Maurice Quinlivan (Limerick City, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I wish to take the opportunity to express Sinn Féin's support for the Bill. I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Copyright and Other Intellectual Property Law Provisions Bill 2018.

We need a strategy that enables creators to live from their work while ensuring a user's right to access creative content. We need an alliance of creators' and users' rights that supports freedom of access and use while, at the same time, valuing creative work.

The Bill introduces measures aimed at modernising copyright law and includes important changes set out in the 2013 Marrakesh treaty relating to access to copyright materials for people who are blind, visually impaired or otherwise print-disabled by conditions such as dyslexia or physical conditions that prevent them from holding reading materials. Following the recent ratification by Ireland of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities I am pleased to see further progress to assist people with disabilities. Much work needs to be done to address outstanding issues in the comprehensive employment strategy for people with disabilities. Sinn Féin is happy to support the Bill but we may bring forward amendments which we believe could strengthen it.

This legislation stems from the copyright review committee 2013 report. It is regrettable that a copyright council of Ireland will not be established under the Bill, as recommended by the copyright review committee in the 2013 report.

The purpose of the council, as envisaged, would include acting as an independent advocate for the integrity of copyright, raising public awareness of copyright and promoting codes of best practice. The proposal could have provided a centralised body at the core of copyright issues in Ireland. An alternative dispute resolution facility within the copyright council could have provided quicker and less costly access to legal resources and intellectual property expertise than what is now proposed. Can the Minister outline why the Government has decided against the establishment of such a council? Surely the small cost of initially setting up a council would not act as a barrier to its establishment with all the associated benefits.

The Bill addresses anomalies identified by the copyright review committee concerning the term of copyright in literary, dramatic musical and artistic works that have not been published. The committee noted that section 24 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 could result in certain unpublished works having perpetual copyright. The copyright review committee proposed that section 24(1) of the 2000 Act be amended to clarify that copyright expires 70 years after the death of the author regardless of whether the work has been published. Section 7 of this Bill provides for such an amendment.

Section 27 concerns arrangements for legal deposit of copyright works. Section 198 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act requires publishers in the State to supply copies of books to designated libraries, including the National Library of Ireland and those of the major universities in the State. Section 27 will allow the libraries to request their copies in physical or electronic form, or both, unless the publisher has already supplied it in one of those forms. This brings the application of copyright law into line with advances in modern technologies.

Sections 4(d), 4(e) and 43 make important changes to provisions of the 2000 Act relating to the use of copyright materials for education. The term "educational establishment" is defined under the 2000 Act to include schools, universities and any establishment whose operational activities are funded by the Exchequer. Section 4(d) expands this to include all institutions that award State-recognised qualifications, such as FETAC and HETAC awards. Again, this brings the application of Irish copyright law in line with the changes in the education system since the 2000 Act was first introduced almost 20 years ago.

The provisions relating to the implementation of the Marrakesh treaty are particularly important. Section 25 creates an exception to copyright for the benefit of people with disabilities. This applies to designated bodies, the current definition of which includes all non-profit bodies that make or supply works modified to meet the special needs of persons with disabilities. Sections 24 to 26, inclusive, contain measures to give effect to requirements of the Marrakesh treaty. Conceived in line with the human rights principles outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Marrakesh treaty is the first copyright treaty to include a clear human rights perspective. The Marrakesh treaty demonstrates that copyright systems are an important part of the solution to the challenge of improving access to books and other printed works for people with print disabilities.

The World Intellectual Property Organization, an agency of the UN, maintains 285 million people are living with visual impairments throughout the world but less than 10% of all published materials are accessible to people who are blind or those with low vision. The Marrakesh treaty eases the production and transfer across national boundaries of books that are adapted for use by people with disabilities and visual impairments, most of whom live in lower-income countries. The treaty has a single objective: to increase access to books, magazines and other printed materials for people with print disabilities. It aims to achieve this by making it easier for accessible copies to be created and shared across international borders. The World Intellectual Property Organization has said that without books, journals and magazines, people who are blind or visually impaired can be cut off from major parts of life. It can mean they cannot gain an education or participate fully in society and it can mean that they cannot realise their full potential. The treaty is now in force in 35 countries. This is an important step forward for Ireland.

Why is no copyright council to be established under this Bill? Finally, I have a query relating to the new powers for the lower courts. Jurisdiction for lower courts to hear specific intellectual property claims should be narrowly restricted. Will the Minister outline the proposal in greater detail? Is the Minister confident the lower courts have the expertise to hear complex intellectual property cases? Has the Government considered other approaches, such as the establishment of a specific intellectual property court?

See this speech in context