New digital copyright bill is opposed by U.S. consumer electronics and computer companies.........
They are upset because the bill regulates technology rather than the act of copying.
techweb.com
August 11, 1997, Issue: 966
Section: News
------------------------------------------------------------------------
System vendors: Clause stifles innovation -- Digital-copyright bill sparks computing rift
By George Leopold
Washington - The hardware and software industries are clashing over proposed legisla-tion that would implement a global copyright accord approved late last year.
At issue in House bill H.R. 2281 is a provision dealing with circumvention of digital-copy-protection schemes. The provision is backed by the Clinton administration, software companies and other content providers that are seeking stronger protection for their intellectual property as the Internet grows.
U.S. patent and trademark commissioner Bruce Lehman predicted last week that the copyright bill will win congressional approval. "It's very reasonably crafted," he said in an interview.
But industry groups representing computer and consumer-electronics manufacturers called the provision too broad, saying it threatens to dictate technology choices for future consumer-electronics and PC products.
H.R. 2281 was introduced July 29 by House Judiciary intellectual-property subcommittee chairman Howard Coble, R-N.C. Based on proposals put forth by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the bill would implement two international copyright treaties approved by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in December.
Coble's proposal is "a compromise because it's not completely what the content providers wanted and it's not what the consumer-electronics industry wanted," said IP-subcommittee chief counsel Matt Glazier.
But the computer and consumer-electronics groups lobbying against the provision say it would compromise their constituency's ability to drive technology. "Our concern with the digital-copyright legislation is that it tends at the highest level to regulate technology as opposed to behavior," said Chris Byrne, director of intellectual property for Silicon Graphics Inc. (Mountain View, Calif.) and chairman of the intellectual-property committee of the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI, Washington). "As a result, we have a concern that [the bill] may have a stifling effect on the IT industry's ability to innovate."
ITI, which represents the U.S. computer industry, online-service providers and OEMs, has proposed substitute language that would soften the bill's impact on manufacturers. "We want to provide more balance [and make the bill] more technology-neutral," an ITI spokeswoman said.
ITI members are also concerned about broader liability issues. One amendment under consideration would exempt a manufacturer from digital copyright-infringement liability if its device accommodated one "substantial" non-infringing application, congressional sources said. But U.S. officials said the proposal is too broad and would undermine fundamental copyright protections.
The U.S. consumer-electronics industry joined in last week in opposing the House bill, warning that the anti-circumvention provision would prohibit the use of "any electronic components in the design of a recorder or computer that fail to respond to any anti-copy technology that a content owner might choose."
The Home Recording Rights Coalition, a lobbying group headed by the Consumer Electronics Manufacturers Association (Arlington, Va.), criticized the House bill's anti-circumvention language as "contrary to the WIPO treaties themselves and unreasonably threatening to the design of new generations of recording devices and computers."
But Lehman of the patent office said the consumer-electronics community has been intransigent. "We tried to work out the differences among the parties" in crafting the legislation, he said, but "in the end, the consumer-electronics people, particularly, were not willing to make any compromises or concessions."
Recurring conflict
The debate over the anti-circumvention provision echoes a similar conflict last year, when legislation favored by the patent office failed to make it out of the House Judiciary Committee.
The digital-copyright issue was addressed internationally in the WIPO treaty. The Coble bill, known as the WIPO Treaties on Copyright and on Performances and Phonograms, is designed to implement the global accord. ITI officials said the group doesn't oppose the treaty, only the section of the Coble bill dealing with defeating copy-protection systems.
During negotiations on the WIPO treaties, the computer and consumer-electronics groups helped forge a compromise "technical-measures" provision that leaves the circumvention question up to individual countries.
The WIPO treaties were sent to the Senate for ratification on July 28. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said the accords will help create minimum standards for global copyright protection. Nonetheless, he said, the success of the treaties depends on wide international acceptance and U.S. leadership on the issue.
While not completely satisfied with the House bill, the software, movie and publishing industries are supporting the copyright treaties as they seek to do more business on the Internet.
"The treaties not only are vital to safeguarding critical U.S. export markets but, once ratified, will also ensure that our nation's copyright laws and values become the standard of protection for the Internet," said Allan Adler, chairman of the Creative Incentive Coalition (Washington)
The House panel has scheduled hearings beginning Sept. 10 on the WIPO-implementation bill and related online-copyright-liability legislation. Lehman, who is expected to testify, acknowledged that the legislation will likely be modified by lawmakers.
But he said his bottom line is protecting the interests of copyright owners.
Copyright r 1997 CMP Media Inc. |
