AV News 183 - February 2011
Copyright
Rosemary Wilman HonFRPS & Safiya Beagin
The question of Copyright is once again on the agenda.
Rosemary Wilman HonFRPS made mention in her
‘President’s Report’ which was published in the latest
edition of the ‘RPS Journal’ that:
‘Prime Minister, David Cameron, has revealed that
copyright is again on the political agenda. Although no
further details are known as yet, I can assure you that
The Society is committed to protecting photographers’
intellectual property rights, and will continue to be active
in this area: highlighting the importance of attribution at
all times. As a member of the British Photographic
Council and British Copyright Council, The Society is well placed to work on this
issue and to benefit from the combined expertise and opinions of all involved’.
Safiya Beagin of Field Seymour Parkes, Solicitors of Reading, kindly sent
AV News a follow up article on 'The Digital Economy Act'.
Copyright Infringement: New costs for ISPs
One of the aims of the Digital Economy Act 2010 was
to reduce online copyright infringement and the Act set
out a new procedure for reporting and addressing
online copyright infringement.
Under the procedure, internet service providers
(ISPs) are required to notify their subscribers if their IP
addresses are reported by copyright owners in
copyright infringement reports as being used to
infringe copyright. They are also required to provide
copyright owners with copyright infringement lists for
subscribers about whom the number of reports has
exceeded the stated threshold to be used as the basis for legal action.
At the end of last year, the government published a response to its
consultation on how the costs relating to the new procedure should be split. The
government concluded that the costs should be split 75% to copyright owners
and 25% to ISPs. In addition, the government confirmed that there will be no fee
for subscribers to appeal against a notification letter. However it has reserved
the right to introduce a fee at a later date if necessary. The government's
decision ensures that individuals will not be directly funding the system.
ISPs are disappointed with the decision and argue that copyright owners
should bear all the costs associated with the new procedure, as they are the sole
beneficiaries of the procedure. Copyright owners counter-argue that ISPs, who
are regulated by Ofcom, should cover the costs of the regulator. The
government's reasoning behind the costs split is that ISPs should share the
costs as an incentive to ensure that their infringement processes are as efficient
as possible. The cost implications of the government's decision for ISPs are
likely to be very significant, running to millions of pounds.
Page 18