By
Emmanuel Legrand
How should the Copyright Office be structured and what functions should it perform
in the 21st
Century? This are not simply rhetorical questions. The subject
matters because of the central role that the United States Copyright
Office (USCO) plays in shaping the country's copyright policies,
administering existing copyright laws, and being the country's registry
of copyrighted works.
“Copyright
itself has grown in importance over the years and the role of CO has
changed to a point that the CO is a centre for creative industries,”
said Troy Dow, VP/Counsel at the The Walt Disney Company during a
seminar titled “A Copyright Office for the 21st Century”
organised in Washington, DC on March 18 by the Duke Law School Center
for Innovation Policy and the New York University Law School’s
Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy.
“The
CO has been critically important in the development of copyright law
and has been heavily involved in shaping copyright law,” Dow added.
“We have to make sure that its structure and status reflects its
mission.”
Defining missions
But
what should be the missions of the Office? The discussion is
particularly timely at the moment because several key issues need to
be addressed regarding the future of the USCO in the coming months
and years. The USCO was established
in 1897 by Congress as a separate department of the Library of
Congress, and its initial task was to dealing with copyright
registration, which was previously the responsibility of district
courts. This
function is still performed today by the USCO. It processes over
700,000 registrations a year of books, music, movies, software,
photographs, and other works of authorship.
The
USCO also works as an expert to Congress on copyright issues and
works with a wide range of government agencies, from the Department
of Justice to the US Trade Representative. The
USCO has itself initiated the debate, first by publishing in 2015 a
strategic plan covering the period 2016-2020, titled “Positioningthe United States Copyright Office for the Future”
in which current Register of Copyrights Maria Pallante expressed her
“vision” for the USCO: a “lean, nimble, results-driven, and
future-focused” organisation.
In
addition, acting at the request of the House Committee on
Appropriations, the USCO has issued on February 29 a Notice of
Inquiry seeking public comments on its funding strategies and
implementation timeline for its Provisional Information TechnologyModernization Plan and Cost Analysis.
(The deadline for submitting comments on the plan is March 31, 2016.)
IT modernisation
This
is particularly sensitive as the USCO's IT system is dependent on
that of the Library of Congress and is in need a major overhaul to
perform its tasks in a digital environment (anyone who has tried to
register a work or researched past registrations can testify to
that). If adopted (and financed by Congress), the $165m five-year
plan would see the Office adopt a drastic new cloud-based system.
USCO's Maria Pallante |
“It
is clear that making incremental improvements will not be enough,”
wrote Pallante in the report’s executive summary. “We must
shift the approach entirely, and the IT Plan therefore provides a
flexible platform that others can build upon for the effortless
protection and licensing of copyrighted works.”
According
to the participants to the Duke/NYU conference, the IT overhaul is a
necessity, but the ways to get there are multiple. This investment
would part of a larger picture which incorporates the two main
functions that the USCO serves: The registration and recordation
role; and the regulatory and adjudicatory functions.
Jim
Griffin, Managing Director of digital consultancy company OneHouse,
is of the opinion that the sheer mass of data that flows through the
USCO's system requires drastic approaches. “If the purpose of
copyright is to incentivise creativity then we're doing a fine job.
Generally there's lots of creativity and content,” said Griffin.
“But how do you keep up with all that stuff. The answer what the CO
needs to be doing is MORE because there is more stuff, and the pot
grows every single year. And the answer to dealing with more is to do
less, and re-focus our priorities.”
Managing data
Griffin
believes that the CO alone cannot cope with the volume of data and
advocates for a public-private partnership. “We cannot leave the CO
confront this huge amount of content with the same resources,” said
Griffin, who added that the answer would be to create bridges between
public and private interests in order to create a market for
registration.
For
example, photographers could expedite registration of the pictures
they take through existing platforms like Instagram or Flicker. Matt
Schruers, VP for Law and Policy at the Computer & Communications
Industry Association, said that it was not difficult to add a
specific software to existing platforms to deal with a function of
registration into the software.
Jeff
Sedlik, President and CEO of the PLUS Coalition, which regroups various
photographers' representative bodies, said that a news photographer
could add up to 1,000 pictures a day and usually has neither the time
nor the resources to register all these pictures. “When platforms
can allow to identify the works, everybody benefits,” said Sedlik.
“But we need to keep the registration control under the guidance of
the new CO.”
Christopher
Springman, from the NYU School of Law, suggested that the USCO should
continue to play a role in registration, but as the “regulator of
the registration system not the operator. The CO would set the rules
for the system, how data should be stored, and it should be handled
by private companies a little bit like the domain name system works.”
An independent agency?
The
debate on the future of the USCO also turned on what should the
mission of the new USCO be and where should the Office fit within the
US government structure. Some advocated for the USCO to become an
independent government agency, free from its affiliation with the
Library of Congress, with a Register of Copyright, or a CEO, named by
the President of the United States, serving at the request of
both the White House and Congress. In recent communications, the
current Register of Copyright, Maria Pallante, also seemed to favour
such approach.
Pam
Samuelson, Professor of Law at the University of California at
Berkeley, said she favoured a CO as an independent agency, but she added a few
caveats. To fully function and reflect the complexity of the
situations it has to deal with, as well as taking into consideration different
perspectives, the CO should add to its staff “a well respected”
chief economist; a “very talented” chief technology officer who
would not deal with internal IT issues but rather participate in advising
the CO on technology issues; a social scientist to do qualitative and
quantitative researches; and an ombudsman “who would take a higher
perspective.” “Copyright affects everybody and the CO would
benefit from people who would bring new perspectives,” said
Samuelson.
For
Sandra Aistars, Clinical Professor of Law at the George Mason
University School of Law in Arlington, Virginia, a 21st
Century version of the Copyright Office “needs to include more the
individual creators and also the public” and should also take
adjudicatory functions to help creatives.
There
were, however, different views when it came to regulatory
functions. Disney's Dow would want the USCO to have more regulatory
responsibilities but warned that “you have to have the resources to
make sure you succeed in that space.” His views were echoed by
Joseph Liu, Professor of Law at Boston College Law School, who also
suggested that the regulatory fields covered by the USCO should be
selective. “Copyright law is as complex as tax law,” he said. “There
are obviously lot of big issues to walk through.”
Google's way
A
dissonant voice came from William Patry, Senior Copyright Counsel at
Google, who agreed that the USCO had “not been funded properly”
to do what it was meant to do, but he drew the line with things that
the Office currently does not do and could be tasked to do if it
became a regulatory agency. “The Copyright Office has an institutional
memory, and that is good," said Patry. “There are things that the CO
does not do. It does not make fair use determination or damages in
cases. These are all common law things. It does not make a lot of
sense to give more responsibility [to the USCO] where it does not
have institutional expertise. I'd say the same thing for a small claims
tribunal.”
Patry
added, “If you had a number of huge areas now handled by Congress
or the courts [passed on to the USCO], you would still need to give
guidance to the CO through the law. I don't see Congress delegating
some fundamental issues without ensuring guidelines. I don't see much
of an upside. I don't think Congress is actually that bad.”
[Patry
also said, while Mary Rasenberger, Executive Director of The Authors
Guild, was sitting next to him, that he saw no problem “in getting
more money in authors' pockets.” As the case Google vs. Authors
Guild on the digitisation of books is to be reviewed soon by the US
Supreme Court, the irony of this statement was not lost on the
audience...]
Rasenberger
took the opposive of Patry's views by advocating for “an
independent US CO that should not be within the LoC” and whose head
should be a presidential appointee. She also would see the CO have
“broader” regulatory powers. “In most countries, copyright law
sets the principles, and then you create regulation along these
lines,” she explained.
Rasenberger
is also less keen to see Congress getting involved in copyright
issues. “Congress can't keep pace with technological changes and
when it does gets something like the DMCA [Digital Millennium
Copyright Act], it is heavily negotiated and then when technology
changes, [the law] can't keep up. The world so much more complex
today. There are so many issues in which Congress has left gaps and
the CO could help with those. Congress is the right place to discuss
what the frame should be, then it should have to get the expert
agency to implement the law. That is what other countries do.”