DMCA hearings: library etc education

Copyright Office: Jacqueline Charlesworth
Michelle Choe
Regan Smith
Cy Donnelly
Steve Ruhe
John Riley
Stacy Cheney (NTIA)
 
Proposed Class 4: Audiovisual works – educational uses –
educational programs operated by museums, libraries, or nonprofits
This proposed class would allow educators and learners in
libraries, museums and nonprofit organizations to circumvent access controls on
lawfully made and acquired motion pictures and other audiovisual works for
educational purposes. This exemption has been requested for audiovisual
material made available in all formats, including DVDs protected by CSS,
Blu-ray discs protected by AACS, and TPM-protected online distribution
services.
 
Proponents: Renee Hobbs, Media Education Lab, University of
Rhode Island: Work in non-school settings. (1) No reason to distinguish those
who learn in non-school settings like nonprofits. (2) Perpetuates inequality,
since libraries etc. serve underresourced communities, where this form of
learning is important. (3) Not useful to create separate rules for different
formats.  Recognizing educators’ and
students’ ability to make appropriate choices is reasonable. (4) If limiting
language is required, “digital and media literacy instructional practices in
informal learning contexts” would be reasonable though it’s not required.
 
Q: examples of inability to circumvent outside digital and
media literacy education?
 
Hobbs: most of my examples include digital and media
literacy education.   Incredible work in library community:
Macarthur Foundation invested over $130 in informal learning sector digital
initiatives.  Informal learning research
and pedagogy has advanced by leaps and bounds. Chicago’s Umedia at public
library: teen library services—1000s of teens and young adults have been making
media in a wide variety of forms, but they can’t make use of circumvention for
their creative work, unlike UPenn students.
 
Q: would exemption require physical presence at library
etc.?
 
A: That’s a great question—just as there is so much
innovation in tech delivery of digital media, there’s a huge amount of
innovation in digital learning space about blending face to face and online
learning. Even in libraries, it’s common to have a course on “how to make a
blog,” where learners work in the library and then back at home. I don’t think
the distinction should be a limiting factor, because today those practices are
seamless.
 
Direct harm: Jeanine Cook, Yes Philly, nonprofit helping
African-American youth get GEDs; students have negative experiences w/schools
so exploring media is really valuable in non-school environment. But she can’t
use decryption even though learners in other programs have the right to make
such creative work.  Accident of birth
keeps them distinct from Penn students not far away.

Charlesworth: what about noncommercial video exception? Would that apply here?
 
A: Opponents say when we look historically the exemptions
for K-12 were distinct and separate. 
Many of the creative expressions and work products aren’t like remix
video artists. They aren’t designed for that purpose.  They’re part of strengthening the media
understanding muscle, like an exercise, not designed for an authentic audience
with a real world wide distribution. Way to help students learn.  Possible it might apply, but not willing to
rely on it.
 
Q: There are a number of adult education programs, some
affiliated w/school districts and some not. Is adult education included, GED
programs?
 
A: yes. 
 
Q: examples of where this might be used?
 
A: Yes Philly, which I just described, fits that
definition.  250 teens and young adults
who dropped out and are returning for their GED. Not affiliated with school
district; nonprofit.  Jeanine Cook wanted
students to use clips from Selma,
other film, and was unable to do so because of current limitations.
 
Charlesworth: how are they accredited to grant GEDs?
 
A: State of Pa. offered them accreditation, but not familiar
w/the legal mechanism.
 
Charlesworth: some official sanction.
 
A: yep.
 
Q: how would you define educators and learners?  Libraries, nonprofits, etc. have different
missions.
 
A: Teachers and learners can be blurred in library
programming services. Providence Community Library: media literacy might
involve a college student at University of Rhode Island enrolled in one of my
grad classes. Learners might be other K-12 teachers; mothers and patrons of
library; teens; younger people.  Library
programs and services aim to reach the broadest spectrum of Americans.  Teachers are drawn from wide swath of public
and learners are drawn from the community served.
 
Q: envisioning a course taught at one of these institutions?
 
A: yes.  Course isn’t
correct—usual term is “program” for libraries and museums. May be single
session or a series of experiences over a longer period.
 
Q: do you have a way to differentiate a “Best of the Oscars”
presentation at the Smithsonian.
 
A: I don’t think we need to confuse exhibition with fair use
for learning purposes.
 
Q: so we could exclude exhibitions to general public.
 
A: yes.
 
Jonathan Band, Library Copyright Alliance: Before I talk
specifically about libraries and museums, I want to talk about broader
issues.  Ultraviolet etc.: I haven’t
studied the licensed terms, but wouldn’t be surprised if license prohibited
public performance. Would using it in a classroom setting be ok? Sure they don’t
want to induce breach of contract. 
110(1) wouldn’t take care of the license problem, unless you want to say
that 110(1) preempts the license, which would be dandy with us.

Charlesworth: in some settings, 110(1) enables one to show a copyrighted work.
 
Band: yeah, takes care of © but not the license, though he
agrees it preempts the contract terms! Also in terms of Corley: other cases
that go the other way. Bill Graham Archives, Spurlock, Swatch: court
specifically addressed issue of format. 
Swatch: was transcript enough or did they need the audio, and the court
found that audio was additionally insightful beyond the transcript and that was
fair use.
 
Moving on to libraries and museums: sponsor lectures and
classes on a wide variety of topics. Following examples from 6 months of NYPL:
choreographer used clips of ballets that inspired him; Satrapi used clips from Persepolis; George Clinton used clips of
performances that inspired him; William Gibson; magician David Blaine; actor
RuPaul; art dealer used clips from documentary about him; Suzanne Farrell used
clips about her dances. Not limited to NYPL: Skokie library had lecture from
critic about “films that changed my life.” Important part of informal
education; doesn’t threaten rightsholder interests.
 
If the noncommercial exemption covers this, great.  That would be a helpful clarification.  Circumvention tools are widely available and
widely used for infringing and noninfringing purposes. Educators want to do the
right thing. They could ignore the DMCA with impunity, but instead they are
going through this complex process. Rightsowners know there’s no impact on the
level of infringement.  Understand the
frustration about infringement, but don’t take it out on educators just b/c
DMCA allows them to do so.
 
Opponents: Bruce Turnbull, AACS LA and DVDCCA: (1) AACS
particularly, note that there’s no need for Blu-Ray quality; nothing in the
record but vague anecdotal statements amounting to substantial adverse effects.
(2) Fair use doesn’t require the user to have any quality level they wish.
 
Charlesworth: And the cited cases?
 
A: I’m not prepared to respond to those on the spot.  Reply comments stated that DVDs dominate the
marketplace. Maybe that will change in a few years but that’s what we’ve got
now. As to Blu-Ray there’s no record for an exemption. More broadly, the categories
suggested here are very vague and broad—all kinds of nonprofits, museums,
libraries, not limited to institutions specific to education or activities
specific to education. No assurance that participants will be engaged in
educational activities at all. 
Nonprofits in particular: one could create a museum if they want.  A museum of my own DVD works, inviting
everyone to come in from 4-5.  [Why would
ability to circumvent matter there? 
Couldn’t I just set up a DVD player right now?] It’s possible to create
a small nonprofit for all kinds of purposes. [Why would you do that—to make
another copy of South Park from a
copy you already own?]
 
Q: if we narrowed to educational activities, would you still
oppose?
 
A: that would be better, but we’d oppose it with Blu-Ray. If
more in character of existing educational exemptions (short clips, close
analysis), merely having an educational focus or mission begins to drift away [implicitly,
because people are super super untrustworthy, except I guess for the ones who
run Ultraviolet].  But degree-granting
institutions like GED granting institutions would get closer.
 
Alternatives: as was demonstrated previously, screen capture
software does in fact allow you to make use of video, so you’re not deprived of
ability to take video clips and manipulate them. You can completely reorder a
scene from a movie if you want to, include subtitles.
 
Charlesworth: are you saying you wouldn’t oppose a
screencapture safety net for this class?
 
A: if there were a sufficiently narrowly crafted targeted
exemption that derived from the comments presented, then yes.  Finally, w/r/t online: Congress has indicated
its desire as to how online education should be conveyed in terms of the standards,
whether the TEACH Act literally applies or not—both DMCA and TEACH Act mention
technical measures, so any online use would need to adhere to those
requirements.
 
J. Matthew Williams, Entertainment Software Association,
Motion Picture Association of America, Recording Industry Association of
America (Joint Creators and Copyright Owners)
 
My clients support educators and education. We’re seeking
balance, not unnecessary burdens. This proposal sweeps in so many institutions,
organizations, people, that it’s essentially a disallowed user-based
exemption.  The Office has taken steps
toward referencing a user base, but this would be “all noncommercial uses of
motion pictures” and we think that would be both dangerous and inconsistent
with the statutory scheme.
 
Charlesworth: does noncommercial exemption apply to these?
 
A: No, b/c there’s an educational exemption and a remix
exemption that has evolved over time. That said, b/c this one is so broad, it
probably would include some remix content. 
If people working at a nonprofit are creating a remix.
 
Charlesworth: what about the GED example?
 
A: aligned with Turnbull. Not talked to clients about it, but
targeted limited exemption might be OK. 
Reiterate: concern if it extended to students beyond those covered by
existing exemption.
 
Swatch v. Bloomberg: not sure how that applies, b/c that was
a recording of an entire earnings call posted onto news site and the claim was
they didn’t need to post the entire call. [No, the claim was that they didn’t
need to post the audio with its full detail of voice etc. instead of a less
detailed transcript.] And the court said it wasn’t transformative. [No, the
court specifically amended its opinion to make clear that the use was
transformative.]
 
Anyway, NYPL uses were achievable without circumvention,
showing there’s no need.  On the harm
issue, when you’re using a circumvention device to rip a Blu-Ray or DVD you end
up with a complete, in the clear copy. That sets it apart from what most people
do with screencap. 1.5 million nonprofit organizations. It’s a threat to us for
in the clear copies to end up on machines even if it’s not the initial use they
make. [Note that the noncommercial exemption hasn’t done this.]
 
Q: screencap. Mac problems. Is there a license providers
have to get to disable screencap on new operating systems?
 
A: don’t know the answer. 
Interoperability issue.  We haven’t
done the testing.  We assume the testing
they’ve done is accurate.  If those
technologies don’t unlawfully decrypt but captures it after, there’s not a
circumvention.
 
Turnbull: I don’t know of any licenses that specifically
address screen cap software. W/r/t Mac, I’m completely unaware of licenses b/c
Mac doesn’t support Blu-Ray.  I’m certain
there’s no DVD license.  What is known as
DRM licensing business as robustness rules: you have to make your system so
that it can’t be easily attacked by someone seeking to circumvent. [And they
define screencap as circumvention for these purposes.] DVD wasn’t as protected;
AACS has a different set of robustness rules. 
One of the things covered by rules is a requirement that the licensee in
making the product protect the content from point of decryption until the point
of presentation on a screen. The AACS does not require the use of any
particular tech to do that. It is possible that in implementing this, some
systems developed tech that is not compatible with screencap software that
works on DVD.  Having said all that,
since Mac doesn’t support Blu-Ray, doesn’t know what Apple did.
 
Charlesworth: on screencap, what is your view?
 
Williams: seems viable to me. If current exemption covers
it, it’s lawful.  Proffered narrower
language on informal learning—very vague, I don’t know what that means, maybe
b/c I’m not in media literacy field. 
Anything should be much clearer. 
 
Terms of service: to the extent that any of these uses
violate the ToS, that’s the case with the existing exemptions for circumvention
of digital downloads and DVDs, which has never stopped people in the past, so
it’s not a real argument.  [I didn’t know
that my DVD came with an enforceable license; I thought there was a first
sale!]
 
Many of these uses could be licensed—LA testimony about Fox
licensing.
 
Hobbs: Libraries, museums, nonprofits that aren’t gov’t
sanctioned/accredited.  In my written
reply I describe Nuala Cabral, an educator who runs a small Philly nonprofit
called Fanmail: media literacy and social activism for African-American
community—people respond to misogynistic representations in contemporary media
culture. Wants to create analysis and commentary on Orange is the New Black on
Blu-Ray but she can’t access the clips. She’s not making a film, but a learning
experience for adult learners.  I don’t
think noncommercial would fit.
 
Charlesworth: it can be streamed from Netflix. Has she tried
screen capture?
 
A: I don’t know.  I
tried to make a screencapture of Netflix and I was unsuccessful three years
ago.  Screencapture doesn’t uniformly
work on all machines due to unknown tech gaps.
 
Charlesworth: but could you find a way to use screencapture
to get clips?
 
A: Potentially. Narrowly written exemption that doesn’t
include educators like Cabral would be insufficient. Underserve the people who
could most benefit from opportunities to respond to contemporary cultural
representations.
 
Band: Matt uses the word “balance,” but that’s our
word.  Swatch: P argued that transcript
would have been sufficient, and Bloomberg succeeded in arguing that the tone of
voice made a difference in analysis.  The
court specifically amended the opinion to say it was transformative.
 
W/r/t library example: the point is that those were
authorized uses, but b/c of the time that it takes, having to get authorization
on short notice means you can’t use what you want. You might be able to clear a
few, but a lot of times you can’t.  Use
of clips in presentations is on the rise b/c audiences expect that—a growing
problem, and clearing the rights will be a challenge.
 
Q: how many of those examples were educators who would have
done the same in a university setting?
 
Band: these are artists who were making presentations, but
if they spoke on campus they’d do the same thing.
 
Q: contours include lectures, which may not be covered right
now?
 
A: Yes, unless the noncommercial exemption covers it.
 
Turnbull: On Swatch case: that was part of what we’ve been
trying to show with our screencap demos. If there’s a need to see the wire
holding up the lion’s tail, screencap could get that. Need to manipulate clips,
we can do that.  The point we’re making
is not that nuance isn’t important but that there is an alternative that gets
at the stated need.
 
Q: Would you support clarifying the proposed exemption to
narrow it to institutions with educational missions?
 
Hobbs: I would support language if it included nonprofits w/
an educational mission.
 
Charlesworth: how do you define that?  That’s a broad term.
 
Hobbs: aiming to reduce HIV with healthcare services might
or might not have educational mission in addition to another mission. But that
only speaks to the importance of what’s becoming a normative practice. As we
try to reach audiences in an increasingly crowded media environment w/lots of
choices, we use digital media as part of our toolkit, and we wouldn’t want to
narrow it.  HIV education: use of
Hollywood clip could be really important to advance prevention goals.

from Blogger http://ift.tt/1dyzB7N

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s