Copyright is meant to allow authors and publishers of textbooks to earn their due share of income, while creating incentives to make textbooks accessible.
But it isn’t working for students and teachers in South Africa. In 2003, the Department of Education (DoE) spent R1,3-billion purchasing primary and secondary school textbooks. By the DoE’s own admission, the textbooks procured fell far short of the need. That same year, in a review of the financing, resourcing and costs of education in public schools, the DoE wrote: ‘The price of textbooks warrants special attention, partly because textbooks constitute such a large portion of the state’s expenditure on education — partly because textbooks are probably the most important input, at the margin, in producing learning achievement, and partly because of certain peculiarities in the textbook market — some views suggest that the textbook industry may not be sufficiently competitive, and that it is characterised by too many sole-supplier situations to ensure competitive prices. Higher prices could allow producers to make abnormally high profits, or might simply sustain inefficient production processes.”
The DoE is spending too much money on too few books – which is ironic, given that it is the publishing industry’s largest client and accounts for half the industry’s turnover. It is operating in an environment where resources are too scarce to meet competing needs. In 2000, the DoE’s Register of Needs Report found that only 20% of government schools had libraries, only 57% had electricity and only 12% had computers for learning. The education system is cash-starved. Not so the publishers. Pearson Education (among the largest educational publishers in the world, and a major supplier of textbooks in South Africa) posted an operating profit of R3,5-billion last year.
In a 2004 report on the cost of books, the Print Industries Cluster Council (PICC) concluded that South Africa is ‘not a reading nation” – based on its approximation that only 4% of the population buys books. The PICC said the question confronting policy should not be ‘Are books expensive?” but rather, ‘How are we going to get people to read?”.
The fact is, we are only going to ‘get people to read” once books become affordable. The publishing industry owes us an explanation as to why a recommended textbook such as Nelson Mandela’s autobiography, Long Walk to Freedom, costs so much more in South Africa than it does in the United States. And why an essential support book such as the Concise Oxford English Dictionary is available in India at a third of its South African price.
Over-the-counter prices do not reflect the vast income differences between the US and South Africa. To appreciate what the price of R154 for Mandela’s autobiography in South Africa means, we should consider that this is equivalent to paying R1 700 for the book in the US. There are several factors restricting access to learning materials other than excessive prices. Among the ‘bundle” of rights conferred upon a rights owner (typically, the author) or rights holder (the publisher) is the right to copy. At the moment, copying is permitted for personal use only. There are a set of exceptions for teachers and libraries listed in the regulations, but they are generally considered unworkable. It would no doubt come as a surprise to many school teachers that by photocopying a limited amount of material for students, they are breaking the law and could face fines of up to R3 000 per infringement, or three years in jail, or both. Confronted with poor students and soaring book prices, teachers need a law that enables them to overcome situations of acute resource shortage, both at school and in poor students’ homes.
Our laws should also promote the adaptation of essential learning materials into indigenous languages and formats suitable for the sensory disabled. Currently, the right to adapt is a disused, neglected portion of the publishing domain: most often, these rights are never invoked. The publishing industry has no use for them, since these are considered to be unprofitable market segments, but the rights are locked up anyway, just so that no one else can get them. A policy that recognised these unused rights and put them in the public domain would spur a much-needed publishing cottage industry, and do an enormous service to teachers of such traditionally disadvantaged learners.
National legislation in other poor countries, such as India, Pakistan and the Philippines, have copyright provisions that explicitly promote access to learning materials. The Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights urges countries to use intellectual property protection in sovereign interest; and the World Intellectual Property Organisation is meeting next month to chalk out a ‘Development Agenda.”
Access to learning materials is a development priority, the cornerstone of a sound educational policy. To acknowledge this, we must first recognise that South Africa is a developing country – even if the publishing industry doesn’t.
Thami Ncokwane is the policy and research coordinator at the South African Students’ Congress. Achal Prabhala coordinates the Access to Learning Materials Project in Southern Africa at the Consumer Institute SA.
Fast facts
Textbooks take a big portion of the Department of Education’s (DoE) budget. In 2003, the department spent R1,3-billion on textbooks for primary and secondary school learners.
In 2000 the DoE found in its Register of Needs Report that only 20% of the schools had libraries, only 57% had electricity and only 12% of the schools had computers.
The Print Industries Cluster Council concluded that South Africa lacks a reading culture based on the fact that approximately 4% of the population buys books.
Teachers are not allowed to copy more than a very small percentage of any learning materials and are barred from making more than nine copies per term.
Publishers in South Africa insist that the violation of this copyright law should be declared a criminal offence.
Education experts suggest that the law should be relaxed to allow for reasonable reproduction of learning materials by teachers in impoverished areas.
This could also promote the production of learning materials in indigenous languages and cater to the sensory disabled learners.
Production and access to learning materials should be linked to the realities facing South Africa as a developing country.