India Joins WIPO Internet Treaties: A Major Step Forward


On July 4, the Indian government announced that India will accede to the two WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) Internet treaties, the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT), 1996 and the WIPO Performance and Phonographs Treaty (WPPT), 1996. The Press Information Bureau statement indicated that accession to the Treaties will allow India to enable creative rights holders to secure a return on investment on the production and distribution of creative works, to create a level playing field for Indian rights holders and to “contribute to the development of a vibrant creative economy and cultural landscape.”

Accession will help to achieve all these goals. This marks an important step forward for India and the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion of the Ministry of Commerce, which brought the recommendation forward to Cabinet for consideration and approval, is to be congratulated. The Indian Music Industry has already commented favourably on the decision, calling it “excellent news for the protection of Indian music – within India and globally.” It will benefit not just the music industry but also India’s rich and creative film and television sector.

This is what the Internet treaties do and why they are important, as outlined by WIPO;

The WCT deals with protection for authors of literary and artistic works, such as writings and computer programs; original databases; musical works; audiovisual works; works of fine art and photographs; whereas the WPPT deals with protection for authors rights of performers and producers of phonograms.

The purpose of the two treaties is to update and supplement the major existing WIPO treaties on copyright and related rights, primarily in order to respond to developments in technology and in the marketplace…Among other things, both the WCT and the WPPT address the challenges posed by today’s digital technologies, in particular the dissemination of protected material over digital networks such as the Internet.

The requirements of the treaties are as follows:

Both treaties require countries to provide a framework of basic rights, allowing creators to control and/or be compensated for the various ways in which their creations are used and enjoyed by others. Most importantly, the treaties ensure that the owners of those rights will continue to be adequately and effectively protected when their works are disseminated through new technologies and communications systems such as the Internet.

The treaties also require countries to provide not only the rights themselves, but also two types of technological adjuncts to the rights. These are intended to ensure that rightholders can effectively use technology to protect their rights and to license their works online.

The first, known as the “anti-circumvention” provision, tackles the problem of “hacking”: it requires countries to provide adequate legal protection and effective remedies against the circumvention of technological measures (such as encryption) used by rightholders to protect their rights.

The second type of technological adjuncts safeguards the reliability and integrity of the online marketplace by requiring countries to prohibit the deliberate alteration or deletion of electronic “rights management information”: that is, information which accompanies any protected material, and which identifies the work, its creators, performer, or owner, and the terms and conditions for its use.

The implementation of the anti-hacking provisions in India could be controversial as noted by well-known Indian IP blog Spicy IP. While calling the decision a “huge win for copyright owners”, the blog notes that the Copyright Act does not penalize facilitation of circumvention provided the purpose of the facilitation is not a prohibited act. In other words, it is ok to circumvent technological protection methods (TPMs) to access a work provided that the purpose of circumvention is to exercise fair dealing exceptions (in the case of India, private or personal use, criticism or review, reporting of current events, and so on). This is a potential loophole that may need to be closed.

This issue has come up elsewhere (e.g. Canada). As I explained in an earlier blog, “Why Can’t I Legally Pick Digital Locks to Exercise My Fair Dealing Rights”, in the analog world you have to legally acquire access to a work (by purchase, rental, loan etc.) before exercising your rights to make copies without payment to the rightsholder. It should be no different in the digital world. There are many ways to legally access digital works; circumventing TPMs should not be one of them.

This issue will no doubt be worked out in time. In the meanwhile, with its decision to accede to these treaties India will join more than 90 other countries that have made the commitment to protect their cultural industries in the digital environment. Good news for India’s creators and for all creators who exploit their work in India.

© Hugh Stephens 2018. All Rights Reserved.

Inside Dale Chihuly’s Studio “The Boathouse”

Credit: Author

Last October I wrote a blog posting about glass artist Dale Chihuly’s travails with a lawsuit brought against him by a former associate (or employee, his status is not clear), Michael Moi, who claims that he co-authored many of Chihuly’s works over the past 15 years. Moi is suing Chihuly for copyright infringement, and (naturally) substantial damages. As far as I am aware the case has yet to be heard, although there were legal wranglings in the fall that led to the disqualification of Moi’s lawyers. Continue reading “Inside Dale Chihuly’s Studio “The Boathouse””

Piracy, Technology and Economic Development: The Indonesian Case


It’s a perverse paradox that technological advances and economic development–something that all developing countries strive for in order to raise productivity and the welfare of their citizens–‎come with a heavy price tag. In some cases, it is economic despoliation; in others it is growing corruption and highly unequal distribution of wealth; in still others it is the exploitation of technology by bad actors for undesirable ends. We are all aware of the blessings of technology, from medicine to manufacturing to communications–and have been told that nothing should be allowed to slow down this progress. In the area of communications, the Internet has become the bearer of many good things–and some not so good things—such as invasion of personal privacy and content-theft (piracy). Continue reading “Piracy, Technology and Economic Development: The Indonesian Case”

The Latest Tactics of those Opposed to “Piracy Site Blocking” in Canada: Try to Discredit the Process and the Proponents


In the famous 1942 film Casablanca, Police Captain Louis Renault (Claude Rains) declares himself to be “shocked, shocked”, that gambling is going on in Rick’s (Humphrey Bogart’s) Bar, as Rains quietly palms his winnings while closing the bar. This line has become synonymous with feigned outrage and is a good description of Michael’s Geist’s “exposés” of the FairPlay Canada Coalition campaign to convince the CRTC (Canada’s broadcasting and telecommunications regulator, aka the Commission) to adopt a process of requiring Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block offshore websites that are “blatantly, overwhelmingly or structurally engaged” in content piracy. Using the Access to Information process, Geist has “revealed” that Bell Media, one of the leading elements in the Coalition, actively sought out support from various stakeholders, including George Brown College and Brock University. Continue reading “The Latest Tactics of those Opposed to “Piracy Site Blocking” in Canada: Try to Discredit the Process and the Proponents”

So You Admire Your Neighbour’s House? Best Not to Copy the Design

Steve Russell/Toronto Star

If you have always admired or even envied your neighbour’s house—those special features like the gabling, the placement and colour of the windows and window frames, the design of the chimney, and so on–and are tempted to hire an architect to copy it, perhaps you should think again. That’s the lesson that has emerged from what we could call the “Strathearn design case” in Toronto. (named after the street on which the home with the copyrighted design was located). Continue reading “So You Admire Your Neighbour’s House? Best Not to Copy the Design”

Copyright Developments Down Under: There’s a Lot Going On


The wheels of copyright change are grinding away in Australia, both through legislative review and court actions. I hesitate to call the process “copyright reform” because one person’s reform is another’s regressive step. The government has chosen the term “copyright modernisation” and a public consultation has been launched with a final submission date of July 4. The review is designed, in part, to gauge public support for copyright proposals included in a report on intellectual property issued by the Productivity Commission back in 2015 and 2016. Continue reading “Copyright Developments Down Under: There’s a Lot Going On”

Google “Thumbs its Nose” at New Zealand’s Courts: Kiwis Should Look to Canada for a Precedent


Google is at it again. According to press reports in the New Zealand Herald, Google refused to comply with a New Zealand court order to suppress details and remove content related to a local murder trial because, according to a representative of Google NZ, “Google LLC, was a separate legal entity incorporated in the US, meaning New Zealand’s courts and laws held no power over it.” Tell that to the Supreme Court of Canada. Continue reading “Google “Thumbs its Nose” at New Zealand’s Courts: Kiwis Should Look to Canada for a Precedent”