Copyright: What's going on in France now?

Philippe Aigrain and Bloomberg article on the copyright debate in France

The debate on the copyright and related rights law in France were interrupted late last night and left many of us confused. We know the negotiations will resume on January 17, 2006.

Philippe Aigrain ( philippe.aigrain@wanadoo.fr) who has been involved in the debate explained a few things in an email. This is a quick translation of his main points (and I apologize to Philippe whose English is better than mine) summarizing his take on what has just happened in France.

For Philippe Aigrain, the results are mixed and there are some "partial and fragile victories" for people who have been supporting legal licensing with remuneration for downloading. The Minister of culture and the recording studio lobbyists will sure come back to the vote in January but he sees some progress.

The opposition between free versus remuneration has moved to a debate about ways to finance cultural productions compatible with individual choice and media diversity. Moreover, there's now an awareness that going for more and more detailed control can lead to the loss of fundamental freedoms. For Philippe, some clarification are still badly needed. There's a vagueness in the proposals for global licenses and the fact that it is presented as "optional" could be a mistake. However, there is some support for a license based on payments of all subscribers. One of the biggest advantage of this would be that control and surveillance would be not be necessary. It will also be consistent with levies on copies and blank tapes for example.

Some of the amendments related to a global license have not been discussed yet and hopefully there will be clarification. In particular, the question of how the money would be distributed to authors and creators by a collective society and how to deal with authors and creators who have chosen to freely distribute their works (see amendemnt 200 by the PS).

Another important amendment (134 PC=136 UMP=144 UDF, supported by the PS and modified in re of encrypted televisions) was adopted. It limits the definition of technological measures that can be legally protected against circumvention. Excluded from the definition are formats, protocols, algorithms and cryptology methods as such. This amendment protect free software and research but it must be completed by a vote on amendment 93 stating that circumvention cannot be prohibited when the purpose is a legal use or allowed by contract.

On the negative side, the rejection of exceptions for research and education, for libraries and archives as well as the rejection of the clarification regarding the right to quote (including audio visual works) reminds us that France is conservative regarding these activities. Some work is still needed to convince negotiators that this is really about creation of knowledge for the future and the concrete exercise of democratic debate.

Finally, Philippe Aigrain explains what he sees as lessons learned when comparing the debate about the text of the legislation and the fight against software patents. It is possible to succeed while leading a thematic fight on a question that goes across political parties whether nationally or at the European level. Actually, there's been important and mutual influences between European and national movements. Civil society players have developed synergies between their European and antional activities. However, these campaigns against powerful lobbyists and regarding texts intentionnally technical and complex are exhausting and difficult to repeat. It is necessary to have a clarification of the underlying political debate to have a better influence at the top. The fragile success always rest on such clarification in limited areas but to generalize and to give it a concrete weight remains hard work.


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000085&sid=aVSbCR7TCDvc&refer=europe

French Parliament Votes to Allow Web File Sharing (Update2)

Dec. 22 (Bloomberg) -- The French Parliament voted last night to allow free sharing of music and movies on the Internet, setting up a conflict with the government and media companies.

If the amendment survives, France would be the first country to legalize so called peer-to-peer downloading, said Jean-Baptiste Soufron, legal counsel to the Association of Audionautes, a French group that defends people accused of improperly sharing music files.

The law would be a blow to media companies that are suing people for downloading or sharing music and movie files. Companies such as Walt Disney Co., Viacom Inc. and News Corp.'s Fox say free downloading of unauthorized copies of TV shows and movies before they are released on DVD will cost them $5 billion in revenue this year.

``The deputies used this vote to show their independence from the government, but they don't know what they are doing,'' Nicolas Seydoux, chief executive of French cinema company Gaumont SA, said in an interview on France Inter radio. ``We are not trying to ban anything, just to make sure the work of others isn't stolen.''

The amendment was approved 30 to 28 at close to midnight yesterday. While there are 577 members of the lower house, few were present for the vote. French Culture Minister Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres has asked that parliament debate on the amendment again today, Agence France Presse reported.

Media Crackdown

Legal music downloading sites such as Apple Computer Inc.'s iTunes have French-language sites, as do major music companies such as Vivendi Universal SA. Last night's amendment would allow someone having bought a song from one of those sites to share it with family or friends.

Media companies have cracked down on such illegal downloads. Grokster Ltd. last month shut down its online file- sharing service and will pay $50 million to settle a lawsuit by music and film studios accusing the company of helping people pirate copyrighted songs and movies.

The entertainment industry has fought free movie and music file sharing for more than five years, saying it loses billions of dollars annually. Napster Inc., which closed in the wake of an industry lawsuit in 2000, now operates as a paid service and gives some user fees to music and film companies and artists.

Upper House

The French vote needs to go through more steps to become law. It can be overturned if it is debated again and voted down in the lower house. It also needs a vote from the upper house, or the Senate.

The amendment, which is attached to a bill on intellectual property rights, states that ``authors cannot forbid the reproduction of works that are made on any format from an online communications service when they are intended to be used privately'' and not for commercial use.

Parliament is debating a bill that would transpose a 2001 European Union directive on intellectual rights into French law. The government had introduced articles into the bill that would make file-sharing akin to counterfeiting, punishable by prison sentences of up to three years and fines of up to 300,000 euros ($355,000).

`At Risk'

``The vote puts the livelihoods of people in the music and film industry at risk,'' Gaumont's Seydoux said.

Consumer groups such as UFC-Que Choisir had protested the government's proposed bill.

Soufron of Audionautes said any system that allowed unlimited downloading could be accompanied by a system similar to the royalty tax that exists for blank compact disks and DVDs.

Music companies ``are not looking for a new model, they want total control,'' Soufron said.

Under the amendment, Internet service providers would pay part of their revenue to Sacem, a group that has handled artists' royalties since 1851, Soufron said. Details of the payments are not in the amendment. The group redistributed 578 million euros to musicians last year.