Plans to enable researchers to use computerised techniques to read information contained in journal articles without infringing publishers' rights have drawn "strongly divided" views from the industry, the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) has said. The IPO has published (40-page/450KB PDF) a summary of responses it received to …
Wondering why copyright holders are reviled?
"opposing views had been submitted on other planned reforms to copyright, including allowing education bodies to copy protected works into new formats for student learning"
AKA We like screwing money out of schools - they aren''t spending their own money so ridiculous fees are easier to extract
"There was also dispute over whether copyrighted works could be used in quotation and in reporting current events without infringement"
AKA We'd like to stop anyone posting negative articles about our stuff
Rights holders, though, argued that introducing any "general measure" to prevent contractual override of copyright exceptions "would constitute an unduly excessive restriction of freedom to contract"
AKA We'd like to avoid following those laws designed to stop unfair practices - "Slave owners argued that introducing a general measure preventing contractual override of human rights would constitute an unduly excessive restriction of freedom to contract"
Rights holders also campaigned for a planned 'private copying' exception to be limited to physical products only, and specifically prevent individuals copying digital content into cloud storage services for private use.
AKA feel free to allow stuff that no-one will be doing by the time this comes into force, we want to carry on screwing our customers in the future.
hard at work, lobbying.
So, copyright holders do not want the copyright rules relaxed, whereas users of copyright material do want the rules relaxed.
Are we surprised by this ?