Fringe views replace universities’ position on the Copyright Amendment Bill

 

 

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Universities South Africa (Usaf) seeks to promote optimum conditions for universities to thrive in South Africa. Therefore, it made no sense when its submission to Parliament in support of the Copyright Amendment Bill implicitly accepted a provision that would have meant that plagiarism will no longer be copyright infringement and did not recognise that the compulsory royalty provisions for authors would hinder academics writing for peer-reviewed journals.

A formatting error at the end of the document showed that the Usaf submission of July 2018 was written by one of the most vocal supporters of the numerous copyright exceptions in the Bill, a founding member of pro-Bill lobby group ReCreate, who is based at the University of the Witwatersrand.

Universities are major consumers of copyright materials and will demand greater flexibility to work with these materials and to make them accessible to their faculties and students — that is, for improved copy­right exceptions — and they cannot be faulted for this.

But a study of the Usaf submission compared with the submission made by ReCreate in the same consultation shows something else was going on.

Usaf’s submission was in response to Parliament’s consultation on a limited number of clauses in the Bill. Yet the submission went beyond that and, containing multiple errors, unreservedly enthused about the Bill’s expanded “fair use” clause and other copyright exceptions. It supported the panorama exception for photographs and films and commented on needle time for music, despite this not being something in which universities would be expected to have an interest.

A comparison between the Usaf submission and an early version of the ReCreate submission shows convergence on 10 items and differences on none.

An error in an esoteric point about collecting societies in both documents was a dead giveaway, showing that the Usaf submission had been written to reflect ReCreate’s views. With the support of professors from the American University Washington College of Law, who had disclosed that their work was funded by a grant from Google, ReCreate’s submission was corrected, but it was not followed through in the Usaf submission. Usaf’s error stood in contrast to all the other submissions and was noted by Parliament’s legal adviser.

The Usaf submission was also remarkable for what it did not address. The compulsory royalty provisions for authors in the June 2018 version of the Bill would have been a bar to any scientific journal publishing the work of a South African academic, since they conflict with the standing practice of there being no monetary remuneration for the publication of academic articles.

The copyright exception allowing a student to cut and paste copyright material into an assignment, thesis or dissertation, did not require the author to be acknowledged, thereby inadvertently permitting plagiarism under copyright law. Both provisions were improved— but not perfected— months later following advice from the panel of experts of Parliament’s portfolio committee on trade and industry.

Usaf’s submission also failed to mention an all-encompassing contract override clause that will have profound implications for universities’ relationships with publishers and collective management organisations.


Differences of opinion on whether copyright exceptions apply to given uses will now have to be determined by a reconstituted copyright tribunal or by order of court. Unlike in any other country in the world, every mutually agreed settlement of such a difference will have to be made an order of court to have effect in law, with a judgment recorded against the university as the defendant.

Usaf’s submission supported clauses in the Bill not relevant to universities. It did not deal with clauses that go to the heart of ethics and practices at institutions of higher education, or even consider academic authors and university presses. One has to ask whether universities gaveUsaf the authority to make this submission.

Unisa made a completely different submission through its research chair in law, society and technology. Stellenbosch University wrote to the consultation’s email distribution list that the Usaf submission did not reflect its views and that it and other universities had not been consulted about it.

If Usaf’s submission, based as it was on ReCreate’s position, did not follow a meaningful internal approval process, then one is compelled to conclude that it did not represent the collective view of South Africa’s universities and that its platform was taken over by ReCreate.

That the submission wanted to create the impression that there was broad support for the Bill is apparent from its first paragraph, which states that Usaf is “the national representative for 26 public universities in South Africa” and “the voice for the sector.”

ReCreate followed through after the Bill had been passed with an open letter in April 2019, calling for the president’s immediate assent to the Bill. An earlier draft of the open letter claimed “our organisations represent over half a million South Africans” and a drafting note assumed that Usaf would co-sign.

But when Usaf and other institutions on whose support ReCreate relied did not co-sign, ReCreate still sent its open letter to the president with the same unsubstantiated claim about the half a million South Africansit represented.

On Monday there will be an “indaba” at Wits University about the “impasse” on the constitutionality of the Bill, organised by the same people behind ReCreate, with the topics framed in the terms of ReCreate’s arguments why the Bill is supposedly constitutional. Yet the invitations to the indaba make no mention of ReCreate, presenting it as being co-hosted by Wits University and the American UniversityWashington College of Law.

Fringe views on copyright held by ReCreate and its supporters have been presented as academic opinion in support of the highly controversial Bill, not only in the submission to Parliament written for Usaf.

These fringe views had privileged access to the government at the expense of creators and investors in the creative economy, and are on the brink of being foisted onto South Africa as law.

The country’s benefits from mutual international recognition of copyright and its creative economy have already encountered the stress resulting from the government having heeded this siren call without having conducted proper assessments and policy formulation in developing the Bill.

André Myburgh is a South African lawyer based in Basel, Switzerland, where he specialises in copyright policy and legislation internationally. He was a member of the panel of experts established by the portfolio committee on trade and industry to advise on the Copyright Amendment Bill. He also advises the Copyright Coalition for South Africa, whose members have challenged the constitutionality of the Bill

These are unprecedented times, and the role of media to tell and record the story of South Africa as it develops is more important than ever. But it comes at a cost. Advertisers are cancelling campaigns, and our live events have come to an abrupt halt. Our income has been slashed.

The Mail & Guardian is a proud news publisher with roots stretching back 35 years. We’ve survived thanks to the support of our readers, we will need you to help us get through this.

To help us ensure another 35 future years of fiercely independent journalism, please subscribe.

Andre Myburgh
Guest Author
Advertising

Coalition politics and law: The fight over Tshwane

With coalition politics on the rise, particularly in local government, this kind of court case is likely to become more common

High court declares Dudu Myeni delinquent

Disgraced former SAA chairperson Dudu Myeni has been declared a delinquent director by the...

SANDF inquiry clears soldiers of the death of Collins Khosa

The board of inquiry also found that it was Khosa and his brother-in-law Thabiso Muvhango who caused the altercation with the defence force members

No back to school for teachers just yet

Last week the basic education minister was adamant that teachers will return to school on May 25, but some provinces say not all Covid-19 measures are in place to prevent its spread
Advertising

Press Releases

Road to recovery for the tourism sector: The South African perspective

The best-case scenario is that South Africa's tourism sector’s recovery will only begin in earnest towards the end of this year

What Africa can learn from Cuba in combating the Covid-19 pandemic

Africa should abandon the neoliberal path to be able to deal with Covid-19 and other health system challenges likely to emerge in future

Coexisting with Covid-19: Saving lives and the economy in India

A staggered exit from the lockdown accompanied by stepped-up testing to cover every district is necessary for India right now

Covid-19: Eased lockdown and rule of law Webinar

If you are arrested and fined in lockdown, you do get a criminal record if you pay the admission of guilt fine

Covid-19 and Frontline Workers

Who is caring for the healthcare workers? 'Working together is how we are going to get through this. It’s not just a marathon, it’s a relay'.

PPS webinar Part 2: Small business, big risk

The risks that businesses face and how they can be dealt with are something all business owners should be well acquainted with

Call for applications for the position of GCRO executive director

The Gauteng City-Region Observatory is seeking to appoint a high-calibre researcher and manager to be the executive director and to lead it

DriveRisk stays safe with high-tech thermal camera solution

Itec Evolve installed the screening device within a few days to help the driver behaviour company become compliant with health and safety regulations

The best local and international journalism

handpicked and in your inbox every weekday