Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: more on BILL TO LIMIT DATABASE PIRACY INTRODUCED
From: Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 15:11:32 -0500
To: Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu> Subject: [T-142 (Coble) BILL TO LIMIT DATABASE PIRACY INTRODUCED Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 14:30:17 EST From: Joshua Lederberg <jsl () rockvax rockefeller edu> Dave, on this subject, here is the testimony I gave Thursday Feel free to disseminate to interesting-people if you think that is warranted. Josh Oral Testimony Joshua Lederberg President-emeritus Rockefeller University 18 March 1999 .fi My name is Joshua Lederberg. I am grateful to Chairman Coble for this opportunity to comment on the "Collections of Information Antipiracy Act" on behalf of the Academies and the AAAS. Our written testimony for the record will elaborate on the legal issues. With my own voice, I offer you the perspectives of a professor and former president at Rockefeller University; from a long career as researcher in molecular genetics, and bioinformatics; as an adviser to government science agencies and scientific publishers; and not least as a creator and active user of both commercial and nonprofit scientific databases. I remain an adviser to such enterprises, but I am here formally representing only the Academies and AAAS. Access to and use of factual data is essential to furthering our understanding of nature, to medical and technical progress, and to the validation of scientific claims. Indeed, the currently thriving public domain for data, fostered by government policies that nourish research and guarantee full and open access to data, benefits all downstream users, including the commercial database industry. At this time, barring instances of gross piracy, there is no crisis in the development of new databases: commercial or otherwise. Significant legal, technical, and self-help protection measures to protect proprietary databases are already available. We support the adoption of new diplomatic initiatives and legal measures to address egregious wholesale database piracy. However, we are opposed to responses to those grievances which go beyond solving that problem, and would erect unprecedented and unjustified new rights in factual data. These would undermine our nation's successful research and education system, and put a heavy hand on the scale of legitimate competing interests. We appreciate the two changes that were made to H.R. 354 since last year's bill, but along with the Administration and other notable critics, we find the legislation as currently proposed still needs substantial remediation. Our objections to H.R. 354 include: o An overly and unnecessarily broad scope of protection for factual data -- one that would supersede copyright for collections of works of authorship; o An insufficient carveout for not-for-profit scientific and educational users; o An incomplete government data exemption, particularly for government databases disseminated by the private sector; o The retroactive application of the legislation; o The unduly long term of protection in light of the breadth and depth of the scope of protection; o The blanket prohibitions on traditionally legitimate commercial value-adding uses; o The lack of reasonable limitation on the inordinate market power conferred by this legislation on sole-source data providers; and o Absent or vague definitions of important terms. Together with a broad cross-section of research, education, library and consumer groups, as well as many commercial publishers and database providers, we would prefer alternative legislation such as "The Database Fair Competition and Research Promotion Act of 1999" that: o Targets database piracy by focussing on true unfair competition principles, without creating unprecedented new property rights in data and unwarranted control in downstream uses of data; o Maintains a reasonable balance between the interests of database producers and users, including legitimate and economically important value-adding activities; o Preserves essential public interest uses, including customary scientific, educational, and library activities; o Adheres to all Constitutional principles; and o Provides protection against monopolistic pricing by sole-source data vendors in situations where competition breaks down as a preferred approach to balancing economic interests. If this simpler and properly focused alternative is not taken, then a much more complex bill, like the one that was in the course of being drafted in the Senate Judiciary Committee negotiations last summer, would need to be used. The Academies and the AAAS remain committed to working with Congress on developing a well reasoned and balanced database protection bill that serves the interests of our nation. Thank you.
Current thread:
- IP: more on BILL TO LIMIT DATABASE PIRACY INTRODUCED Dave Farber (Mar 21)