! among others are moving to remove this right in favour of
> >> the copyright holders. Refer to:
> >> http://www.boingboing.net/2009/05/29/usa-canada-and-the-e.html for
> >> information and background on this situation. It has been a
> >> longstanding principle that the vision impaired should not be
> >> deprived of access to information merely for copyright reasons. I am
> >> not an expert in this area, but am somewhat familiar with it after
> >> doing work with Vision Australia. I ask you and your staff to
> >> discuss this position by the govt with colleagues and reconsider the
> >> position. You or I or our loved ones could lose our sight at any
> >> time and be deprived of the joy of 'reading' merely due to this
> >> proposed change. Best regards, Jan Whitaker Berwick VIC PS: I hate
> >> forms because I am not sure if I'll receive a copy and the info on
> >> this page does not ascert that I will.
> >>
> >> [It's a form thing....]
> >>
> >> Here's his link to write to him:
> >> http://www.aph.gov.au/house/members/memfeedback.asp?id=ATG
> >
> > McClelland's reply [I wrote to Shorten, so I was confused why I was
> > getting a letter from McClelland]
> >
> > Dear Ms Whittaker [misspelled my name throughout; I'm fairly certain
> > I didn't misspell it myself on their bloody form]
> >
> > Thank you for your e-mail of 30 May 2009, regarding copyright
> > exceptions for blind and visually impaired persons. Your
> > correspondence has been forwarded to me as copyright is part of my
> > portfolio responsibilities.
> >
> > Firstly it is not correct that Australia may be opposing proposals
> > for a new international instrument to asist greater access to
> > copyright materials for blind and visually impaired people within
> > discussions at the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights
> > at the World Intellect (sic) Property Organisation (WIPO).
> >
> > In fact, Australia is keen to be constructive in international
> > discussions at the WIPO on improving access to copyright materials
> > for visually impaired persons. This includes consideration of a
> > possible treaty as proposed by the World Blind Union, and supported
> > by Brazil, Equador and Paraguay. [I wonder how much clout they have!]
> > Australia is very supportive of finding an effective and timely
> > solution to this matter.
> >
> > Australian copyright law already provides a number of exceptions to
> > facilitate access to materials for people with a disability [that is
> > true; I've read the act in conjunction with a project to provide that
> > access]. The Government has no intention of removing or reducing
> > these exceptions. [So if the treaty says they must, will they not
> > sign it?] However, we will consider the merits of any additional
> > proposed measures for enhancing access to materials which are raised
> > in WIPO.
> >
> > I can assure you that the Australian Government is very conscious of
> > the needs of the visually impaired persons and people with other
> > disabilities and understand the importance of providing appropriate
> > and adequate measure to cater for those needs.
> >
> > The action officer for this matter in my Department is Josh McKay who
> > can be contacted on (02) 6141 3446.
> >
> > Sincerly
> > Robert McClelland
> >
> > =======
> > I went back to that original article by Cory Doctorow and find there
> > is an update that things have retreated from the original position.
> > 
> http://keionline.org/blogs/2009/05/29/final-conclusions-of-sccr-18#more-1961
> >
> >
> > These are the final conclusions of SCCR 18.
> >
> > World Intellectual Property Organization
> > SCCR Eighteenth Session
> > Geneva, May 25 to 29, 2009
> >
> > CONCLUSIONS OF THE SCCR
> > prepared by the Chair
> >
> > Limitations and exceptions
> >
> > 1 The Committee reconfirmed its commitment to work on the outstanding
> > issues of the limitations and exceptions, as decided at the
> > seventeenth session of the SCCR, taking into account
> > development-related concerns and the need to establish timely and
> > practical result-oriented solutions. Likewise, the Committee
> > reaffirmed its commitment to continue without delay its work in a
> > global and inclusive approach, including the multifaceted issues
> > affecting access of the blind, visually impaired and other
> > reading-disabled persons to protected works.
> >
> > 2 The Committee expressed its appreciation for the Proposal by
> > Brazil, Ecuador and Paraguay Relating to Limitations and Exceptions:
> > Treaty Proposed by the World Blind Union (WBU). Views were expressed:
> > supporting the proposal for a binding instrument; expressing the wish
> > for more time to analyze it; expressing the desire to continue the
> > work on the basis of a global and inclusive framework; and expressing
> > that deliberations regarding any instrument would be premature.
> > Member States will continue to consult on these issues at national
> > level and report on the activities and views on possible solutions.
> > This proposal, together with other possible proposals and
> > contributions by the Members of the Committee, will be discussed at
> > the nineteenth session of the SCCR.
> > [snip]
> >
> >
> >
> > Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
> > jwhit at janwhitaker.com
> > blog: http://janwhitaker.com/jansblog/
> > business: http://www.janwhitaker.com
> >
> > Our truest response to the irrationality of the world is to paint or
> > sing or write, for only in such response do we find truth.
> > ~Madeline L'Engle, writer
> >
> > _ __________________ _
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Link mailing list
> > Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> > http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>
>--
>Kim Holburn
>IT Network & Security Consultant
>Ph: +39 06 855 4294  M: +39 3494957443
>mailto:kim at holburn.net  aim://kimholburn
>skype://kholburn - PGP Public Key on request
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Link mailing list
>Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
>http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
jwhit at janwhitaker.com
blog: http://janwhitaker.com/jansblog/
business: http://www.janwhitaker.com

Our truest response to the irrationality of the world is to paint or 
sing or write, for only in such response do we find truth.
~Madeline L'Engle, writer

_ __________________ _