IP: FTAA: CPT, EFF, EPIC, NetAction, NWU on IP/Info Policies

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

------------------------------------------------------------
Info-Policy-Notes | News from Consumer Project on Technology 
------------------------------------------------------------
June 31, 1998




July 29, 1998 comments by CPT, EFF, EPIC, NetAction and National
Writers Union to United States Trade Representative (USTR) 
regarding negotiations on Free Trade Area for the Americas. 
These comments focus on the sections of the treaty which concern
intellectual property and information policy. 


(This document is on the web at:
http://www.cptech.org/treaty/ftaa/ftaa-info2.html)


July 29, 1998 


Ms. Gloria Blue
Executive Secretary
Trade Policy Staff Committee
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative
Rm. 501, 600 17th St., NW
Washington, DC 20508


Ms. Blue: 


We are writing to provide comments to help U.S. trade negotiators
determine the objectives for the initial September 1998 negotiations of
the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). Our organizations represent
the interests of citizens, consumers and authors. We present 13 points
that will assist the U.S. negotiations team in ensuring that the
intellectual property and electronic commerce provisions of the treaty
protect creators and consumers, while promoting competition and
innovation, while avoiding anticompetitive practices. 


Comments for the Working Group on Intellectual Property 


   1.The Internet and other digital information technologies pose new
issues for copyright and neighboring rights. 


   2.Legislation to protect copyrights or neighboring works should seek
solutions that are least invasive of personal privacy.
 
   3.Legislation to protect copyrights or neighboring works should avoid
barriers to the development of new information technologies. 


   4.Avoid problems associated with overbroad patent or copyright
protection, and anticompetitive barriers to the development of
interoperable works. 


   5.Legislation to protect copyrights or neighboring works should
protect non-commercial and commercial fair use. Countries should be
given wide latitude to define fair use rights for educational and
research purposes, including non-commercial distance education
programs. 


   6.Efforts to protect "sweat of the brow" investments in databases
should not create ownership of facts, create excessive levels of
marketing exclusivity, authorize anticompetitive licensing practices, or
exclude fair uses of data. 


   7.Efficient development of information technologies are enhanced by
policies which promote interoperability of computer and
telecommunications software and hardware. 


   8.Competition authorities should discourage anticompetitive software
licensing practices and other monopolistic practices. 


   9.Mass market "shrink-wrap" or "click-on" licenses should not be
permitted to include anticompetitive provisions. For example, mass
market licensees should not be permitted to contain restrictions 
on reverse engineering, nondisclosure clauses, or restrictions on the 
use of the product that stop the customer from creating a competing 
product (except to the extent that this use would involve copying some 
of the product to an extent that would exceed normal fair use limits). 


  10.Trademark, copyright or other intellectual property rights should
not be used to discourage criticism, parody, or free speech. 


  11.Mass market licenses should not be permitted to ban the consumer
from expressing grievances against the product. 


  12.Copyright should not be extended to government documents and data. 


  13.Legislation to protect copyrights should preserve and enhance the
moral and economic rights of individual authors, as distinct from large
content owners. 


Signed, 


Consumer Project on Technology (CPT)
        http://www.cptech.org/ 
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
        http://www.eff.org/ 
National Writers Union (UAW Local 1981)
        http://www.nwu.org/nwu/ 
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
        http://www.epic.org/ 
NetAction
        http://www.netaction.org/ 




                         APPENDIX 


Excerpts from the 1996 Federal Trade Commission staff report,
Anticipating the 21st Century: Competition Policy in the New High-Tech,
Global Marketplace. 


        [s]hrinking product lifecycles and the
        increasing  global character of high-tech
        competition, in combination with expanded
        Intellectual Property protection, creates a
        situation to warrant a closer examination to
        ensure that companies do not wield their IP
        rights to stunt competition." (pg. 2233.) 


                . . .


        Some participants expressed concern that
        overbroad copyright scope might either create
        disincentives for, or erect roadblocks against,
        follow- on innovation. One computer industry
        representative found overbroad copyright scope
        "harmful to progress because software, more
        than anything, is a series of inventions piled
        on top of each other."[*] Another emphasized
        that broad copyright scope can create a risk of
        "overcompensation" in the sense that "[a]n
        author or inventor with too broad a monopoly
        over a work can seek compensation from authors
        of inventors of [*] works, driving up the cost
        of such works, [and ultimately] resulting in
        fewer works being produced."[*] \


        . . .


        "[Computer industry representatives] suggested
        that broad scope [of copyrights] could thwart
        efforts to enhance interoperability, which
        would in turn impact the growth of computer
        networks, the anticipated source of substantial
        innovation in the near term.[*] Some
        [representatives] suggested that the owner of
        a software copyright should be prevented from
        enforcing its copyright as to the interface,
        especially once that interface has become a
        standard,[*] or they advocated compulsory
        licensing of interface standards that dominate
        the market.[*] 


* footnotes omitted


-------------------------------------------------------------
INFORMATION POLICY NOTES: the Consumer Project on Technology 
http://www.cptech.org/, 202.387.8030, fax 202.234.5127.
Archives of Info-Policy-Notes are available from
http://www.essential.org/listproc/info-policy-notes/ 
Subscription requests to listproc () cptech org with the message: 
subscribe info-policy-notes Jane Doe
-------------------------------------------------------------