Alek,
This is very surprising to me:
you can say that authors produced value, not the users
Is there any situation you can think of where the value is produced by
users but not the authors?
The issue of public transfers is a separate one, in my
opinion.
Do you consider compulsory licensing to be a form of public transfer?
there is space for remuneration for educational use.
To what extent to do think that authors recommended by educators
should be compensated for their efforts?
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Alek Tarkowski
<atarkowski(a)centrumcyfrowe.pl> wrote:
Dear James,
the Estonian exception that we are highlighting today proves that it is
equitable, according to Estonians. Similarly, in Poland we have an exception
that is not as broad as the Estonian one, but much broader than many of the
similar regulations across Europe - at least within educational
institutions, and for educational purposes, educators are free to use any
content, without any remuneration. This is not seen as not equitable.
In general, I don’t think it’s fair to see exceptions as something done “at
the expense” of someone else - for instance right holders. Mainly because
there is no clear proof of losses / substitutions caused by the use of
content within an exception. So we cannot say it’s done at somebody’s
expense. And if we used this rhetoric we’d have to say that copyright itself
is non-equitable as well, done at the expense of users. Of course, to this
you can say that authors produced value, not the users. But then there is
the whole public domain space, where we agree as societies that it’s
equitable to not remunerate authors for use of their works.
The issue of public transfers is a separate one, in my opinion. If you have
in mind extended rights licensing, which is the most popular model for such
transfers for educational uses, I think that it’s an imbalanced model that
puts great strain on public education system. It’s enough to look at the
ongoing debate about educational use of in-copyright works in Australia
(they do not have ECL, but a statutory license that has a similar effect) -
and the public education system is fighting right now to move to a fair use
mechanism.
Finally, I think that there is space for remuneration for educational use.
But it needs to be based on strong evidence, which we lack. And as a
principle, i believe that non-commercial uses (much of educational use falls
into this category) do not require remuneration.
Best,
Alek
On 24 Jun 2016, at 16:04, James Salsman <jsalsman(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Lisette,
Do you believe that broader educational fair use exemptions, to the extent
they preclude competition from in-copyright materials, need to be balanced
with public transfers to be equitable?
I agree we should benefit teachers, and I am sure that is what such
exemptions do. But I do not see how it could be equitable to benefit them at
the expense of the authors they recommend.
--
dyrektor, Centrum Cyfrowe
Twitter: @atarkowski
WWW: centrumcyfrowe.pl / creativecommons.pl
polecam:
uwolnij.podrecznik.org / otwartawiedza.pl / otwartengo.pl /
otwartezabytki.pl
_______________________________________________
Publicpolicy mailing list
Publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy