CREATIVE COMMONS GLOBAL SUMMIT FINALE

The Creative Commons Global Summit 2013 concluded on Saturday, with a full day (literally – not even a break for lunch!) of talks on a wide variety of subjects. Favorite subjects seem to be CC as applied in the real world – in the creative industries, in open government, and in open educational resources (OER).

 

With CC Summit concluded, it's time to celebrate!
Van Der Helst,
Celebration of the Peace of Münster, 1648

Also notable were discussions about copyright reforms and copyright developments around the world. One speaker provided a fascinating review of 22 Arab countries and their varied approaches to copyright exceptions. For example, most Arab countries provide some form of compulsory license to translate documents into Arabic (i.e., with or without the consent of the author). Some of the countries extend this to anybody with a desire to do the translation, whereas other countries restrict the license to specific translators (e.g., libraries or government) or to specific documents.

CC licensing activities by a group of Egyptian short film makers provided a welcome indication that, despite (or in some cases because of?) the turmoil in that country, creative industries continue to create.

Finally, closing remarks by the CC Argentina affiliate gave a good indication just how much work went into preparation for such a substantial and successful Global Summit. There has been talk of hosting a future Global Summit in Africa, which would certainly be welcome, but this blogger’s head spins at the thought of organizing visas and other travel documents for 200 attendees from every continent!

Immediately after the formal ending of the conference, African delegates took the opportunity to gather and discuss CC’s activities on the Continent. In attendance were delegates from (in no particular order) Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, South Africa, Nigeria, and Ghana.  Although this blogger was forced to leave early so as not to miss his departing flight, the discussion was lively and informative. With the addition of CC Kenya this year, and with CC Ghana seemingly just around the corner, the footprint of CC in Africa is rapidly and deservedly growing.

And so, a final thought. This CC Global Summit was, reportedly, the best attended Summit to date in terms of number of Affiliates. Indeed the diversity of attendees was quite impressive. In this age of ever-expanding copyright protection, it is comforting to have seen the varied and tireless efforts by CC and CC affiliates to push for open content.

This was first posted on Afro-IP.

THUS SPOKE THE CREATIVE COMMONS BOARD OF DIRECTORS

It's Day 2 of the Creative Commons Global Summit 2013 in Buenos Aires. This Leo has chillingly discovered that Buenos Aires is farther south than Cape Town, and the weather (4° today!) reflects the latitude.

Today started with a panel discussion by 6 of the members of the CC Board of Directors.

The CC Board doesn't wear black suits.
Henri Gervex, 1890,
"The Board of Directors of La Republique Francaise"

A notable remark was made by Lawrence Lessig, co-founder of CC and presenter extraordinaire. He commented that CC is partly political by nature, but that it is not in CC’s best interest to have a “creed” or “mantra” that is “recited every week as is done in many churches.” His [reasonable] reasoning is that CC’s strength lies in the difficulty to say what CC actually is and stands for. CC includes activists, liberals, conservatives, radicals, and people from every continent, so there are a huge variety of views expressed by CC supporters. This makes it difficult for opponents to target CC and discredit CC’s activities. [This also makes maintaining the CC community much like an exercise in herding cats, or leos.]

Lessig continued later on to say that his whole life now is figuring out how CC prevents itself from being captured by it’s funders. The political system in the US [as in most many other countries] has been captured by donors, and is thus unable to serve the people it is supposed to serve.

Paul Brest, the Board Chair (and former Dean of the Stanford Law School) addressed a question about micropayments. An audience member [a Kenyan, notes this Leo with pride] asked the Board for their opinion on requesting every CC user to donate USD1 ($1), which would possibly raise many millions of dollars in a year. Paul Brest responded that it’s a good idea but asked two questions in response: how many audience members have visited the CC website in the last week, and how many have visited Wikipedia in the last day. The answer should be self evident, and he suggested that it indicates why micropayments probably won’t work well in practice.

Audience members didn’t drop the issue, and pushed the Board to redouble their efforts in making micropayments a significant revenue source. Cathy Casserly, the CC CEO [so many C's!], remarked that they have tried and it simply has not worked. But the Board agreed that efforts should continue. This blogger agrees that Wikipedia (which generates much/most of their revenue from a 1-month-per-year fundraising effort targeted at users) is far more “visible” to it’s users, and that CC’s activities and functionality is less amendable to micropayments.

Lessig pointed out a fascinating conflict that has so far largely prevented CC and Facebook from collaborating.  CC’s position is “permanent and free availability of CC-licensed content.” But Facebook is legally required to tell users that they can, if desired, permanently delete their Facebook account and uploaded content [really? this blogger thought that it was impossible to permanently delete a Facebook account.]. So if Facebook starts allowing users to license content under CC, there is a conflict with their legal requirements.

Michael Carroll (another CC co-founder) concluded the panel with a discussion of CC’s role in advocating for copyright law reform. CC is active in pushing for a more open copyright law, but he stated that, even with a “perfect” copyright law, CC would still be necessary. This blogger doesn’t understand why that’s even a question, since any copyright law would grant right(s), and the ability to license such rights follows automatically. CC would be unnecessary only if copyright law didn’t exist at all.

This blogger has one suggestion for the CC Board, and it is hoped that the suggestion is taken not as criticism but as encouragement. CC has become truly global (the Summit demonstrates this – Affiliate groups are on every continent and are numerous), but the Board has remained almost entirely White. This blogger would like to see the Board diversify and reflect the wide variety of users and supporters of CC.

This was first posted on Afro-IP.

CREATIVE COMMONS GLOBAL SUMMIT OPENS IN BUENOS AIRES

This week this Leo has traveled far to the southeast, and is enjoying wintery Buenos Aires where Creative Commons is holding their Global Summit 2013.

CC's Summit is more interesting than
Francois Brunery's "A Tedious Conference" 

Creative Commons (CC) is a San Francisco based NGO that provides six “plug-n-play” copyright licenses. CC now has a presence all over the world, and recently expanded to include affiliate organizations in Kenya.

The Summit is three days, and Day 1 has opened with an introduction to the work of CC and the major topics that are keeping them busy. Specifically:

1. Stewarding the Commons. CC is leading (or pushing from behind the scenes) a number of Open Policy initiatives such as Open Data, Open Access, Open Educational Resources, and the like. Also, there was much discussion of the imminent launch of “4.0”, the revised group of CC licenses that are designed to address a number of technological and policy advancements since the implementation of the 3.0 version.

2. Develop Innovative Products. CC treats their licenses as “products for consumption”, and would like more people to consider themselves “users” of the CC products. For example, on Flickr and YouTube, you can select a CC license for your posted videos/photos. Most people who do so still consider that they are primarily a Flickr or YouTube user.  CC would like them to begin thinking that they are also primarily a CC user.

3. Strengthen the Affiliate Network. As mentioned, CC has recently expanded to include affiliate organizations in Kenya, and other activities are occurring worldwide. The big question raised at the Summit is how the Affiliates view CC as a forward-thinking organization, and what function will it serve in 10 years time? Also noteworthy was an ongoing movement to “Free Bassel”. Bassel is the name of the CC Syria Affiliate Lead; he is in jail due to his work in open information.

4. Increase Community Uptake. CC licenses are easy to use and easy to understand, which is ideal for many of the users and would-be users (who are typically artists rather than lawyers or academics). The challenge now is to get publishers and government to adopt an “Open” policy such as open textbooks, open data, etc. Here this blogger must point out that Kenya’s government was the first in Sub-Saharan Africa to have an online Open Data portal, although the success of that portal has been waning of late.

5. Fundraising. We were told that 98% of CC funding comes from US-based foundations. This is not a sustainable or healthy funding model (particularly for an organization that is 10 years old) and the CC headquarters recognizes the limitations. The challenge is to determine ways to monetize CC’s “products”.

More as the Summit progresses……

This was first posted on Afro-IP.

DATA AND DATABASES UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 4.0 LICENSE

As Creative Commons (CC) gets ready to release their version 4.0 licenses (see earlier post here), the question arises: how do the new CC licenses address the sui generis database rights?  This was a subject of several sessions in the current CC Global Summit 2013 in Buenos Aires.

"Have you heard? We can soon be licensed under CC 4.0!"
(Guercino, 1637, Allegory of Painting and Sculpture)

Databases and data present interesting IP challenges.  Some countries offer copyright protection, and others (particularly Europe) provide a sui generis protection.

Databases cover an enormous variety of situations, and the first question that might be asked is “what is a database?” For example, a speaker at the Summit informs us that Wikimedia considers and treats Wikipedia as a non-database (i.e., they openly and explicitly state that they do not consider Wikipedia a database). Yet it’s an organized collection of data, and all of the data in Wikipedia is clearly stored in a database, so is it a database despite the clear and contrary statements of the owner?

In any case, Wikimedia uses the CC0 (Creative Commons Zero) license, which tells the world that they reserve no rights (if such rights exist) in their product.

Any database can have two types of protection – one for the “shell” (i.e., the structure) of the database, and one for the contents. For example, a database of paintings can have protection for the structure or selection or arrangement of the database, and each painting stored in the database has it’s own separate copyright protection.

The default position of the CC 4.0 licenses deals with all of these rights as a whole – i.e., it does not distinguish between the two types. All of the rights owned by the licensor (whether to the database shell or the works therein or both) are treated the same under the selected CC license.

So, for example, if the database is created by the author of the works contained therein, then the license will apply to both the database shell and the contents. This is different from the Open Database License, which only applies to the “shell”. Often times, though, the licensor doesn’t hold the rights to license the contents, so users of a CC licensed database need to be aware that a single license may not be sufficient.

It was clear from the discussions that even the participants in this CC Summit were confused by database protection and the applicability of CC licenses to data and databases. This does not bode well, since most “average” users will hardly have even heard of CC or sui generis database protection. It might be worthwhile for CC and other like-minded organizations to devote additional resources to public awareness in this area.

This was first posted on Afro-IP

DIARY OF A PATENT ATTORNEY IN KENYA: PATENT DRAFTING COURSES

In August, two separate courses related to patent drafting are planned in Nairobi.

A Master and His Pupil
Giovanni Do, c. 1637-8

The first course is five days from 5^th to 9^th August, and is sponsored by Kenyatta University (KU), a public university. The course is on Patent Drafting and Dispute Resolution, and includes two “Patent Specialists” as instructors.

The second course is four days from 12^th to 15^th August, and is co-sponsored by the Kenya Industrial Property Institute (KIPI, the Kenya patent and trademark office) and the Center for Intellectual Property and Information Technology (CIPIT). The focus here is Patent Drafting and Patent Prosecution, and the instructors include this Leo and KIPI examiners.

The very existence of two (quite substantial) courses in one month indicates that Kenya is now focusing resources and attention on patents. The question for this Leo is whether such focus is an indication that Kenyans are embracing patenting. Over the past decade or so, KIPI has been issuing less than about 15 patents per year to Kenyan applicants. Do these new courses signal that an increase in the number of applications is occurring or is likely to occur in the near future? Only time will tell, but there is a Buddhist proverb that says, "When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."

One thing should be kept in mind about these courses. Learning to draft patents is a process that typically takes many months (or years) under the supervision of an experienced patent attorney/agent. A one-week course can, at best, be only an introduction to the patent drafting process. Further classes and significant direct tutelage is required for an aspiring drafter to learn the trade.

This Leo will be teaching in the KIPI/CIPIT course, and looks forward to identifying a few individuals with “the right stuff” – i.e., a passion for writing, an interest in science/technology, and the time and patience to learn a skill that is currently almost unknown in Kenya.

This was first posted on Afro-IP

Africa and Climate Change Technologies

An interesting 3-day conference just concluded at Strathmore University in Nairobi, Kenya.  Simply titled “Conference on Climate Change and Innovation in Africa”, the host was the Kenya Climate Innovation Center (KCIC).

The Portrait of Dr. Simarro at the Microscope
Joaquín Sorolla y Batisda, 1897

According to their website, “The Kenya CIC is an initiative supported by the World Bank’sinfoDev and is the first in a global network of CICs being launched by infoDev’s Climate Technology Program (CTP). “  The KCIC mission is “to provide an integrated set of services, activities and programmes that empowers Kenyan entrepreneurs to deliver innovative climate technology solutions” (emphasis mine). The World Bank and the UK and Danish governments (via the funding agencies UKaid and Danida, respectively) are major sponsors of KCIC.

It is appropriate that KCIC is housed at Strathmore University, because Strathmore has been recognized for producing the first three green (LEED certified) buildings in Africa. Other green buildings have followed, including the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) building and a private bank building, both in Nairobi. Indeed the UNEP building is said to have Africa’s largest on-roof solar installation.

Does such activity suggest that technology transfer is alive and well in the construction and green technology industries in Kenya?  To some degree, probably so, but at least the Strathmore buildings were designed by a local architect, and there is little evidence (from this blogger’s observations) that advanced or new green technologies were employed. Most buildings in Nairobi use very little energy because the mild climate makes heating and air conditioning unnecessary. Extensive natural lighting (the entire roof is glass) further reduces energy use but is hardly an advanced technology.  Water reclamation, too, is nothing new.

Indeed, the EPO and UNEP recently published an extensive report on Clean Energy Technlogies (CET), patents, and tech transfer. Says the report “The results show that less than 1 % of all patent applications relating to CET have been filed in Africa.” Such little patenting activity suggests that tech transfer of CET to Africa (when it occurs) is likely in the form of aid or as a donation from the inventor/patentee, as opposed to licensing or collaborative agreements with African companies and governments.  

Getting back to the conference, WIPO was a major sponsor and provided a practical seminar for licensing out technologies. This follows the KCIC mission of empowering Kenyans to “deliver” technology solutions. I love this mission, because it shifts the conversation from traditional aid to support of home-grown technology solutions.

The KCIC is very new (less than 1 year old), so it will be interesting to watch and see whether the initiative actually promotes delivery of local climate change technologies.  At least this blogger wishes the KCIC the best of luck in achieving their mission!

This was first posted on AfroIP here.

Ancient Egypt and IP: old meets new

Two of your newest Leos spent last week in hot, hot Cairo, attending a conference of OpenAIR. This post is not about the conference, but rather about my impression of Egypt: old, and impressive.

Battle of Pyramids
Francois L.J. Watteau, 1798

In California, where this Leo likes to say he originates (technically not true), anything over 100 years old is REALLY old.  Houses over 50 years old garner a lot of sympathy, as most people assume the owner is too poor to raze the house and build something modern and hideous.

In Kenya, where this Leo now calls home, anything tangible (i.e., not counting TK or TCEs here) over 100 years old is ANCIENT. Modern Nairobi didn’t exist before 1900. Prehistoric footprints and skeletons abound, but there is precious little in the way of massive free-standing man-made stone structures.

So, as cliché as they are, the pyramids (clocking in at nearly 4000 years old) are really quite impressive and, well, old. What does this have to do with IP? More than you might think.

Perhaps the greatest mystery of all time (other than how many times William Shatner will be able to reinvent his career) is how the ancient Egyptians, without any modern machinery, were able to move 2.3 million blocks of solid rock, each weighing up to 80 tons, into a massive structure that has stood for over four millennia. Did they use ramps? Did they roll the stones over logs?  Alien assistance, perhaps?

Could you ask for a better example supporting the argument that Traditional Knowledge should be categorized and recorded? In view of this tragic loss of information, South Africa’s recent move (Afro IP post here) toward building a database of TK is welcomed.

From a patent perspective (this might be stretching things a bit), I suspect one could still patent the method used for making the pyramids, were it to be determined today. The very public presence of the pyramids would seem to imply inventive step issues, but perhaps not. Secondary considerations, such as “long felt need” or “failure of others”, can be used to overcome an obviousness rejection in the US. Certainly, an enabling disclosure of the method of construction is not known to exist (evidence: thousands of years of speculation, not a single theory is satisfactory or even entirely plausible, etc.).

Finally, perhaps countries should be able to obtain some sort of protection of their national landmarks. Some form of hybrid protection between trademarks and geographic indications would enable Egypt to take action against a certain hotel in Las Vegas, or against Hollywood for countless sci-fi films.

This was first posted on AfroIP here.