The WIPO development agenda and the contribution of the international library community
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/02640470911004093 |
| Pages | 1010-1025 |
| Published date | 13 November 2009 |
| Date | 13 November 2009 |
| Author | J. Carlos Fernández‐Molina,J. Augusto Chaves Guimarães |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Library & information science |
The WIPO development agenda
and the contribution of the
international library community
J. Carlos Ferna
´ndez-Molina
Department of Library and Information Science, University of Granada,
Granada, Spain, and
J. Augusto Chaves Guimara
˜es
Department of Information Science, State University of Sa
˜o Paulo,
Sa
˜o Paulo, Brazil
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyze the international strengthening of copyright law in
developing countries and the active involvement of the international library community in the
movement against it.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper describes the overprotection of intellectual property
rights through international and bilateral treaties, the reaction against such through the proposal of a
WIPO development agenda, and the contribution of the international library organizations to the
debates and discussions in the WIPO arena.
Findings – The initiative for a development agenda for WIPO has proven much more successful than
many had imagined, even its promoters. The most relevant proposals made by the international
library community were included in the final list of approved recommendations.
Originality/value – The paper raises awareness ofthe relationship between copyright and access to
knowledge and, in consequence, the need for libraryorganizations to exert influence in such legislation.
Keywords Copyright law, Intellectual property,Developing countries, Internet
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
The process of international harmonization of copyright law that has taken pla ce in
recent years has given rise to a spectacular expansion of each of the facets and
dimensions involved; in terms of duration, realm of action, or sanctions, the examples
are numerous. The duration of copyright has been increased by ten to 20 years on the
average; legislation not only protects the work itself but also the “technological fences”
that safeguard it, leading to a new “right to access”; traditional rights have been
broadened, particularly the right of communication to the public; in the European
Union and in some other countries even the compilations of simple data are protected
(“sui generis” right to databases); and sanctions have stiffened, to include an excessive
use of criminal law (there are millions of virtual “pirates”). Furthermore, the text of
legislation is increasingly complex, being the fruit of a branching lobby on the part of
the communication industry, while the public at large either takes no action or does so
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-0473.htm
This study was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (Project
CSO-2008-03817/SOCI).
EL
27,6
1010
Received 5 July 2008
Revised 19 September 2008
Accepted 24 September
2008
The Electronic Library
Vol. 27 No. 6, 2009
pp. 1010-1025
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0264-0473
DOI 10.1108/02640470911004093
in a partial and sectorial manner. If we further consider the increasing use of contracts
(licenses) to regulate the use of works, we find that intellectual works enjoy highly
exaggerated protection, accumulating several protective layers: legislation that is mor e
and more restrictive, technological protection, and finally, contractual protection
(Ferna
´ndez-Molina, 2004).
The main argument used to justify this expansion is the alleged “threat” of the
Internet – that is, because it has made the reproduction and distribution of works
simpler and cheaper, greater protection should be lent to the works. No doubt there is
some logic to thisargument, but it completely overlooks the virtues of newtechnological
possibilities. As Boyle (2005) points out, not only does the Internet magnify the amount
of illegal copy, it also augments licit copy, expanding the size of the market, facilitating
the distribution of intellectual products and reducing the costs of publicity. In other
words, it is not really clear whether the Internet and digital information are a threat or,
rather, a great opportunity for the creators and commercial exploiters of intellectual
works. Nonetheless, the media multinationalsand the copyright collecting societieshave
been able to convince legislators in the main countries that the situation is much worse
now, requiring more intensive vigilance of copyright.
Reforms took shape, firstly, in the national laws of the USA, Australia and the member
states of the European Union. Also necessary was an international harmonization, given
the transnational character of the flux of digital intellectual works. Of course, the World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has been primarily responsible for leading this
process, as it is in charge of harmonizing national legislations and procedures regarding
intellectual property. After several years of study and analysis on the part of a commission
of experts, in December of 1996 the so-called “Internet treaties” were set forth, one of them
dedicated to copyright and the other to neighboring rights. The first, officially
denominated the WIPO Copyright Treaty (1996), was to complement the Berne Convention
(WIPO, 1971) and serve as a model and point of departure so that the member states would
reform their national laws to adapt them to the digital environment, and do so, moreover,
in similar fashion. To date, some 65 countries have signed this treaty.
But the problems of intellectual property are not only a technical or legal matter. Since
the early 1990s, they have been rooted in the realm of international commercial rights,
thanks to two fundamental factors: technological development and globalization. As
Castells (1997) tells us, the most important trait of the global economy is its “informational”
facet, as productivity and the competitive edge depend mostly on the capacity to generate,
apply and manage knowledge and information effectively. Hence, a basic feature of this
new economy is the need for strategic control of information. If information and technology
are the key to progress and development, it is argued, their control should imply
conserving or securing a strategic advantage over competitors, be they countries or firms.
If the objective is to control use and access of information and technology, the crucial tool is
intellectual property, which thereby acquires a fundamental strategic dimension in the
context of international commerce (Drahos and Braithwaite, 2002).
The starting point of this process was the creation of the World Trade Organization
and, more specifically, its agreement regarding intellectual property rights (WTO,
1994), known as TRIPS (Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights). With
the aim to harmonize the scope and extension of the protection of intellectual property
worldwide, it defined a series of minimal norms for protection that all the W TO
members should apply. The key reason, as Arnold (2006) underlines, is that since the
The WIPO
development
agenda
1011
To continue reading
Request your trial