Alan Adler on WIPO negotiations on copyright exceptions

Alan Adler is Vice President for Legal and Government Affairs for the Association of American Publishers. On July 18, 2012, Alan was interviewed about the WIPO negotiations at SCCR 24, on a possible treaty for copyright exceptions for persons who are blind or have other disabilities. Alan explains why the AAP is opposing a WIPO treaty on this topic.

• Category

  Nonprofits & Activism

[jrandom78]

Allan Adler and the AAP are often on the other side of policy debates that we have here in the U.S. (I run the nonprofit that operates Bookshare, the largest online library for people with print disabilities, which operates under the copyright exception). Allan's forthrightness comes through in this interview. He is actually saying what the big issue is in explicit terms. not against the blind per se: against setting a precedent for other treaties that will hurt AAP member interests.

[ryu289]

I just feel that if copyright was lessened we wouldn't have to worry about bills like SOPA and PIPA which threatened constitutional rights.

[Chloe J. Adler]

...I think the real exploitation happens when modern technology creates an entire generation of readers who feel entitled to access, use, and reuse art, entertainment, and information without compensating the people who wrote/created/compiled it. I see this as a cultural devaluing of creative and intellectual work, and that offends me far more than publishers wanting to be compensated for the part they play in making this work available for my use and enjoyment.

[Chloe J. Adler]

You might want to listen again. He said "copyright owners". That can mean the publisher or, depending on the contract, the author him/herself. And just like any other creative job, authors have options. They want to get paid, too, and involving a publisher increases their scope and exposure and therefore, their potential earnings...

[Chloe J. Adler]

Yes. That is how it works. The author does the research, the imagining, and the writing; the publishers do the printing and promoting and investing. All of this is WORK done by skilled people with bills to pay. Publishing is a BUSINESS. It exists to generate revenue, and it is a costly process which involves a lot of contribution by people who, understandably, do not wish to work for free.

[ryu289]

You only say this because you rely on copyright to make you money!

[tomclark00]

This guy is full of crap. Copyright was not created to help publishers; in fact, its original intent was exactly the opposite. If you read the original copyright law, the Statute of Anne, it explains why it was written: to give *authors* the legal leverage they needed to get publishers to stop exploiting them! Unfortunately, 300 years of corruption later, we've got the tail wagging the dog.

[SuperSmashDolls]

Wait, isn't the whole point of treaties to synchronize copyright laws to facilitate trade? Why wouldn't you want the exceptions to these laws in said treaties? That's the whole point of internationally synchronized copyright laws.

The only reason I could think of is that you would oppose those exceptions generally and do not want them to be implemented anywhere. I don't see how you could support those exceptions without supporting the international synchronization of the most common ones.

[Ville Oksanen]

Adler is surprisingly honest in this interview.