Covering Letter
Dear Victoria Pearson;
Thank you for once again offering me the opportunity to share my thoughts and comments on the various copyright issues raised by digital technology and media, and on the Ministry's recent position paper. I am attaching my response to the position paper as an MS Word file. If you would prefer an alternative format, just let me know and I can reformat and resend.
For the most part, I think that the Ministry's approach and positions are useful. While I still feel that a reconceptualization of copyright would be beneficial, I also recognize the political and possible economic realities that limit the ability to present more radical reforms. Thus, I have tried to make practical comments and suggestions to the specific issues raised, while occasionally also presenting a more visionary argument.
I also want to be open in my bias. I firmly believe that the role of copyright policy should be to encourage both the creation of intellectual property and its use and not merely the ability to commercially exploit such work. To that end the goal of copyright should be to balance owner and user rights, to limit the monopoly rights of owners and to permit socially valuable exceptions. I am heartened that this seems to be an underlying principle in the Ministry's position paper. I also firmly believe that digital media and technology have the potential to transform the information and communication environment in positive ways, and that the development, diffusion, and widespread utilization digital media and communication systems (in particular the Internet) should be fostered. There is a tremendous potential for social value and benefit in such systems. Copyright should not be used to hamper or restrict such development; at a minimum it should be technologically neutral, although I think that strong arguments could be made to promote diffusion and use of new media. I do recognize that such arguments may be outside of the specific mandate of this examination of policy, and do applaud the Ministry's concern that whatever copyright changes emerge be as technologically neutral as possible.
Anyway, my response is attached, and let me say, once again, that I thank you for the opportunity to talk with you and the group during my visit to New Zealand, and for the opportunity to respond to the position paper. If you should have any questions, or if you feel it might be useful for me to clarify or expand on some of the responses, please feel free to let me know.
Sincerely,
Benjamin J. Bates
Professor,
College of Communication and Information
University of Tennessee
Back to Top