Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Copyright Exemptions to Facilitate Access to Published Works for the Print Disabled – The Gap Between National Laws and the Standards Required by the Marrakesh Treaty

  • Article
  • Published:
IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The issue of whether and to what extent the law of copyright should provide exemptions in order to facilitate access to published works by the blind, visually impaired and print disabled is complex and emotive, integrating a variety of areas of law, most notably intellectual property and human rights law. The issue has recently been debated on the international stage in the drawing up of the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired, or Otherwise Print Disabled (WIPO Doc VIP/DC/8, hereinafter: the Marrakesh Treaty). The Treaty aims to facilitate the availability of published works in accessible format copies by requiring Member States to provide a limitation or exception in their national copyright laws permitting authorized entities to reproduce a published work in an accessible format, and distribute it without the authorization of the copyright holder to persons who are blind, visually impaired or experiencing other print disabilities. However, the journey to passing the Marrakesh Treaty was by no means linear and involved the expression of often divergent views by the member countries in the international context. This divergence of opinion is reflected in the vastly varying levels of support for related copyright exceptions and limitations provided in the laws of nations around the world. The Marrakesh Treaty was adopted at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) diplomatic conference on 27 June 2013. It is, however, pertinent to note that this treaty will not enter into force until it has received 20 ratifications (Art. 18.). As attention now moves to ratification and implementation of the treaty by Member States, it will be useful to examine the nature of the gap that presently exists between national laws and the standards required by the treaty, and to thereby evaluate whether and to what extent the provisions of the treaty are likely to be implemented in the domestic laws of the Member States. To this end, this article begins by providing a global overview of the copyright exemptions presently in operation in various nations. Thereafter, some specific issues concerning the treaties reflected in the drafts proposed by different countries will be discussed. These issues will be the subject of the first two parts of the discussion. The third part outlines the ambit of the Marrakesh Treaty and points out issues needing further clarification. The conclusion analyzes the prospects of final ratification by reference to the willingness of Member States to adapt their national copyright laws to the Marrakesh Treaty – a willingness that may be indicated by their current legal practices and their contributions to the treaty.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. There are around 58 countries that granted specific copyright exceptions for print disabled persons up to the year 2007. Judith Sullivan (2007).

  2. National copyright laws examined in this article refer to the WIPO database.

  3. Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) (Australia) (hereinafter: Australian Copyright Act).

  4. Copyright Act 1994 (reprinted 7 July 2010) (New Zealand) (hereinafter: New Zealand Copyright Act).

  5. Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (United Kingdom) (hereinafter: UK IP Act).

  6. Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China (1 June 1991) (hereinafter: Chinese Copyright Law).

  7. Law No. 9610 of 19 February 1998 on Copyright and Neighbouring Rights (Brazil) (hereinafter: Brazilian Copyright Law).

  8. Law No. 19 of 29 July 2002 on Copyright (Indonesia) (hereinafter: Indonesian Copyright Law).

  9. Law No. 2000/011 of 19 December 2000 on Copyright and Neighbouring Rights (Cameroon) (hereinafter: Cameroon Copyright Law).

  10. Law Supporting the Rights of Authors, Composers, Artists and Researchers (2008) (Afghanistan).

  11. Law No. 9380 of 28 April 2005 on Copyright and Related Rights (Albania).

  12. Law on Copyright and Related Rights (2003) (Cambodia).

  13. Law No. 82 of 2002 on the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights (2002) (Egypt).

  14. Copyright Act, 2004 (Gambia).

  15. Copyright and Performance Rights (Amendment) Act, 2010 (Act No. 25 of 2010) (Zambia).

  16. Indonesian Copyright Law, Art. 15(d).

  17. Law No. 2121/1993 on Copyright, Related Rights and Cultural Matters (Greece) (hereinafter: Greek Copyright Law), Art. 28A.

  18. Law on Copyright and Related Rights of 15 June 2006 (Armenia) (hereinafter: Armenian Copyright Law), Art. 22(2)(ii).

  19. World Health Organization, “Vision 2020 The Right to Sight”, available at: http://www.who.int/blindness/Vision2020_report.pdf (accessed 12 March 2014).

  20. Ibid.

  21. Copyright Act (Act No. 48 of 6 May 1970, as last amended by Act No. 65 of 3 December 2010) (Japan) (hereinafter: Japanese Copyright Act), Art. 37(3).

  22. Brazilian Copyright Law, Art. 46(I)(d).

  23. Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society (2001) OJ L 167/10, Art. 5(3)(b); Act on Copyright in Literary and Artistic Works (1960:729) (Sweden) (hereinafter: Swedish Copyright Act), Art. 17.

  24. Federal Law on Copyrights on Literary and Artistic Works and Related Rights (as last amended by Federal Law Gazette (BGBl.) I No. 58/2010) (Austria) (hereinafter: Austrian Copyright Law), Art. 42d(1).

  25. Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000 (No. 28 of 2000) (Ireland) (hereinafter: Irish Copyright Act), Arts. 104, 252.

  26. Law No. 2006-961 of 1 August 2006 on Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society (France) (hereinafter: French Copyright Law), Art. L 122-5 7o.

  27. U.S. Copyright Act of 1976, 17. U.S.C. (hereinafter: U.S. Copyright Act), §1. 121.

  28. An Act to Provide Books for the Adult Blind, 2 U.S.C. 135a.

  29. 44 C.F.R. § 501.6.

  30. 35 Fed. Reg. 10589 (30 June 1970) (codified at 44 C.F.R. § 501.10(b)).

  31. 39 Fed. Reg. 20203 (7 June 1974) (codified at 36 C.F.R. § 701.10(b)).

  32. Australian Copyright Act, Sec. 10.

  33. New Zealand Copyright Act, Art. 69.

  34. Act amending the Copyright Act, No. 73/1972, with subsequent amendments. No. 9 of 28 February 2006 (Iceland) (hereinafter: Iceland Copyright Act), Art. 19.

  35. Copyright Modernization Act (S.C. 2012, c. 20, An Act to amend the Copyright Act) (Canada) (hereinafter: Canadian Copyright Act), Art. 32.

  36. UK IP Act, Sec. 31F(9).

  37. Copyright Act (chapter 63) (Singapore) (hereinafter: Singapore Copyright Act), Art. 7.

  38. Greek Copyright Law, Art. 28A.

  39. Brazilian Copyright Law, Art. 46(I)(d).

  40. Indonesian Copyright Law, Art. 15.

  41. Ireland Copyright Act, Arts. 104, 252.

  42. Law on Copyright and Related Rights (as amended 17 December 2008) (Germany) (hereinafter: German Copyright Law), Sec. 45(a).

  43. Copyright and Related Rights Act of 30 March 1995 as last amended on 15 December 2006 (Slovenia) (hereinafter: Slovenian Copyright Act), Art. 47a.

  44. Armenian Copyright Law, Art. 22(2)(ii).

  45. Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, open for signature 9 September 1886, amended on 28 September 1979, Art. 9(2). This provision will be further discussed in Sect. 2.1 of this article.

  46. It is known that “there are at least 650 million persons with disabilities worldwide, of whom 80 per cent live in developing countries, and that the majority of persons with disabilities live in conditions of poverty”. “Realizing the Millennium Development Goals for persons with disabilities through the implementation of the World Programme of Action concerning Disabled Persons and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”, 3rd Comm, 63rd sess, Agenda Item 55(e), UN Doc A/RES/63/150 (18 December 2008). In 2003, the Panel Study of Income Dynamics in the United States conducted a survey on a nationally representative sample of over 7,000 families. The statistics show that 4.9 % of people without a disability live below the poverty line, while 13.2 % of disabled people are below the poverty line. The median family income is $64,000 for people without a disability, while median family income of disabled people is only $40,778. See Richard V. Burkhauser, Robert R. Weathers and Mathis Schroeder (2006).

  47. UK IP Act, Sec. 31A(3).

  48. Australian Copyright Act, Sec. 135ZP (3), (4), (5), (6).

  49. Canada Copyright Act, Art. 32.01(3).

  50. New Zealand Copyright Act, Sec. 69(2)(a).

  51. Singapore Copyright Act, chapter 63, Art. 54(3). This limitation in Singapore is for reproducing sound recordings.

  52. U.S. Copyright Act, §1.121(b)(2).

  53. Reproduction is allowed for “nondramatic literary works”. U.S. Copyright Act, §1.121(a).

  54. Australian Copyright Act, Sec. 182 B(2).

  55. UK IP Act, Sec. 31B(2).

  56. Iceland Copyright Act, Art. 19.

  57. Swedish Copyright Act, Art. 17(2)(2).

  58. “Transliteration of a published work into Braille and publication of the work so transliterated.” Chinese Copyright Law, Art. 22.

  59. “Reproduction of already disclosed works in Braille or another analogous method, if not done for gainful purposes.” Law on Copyright and Neighbouring Rights (as amended in 2002) (Bulgaria), Art. 10.

  60. “Where the work was published with the authorization of the author, he may not forbid: (g) Braille reproductions for the blind.” Cameroon Copyright Law, Art. 29(1).

  61. “Reproduction of a scientific, artistic and literary work in Braille for the purposes of the blind.” Indonesian Copyright Law, Art. 15.

  62. For example, in 2008, only 12 % of blind school-age children could read Braille in the United States. Ralph Ranalli, “A boost for Braille”, available at: http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2008/01/05/a_boost_for_braille/ (accessed 12 March 2014).

  63. U.S. Copyright Act, §1.121.

  64. Iceland Copyright Law, Art. 19.

  65. Australian Copyright Act, Art. 135ZQ(5).

  66. Law No. 20.435 amending Law No. 17.336 on Intellectual Property (2010) (Chile) (hereinafter: Chile IP Law), Art. 71C.

  67. Austrian Copyright Law, Art. 42d(1).

  68. New Zealand Copyright Act, Art. 69.

  69. Brazilian Copyright Law, Art. 46(I)(d).

  70. U.S. Copyright Act, §1.121.

  71. Austrian Copyright Law, Art. 42d(1).

  72. Consolidated Act on Copyright (Denmark) (hereinafter: Danish Copyright Act), Art. 17.

  73. Swedish Copyright Act, Art. 17.

  74. Chile IP Law, Art. 71c.

  75. German Copyright Law, Sec. 45(a).

  76. Australian Copyright Act, Art. 135ZQ(5).

  77. Australian Copyright Act, Art. 47A.

  78. Danish Copyright Act, Art. 17(4).

  79. See further, Tennessee Council of the Blind, “What is Braille”, available at: http://www.acb.org/tennessee/braille.html (accessed 12 March 2014).

  80. Referred to as “modifying”. See Irish Copyright Act, Arts. 104(1), 252(1).

  81. New Zealand Copyright Act, Art. 69.

  82. Chile IP Law, Art. 71C.

  83. U.S. Copyright Act, §1. 110.

  84. Armenian Copyright Law, Art. 22(2)(ii)(h).

  85. Chinese Copyright Law, Art. 22.

  86. Act No. LXXVI of 1999 on Copyright (Hungary), Art. 41(1).

  87. See further, Pierre Leval (1990); Patricia Aufderheide and Peter Jaszi (2011).

  88. Chile IP Law, Art. 71C.

  89. French Copyright Law, Art. L311-8.

  90. Austrian Copyright Law, Sec. 42d(2).

  91. German Copyright Law, Sec. 45(a).

  92. Iceland Copyright Act, Art. 19.

  93. Slovenian Copyright Act, Art. 47a.

  94. Swedish Copyright Act, Art. 17(3).

  95. Australian Copyright Act, Art. 135ZP.

  96. Danish Copyright Act, Art. 17(3).

  97. Canadian Copyright Act, Art. 32(1).

  98. U.S. Copyright Act, §1.121.

  99. Danish Copyright Act, Art. 17(4).

  100. Austrian Copyright Law, Sec. 42d(1).

  101. Armenian Copyright Law, Art. 22(2)(ii)(h).

  102. “[P]rovided that the reproduction is done without gainful intent”, Brazilian Copyright Law, Art. 46(I)(d).

  103. Chile IP Law, Art. 71C.

  104. Greek Copyright Law, Art. 28A.

  105. Berne Convention, Art. 9(2) (hereinafter: the Berne Convention).

  106. Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, signed 15 April 1994, 33 I.L.M. 1197 (1994) (hereinafter: TRIPS).

  107. TRIPS, Art. 13.

  108. World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty, opened for signature on 20 December 1996, Doc 105-17, 36 I.L.M. 65 (1997) (entered into force 6 March 2002) (hereinafter: WCT).

  109. (1) Contracting Parties may, in their national legislation, provide for limitations of or exceptions to the rights granted to authors of literary and artistic works under this Treaty in certain special cases that do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author.

    (2) Contracting Parties shall, when applying the Berne Convention, confine any limitations of or exceptions to rights provided for therein to certain special cases that do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author. WCT, Art. 10.

  110. See further, Nicole M. Thomas (2012).

  111. Panel Report, “United States—Sect. 110(5) of the US Copyright Act”, WTO Doc WT/DS160/R (15 June 2000), at 6.112. Ginsburg argues that “certain special cases” should not receive a normative interpretation. She argues that special cases can include unworthy as well as laudable exceptions as long as they are sufficiently narrow. The normative inquiry is deferred to the second two steps. See Jane C. Ginsburg (2001)

  112. Panel Report, “United States—Sect. 110(5) of the US Copyright Act”, WTO Doc WT/DS160/R (15 June 2000), at 6.180.

  113. Ibid., at 6.220, 6.224, 6.229.

  114. Panel Report, “United States—Sect. 110(5) of the US Copyright Act”, WTO Doc WT/DS160/R (15 June 2000), at 6.97.

  115. See further, Jingyi Li and Niloufer Selvadurai (2014).

  116. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, opened for signature 30 March 2007, A/RES/61/106, Annex I (entered into force 3 May 2008) (hereinafter: CRPD).

  117. Ibid., Preamble V.

  118. Ibid., Art. 30.

  119. Proposal by Chile on the Analysis of Exceptions and Limitations, WIPO Doc SCCR/13/5 (22 November 2005).

  120. Ibid.

  121. Chile IP Law, Title III.

  122. Proposal by Brazil, Chile, Nicaragua and Uruguay for Work Related to Exceptions and Limitations, WIPO Doc SCCR/16/2 (17 July 2008).

  123. Ibid.

  124. Supra note 1.

  125. See further, Report on the Work of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights, WIPO Doc WO/GA/41/14 (13 August 2012).

  126. Proposal by Brazil, Ecuador and Paraguay, Relating to Limitations and Exceptions: Treaty Proposed by the World Blind Union (WBU), WIPO Doc SCCR/18/5 (25 May 2009) (hereinafter: WBU Draft).

  127. Ibid., Art. 4(a).

  128. Ibid., Art. 15.

  129. Ibid., Art. 4(a)(1).

  130. Ibid., Art. 16.

  131. Ibid., Art. 4(a)(b).

  132. Ibid., Art. 4(c).

  133. Ibid., Art. 8.

  134. Ibid., Art. 4(d).

  135. Ibid., Art. 11(c).

  136. Ibid., Art. 5.

  137. See further, Cyrill P. Rigamonti (2006); Audrey R. Chapman (2001).

  138. Ibid., Art. 9.

  139. Ibid., Art. 9(3).

  140. Ibid., Art. 11.

  141. Ibid., Art. 11(b).

  142. Ibid., Art. 11(e).

  143. See further, WIPO, “The Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks and the Protocol Relating to that Agreement: Objectives, Main Features, Advantages”, available at: http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/freepublications/en/marks/418/wipo_pub_418.pdf (accessed 12 March 2014); The United States Patent and Trademark Office, Madrid Protocol, available at: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/law/madrid/ (accessed 12 March 2014); Joanna Schmidt-Szalewski (1998).

  144. Ibid., Art. 11(a).

  145. Ibid., Art. 11(d).

  146. Ibid., Art. 10.

  147. See further, Amy Kapczynski (2008); Gaëlle Krikorian and Amy Kapczynski (2010); Akhil Prasad and Aditi Agarwala (2009).

  148. Draft Consensus Instrument: Proposal by the Delegation of the United States of America, WIPO Doc SCCR/20/10 (10 June 2010).

  149. Ibid., Art. 1.

  150. Ibid., Arts. 2, 3.

  151. Ibid., Art. 1.

  152. Ibid., Art. 1.

  153. Ibid., Arts. 2, 3; explanatory notes viii.

  154. Ibid., Art. 1.

  155. Written Questions from the United States on the Proposal by Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay, and Mexico Relating to Limitations and Exceptions: Treaty Proposed by the World Blind Union (WBU) (Doc SCCR/1815), WIPO Doc SCCR 21 (8–12 November 2010).

  156. WBU Draft, Art. 16.

  157. Ibid.

  158. Draft WIPO Treaty on Exceptions and Limitations for the Disabled, Educational and Research Institutions, Libraries and Archive Centers: Proposal by the African Group. WIPO Doc SCCR/20/11 (15 June 2010).

  159. Ibid., Art. 21(a).

  160. Ibid., Art. 21(b).

  161. Ibid.

  162. Ibid., Art. 5(c).

  163. Ibid.

  164. Ibid., Art. 5(d).

  165. Ibid., Art. 15.

  166. Ibid., Arts. 17, 18.

  167. Draft WIPO Treaty on Exceptions and Limitations for Persons with Disabilities, Educational and Research Institutions, Libraries and Archives: Proposal by the African Group, WIPO Doc SCCR/22/12 (3 June 2011).

  168. Ibid., Art. 1.

  169. Ibid.

  170. Draft Joint Recommendation concerning the improved access to works protected by copyright for persons with a print disability: Proposal by the Delegation of the European Union, WIPO Doc SCCR/20/12 (17 June 2010).

  171. Ibid., Art. 1(ii).

  172. Ibid., Art. 1(iii).

  173. Ibid., Art. 1(iii).

  174. Ibid., Art. 6.

  175. Ibid., Art. 2.

  176. Ibid., Art. 1(iv).

  177. Ibid., Art. 7.

  178. Ibid., Art. 8.

  179. Ibid., Art. 2.

  180. See further, Comparative List of Proposals Related to Copyright Limitations and Exceptions for Visually Impaired Persons and Other Persons with Print Disabilities, Prepared by the Secretariat, WIPO Doc SCCR/22/8 (16 March 2011); Proposal on an international instrument on limitations and exceptions for persons with print disabilities, Document prepared by the Chair, WIPO Doc SCCR/22/16 (4 November 2011); Working Document on an International Instrument on Limitations and Exceptions for Visually Impaired Persons/Persons with Print Disabilities, WIPO Doc SCCR/23/7 (16 December 2011); Revised Working Document on an International Instrument on Limitations and Exceptions for Visually Impaired Persons/Persons with Print Disabilities, WIPO Doc SCCR/24/9 (26 July 2012); Draft Text of an International Instrument/Treaty on Limitations and Exceptions for Visually Impaired Persons/Persons with Print Disabilities, WIPO Doc SCCR/25/2 (23 November 2012).

  181. Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights Report of the Twentieth Session, prepared by the Secretariat, WIPO Doc SCCR/20/13 (7 December 2010).

  182. In total, six intergovernmental organizations and 46 non-governmental organizations participated in this conference. Organizations invited as observers mainly included: a) international and national organizations for disabilities, such as the World Blind Union, World Disability Foundation, Third World Network Berhad, South African National Council for the Blind and the Royal National Institute of Blind People; b) associations for copyright protection, such as the International Authors Forum, International Federation of Musicians, International Federation of Film Producers Associations and International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organizations; c) associations related to publication and dissemination of copyright works, such as the Library Copyright Alliance, International Publishers Association and Motion Picture Association; and d) associations related to the internet and technology, such as the Software & Information Industry Association, International Group of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers and Global Initiative for Inclusive Information and Communication Technologies. See further, “Diplomatic Conference to Conclude a Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works by Visually Impaired Persons and Persons with Print

    Disabilities: List of Participants”, WIPO Doc VIP/DC/INF/2 (10 July 2013); “Diplomatic Conference to Conclude a Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works by Visually Impaired Persons and Persons with Print Disabilities: First Report of the Credentials Committee”, WIPO Doc VIP/DC/6 (18 June 2013).

  183. Diplomatic Conference to Conclude a Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works by Visually Impaired Persons and Persons with Print Disabilities: Rules of Procedure of the Diplomatic Conference, WIPO Doc VIP/DC/2 (18 June 2013), Rules 2, 33, 34.

  184. Ibid., Art. 3.

  185. Ibid., Art. 3(a), (b).

  186. Ibid., Art. 3(c).

  187. Ibid., Art. 2(b).

  188. Ibid.

  189. Ibid., Art. 2(a).

  190. Ibid., footnote 1.

  191. Ibid., Art. 4(4).

  192. Ibid.

  193. Ibid., Art. 4.1(a).

  194. Ibid., Art. 4.1(b).

  195. Ibid.

  196. Ibid., Art. 4.1.

  197. Ibid., Art. 4.2.

  198. Ibid., Art. 4.5.

  199. Ibid., Art. 2(c).

  200. Ibid., Art. 4(2)(a)(iv).

  201. Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired, or Otherwise Print Disabled, WIPO Doc VIP/DC/8 (27 June 2013).

  202. Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cyprus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Haiti, Holy See, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Luxembourg, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mongolia, Morocco, Nepal, Nigeria, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Republic of Moldova, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Switzerland, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, United Kingdom, and Uruguay. Signatures of the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled, WIPO Doc VIP/DC/12 (28 June 2013).

  203. Namely, El Salvador, Indonesia, Lithuania, Mozambique, Namibia, Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey, United States of America and Zimbabwe. WIPO, “Contracting Parties Marrakesh VIP Treaty” (not yet in force), available at: http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?lang=en&treaty_id=843 (accessed 20 July 2014).

  204. In April 2014, France, Greece and India signed the Treaty. In May 2014, Argentina, Ecuador and Slovenia signed the Treaty. In June 2014, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, Guatemala, Iran, Ireland, Mexico, Norway, Poland and Republic of Korea signed the Treaty. Ibid.

  205. WIPO, “Stevie Wonder Hails Landmark WIPO Treaty Boosting Access to Books for Blind and Visually Impaired Persons” (28 June 2013), available at: http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2013/article_0018.html (accessed 12 March 2014).

  206. World Blind Union, “7th Conference of States Parties WBU Side Event June 11, 2014”, available at: http://www.worldblindunion.org/English/news/Pages/7th-Conference-of-States-Parties-WBU-Side-Event-June-11-2014.aspx (accessed 22 July 2014).

  207. IP Policy Committee, blog “EU ratification of Marrakesh Treaty”, available at: http://tacd-ip.org/archives/1110 (accessed 3 March 2014); European Parliament, “Parliamentary Questions 19 December 2013: Subject: EU ratification of Marrakesh Treaty”, available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=WQ&reference=E-2013-014343&format=XML&language=EN (accessed 10 March 2014).

  208. WIPO, supra note 203.

  209. Ghana National Association of the Deaf, “On the Road to Ratification”, available at: http://gnadgh.com/news/?p=3323 (accessed 10 March 2014).

  210. WIPO, “India Is First to Ratify ‘Marrakesh Treaty’ Easing Access to Books for Persons Who Are Visually Impaired”, available at: http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2014/article_0008.html (accessed 22 July 2014).

  211. The Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012 (India), Sec. 52(1) zb.

  212. Ibid., at Sec. 31B.

  213. Senior Minister of State for Law Ms Indranee Rajah SC, “Copyright (Amendment) Bill Second Reading 7 July 2014”, available at: https://www.mlaw.gov.sg/content/dam/minlaw/corp/News/Annex%20A%20-%20Copyright%20Amendment%20Bill%202nd%20Reading%20Speech.pdf (accessed 18 July 2014).

  214. Singapore Government Ministry of Law, “Amendments to the Copyright Act”, available at: https://www.mlaw.gov.sg/content/minlaw/en/news/press-releases/amendments-to-the-copyright-act-2014.html (accessed 18 July 2014).

  215. Ibid.

References

  • Aufderheide P, Jaszi P (2011) Reclaiming fair use: how to put balance back in copyright. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

  • Burkhauser RV, Weathers RR, Schroeder M (2006) A Guide to Disability Statistics from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics. Cornell University, p 50. http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1207&context=edicollect

  • Chapman AR (2001) Approaching intellectual property as a human right: obligations related to Article 15(1)(c). In: Guerassimov E (ed) Approaching Intellectual property as a human right, 4. UNESCO Publishing, digital version ed.

  • Ginsburg JC (2001) Toward Supranational Copyright Law? The WTO Panel Decision and the 'Three-Step Test' for Copyright Exceptions. Revue Internationale du Droit d’Auteur

  • Kapczynski A (2008) The access to knowledge mobilization and the new politics of intellectual property. Yale Law J 117:80

  • Krikorian G, Kapczynski A (2010) Access to knowledge in the age of intellectual property. MIT Press, Cambridge

  • Leval P (1990) Toward a fair use standard. Harvard Law Rev 103(5):1105

  • Li J, Selvadurai N (2014) Reconciling the enforcement of copyright with the upholding of human rights: a consideration of the Marrakesh treaty to facilitate access to published works for the blind, visually impaired and print disabled. Eur Intellect Prop Rev 36(10):653

  • Prasad A, Agarwala A (2009) Copyright law desk book: knowledge, access and development. Universal Law Publishing, Delhi

  • Rigamonti CP (2006) Deconstructing moral rights. Harvard Int Law J 47(2):353

  • Schmidt-Szalewski J (1998) International protection of trademarks after the trips agreement, the symposium: public and private initiatives after TRIPS. Duke J Comp Int Law 9:189

  • Sullivan J (2007) Study on Copyright Limitations and Exceptions for the Visually Impaired, 138–179, WIPO Doc SCCR/15/7

  • Thomas NM (2012) An Education: The Three-Step Test for Development. Eur Intellect Prop Rev 34(4):244

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Macquarie Law School, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

    Jingyi Li (Ph.D. Candidate)

  2. Law School Shandong University, Shandong, China

    Jingyi Li (Ph.D. Candidate)

Authors
  1. Jingyi Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jingyi Li.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, J. Copyright Exemptions to Facilitate Access to Published Works for the Print Disabled – The Gap Between National Laws and the Standards Required by the Marrakesh Treaty. IIC 45, 740–767 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-014-0251-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-014-0251-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation