Opposed by content industry, because the new law will stifle commentary on copyrighted materials.
"More than 1,700 artists have signed a petition urging the government to shelve proposed amendments to the Copyright Act, while pro-democracy lawmakers have launched a filibuster campaign to delay its passage into law."
Besides the raft of new restrictions on copyright (copyright owner now has exclusive right to communication of all forms of reproduction of the work, including satire.), there is an addition of a clause to allow a non-copyright owner to initiate legal action against copyright infringers.
"88C. Notice of a alleged infringement
(1) If it is alleged that an infringement of the copyright in a work has occurred or is occurring on a service provider's service platform, a notice in respect of the alleged infringement may be given to the service provider under this section.
(2) A notice of alleged infringement -
(a) must be in writing;
(b) must be signed or otherwise authenticated by the owner of the allegedly infringed copyright or that owner's authorised representative;
…
(3) A notice of alleged infringement -
(a) must contain the name and address of the complainant and any other information that is reasonably sufficient for contacting the complainant;
What is dangerous about this is: The "complainant" could be the government taking action against political satire it doesn't like. The amendment text does say it requires the copyright owner's signature - but if you're a movie studio that regularly send your work to the government to obtain a classification for permission to show your work in theatres / broadcast of TV / sell your work in shops, then I imagine that signature of yours would be quite easy to get.
1 comment
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 13.1 ms ] thread"More than 1,700 artists have signed a petition urging the government to shelve proposed amendments to the Copyright Act, while pro-democracy lawmakers have launched a filibuster campaign to delay its passage into law."
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/196747/hong-kong-artists-cry-fo...
Besides the raft of new restrictions on copyright (copyright owner now has exclusive right to communication of all forms of reproduction of the work, including satire.), there is an addition of a clause to allow a non-copyright owner to initiate legal action against copyright infringers.
"88C. Notice of a alleged infringement
(1) If it is alleged that an infringement of the copyright in a work has occurred or is occurring on a service provider's service platform, a notice in respect of the alleged infringement may be given to the service provider under this section.
(2) A notice of alleged infringement -
(a) must be in writing;
(b) must be signed or otherwise authenticated by the owner of the allegedly infringed copyright or that owner's authorised representative;
…
(3) A notice of alleged infringement -
(a) must contain the name and address of the complainant and any other information that is reasonably sufficient for contacting the complainant;
…"
http://www.gld.gov.hk/egazette/pdf/20111522/es32011152215.pd...
What is dangerous about this is: The "complainant" could be the government taking action against political satire it doesn't like. The amendment text does say it requires the copyright owner's signature - but if you're a movie studio that regularly send your work to the government to obtain a classification for permission to show your work in theatres / broadcast of TV / sell your work in shops, then I imagine that signature of yours would be quite easy to get.