Monthly Archives: January 2019

Copyright for libraries in 2019: What’s on the Agenda? Part 1

Copyright Week 2019 - Day 1

Today is the first day of Copyright Week 2019!

Copyright week is an initiative launched by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) in order to highlight key issues around copyright. Every day, various groups, all defenders of a copyright framework that promotes creativity and innovation, look into specific copyright policy matters.

Of course this includes IFLA! Given the central role that copyright plays in libraries’ work, we will be participating by posting a blog post a day. We encourage librarians around the world to do the same by writing and tweeting about #Copyright4Libraries.

This first blog of the week looks at what is coming up in 2019 in copyright around the world with a potential impact for libraries. We have gathered information thanks to the IFLA Advisory Committee on Copyright and other Legal Matters and its network. We’ll be following the same model as last year, when we published a first blog focusing on legislation, and a second one on wider trends.

Being aware of ongoing copyright reforms is relevant for the advocacy efforts of libraries nationally, regionally and internationally at the World Intellectual Property Organisation.

By mapping what is going on, we are better able to provide support to our members in local copyright reforms, and to get a general view of policy trends. We hope that it will also support other advocacy efforts by librarians in all regions of the world. All the information you’ll see below is gathered in an online document, available here. Comments and additional information are very welcome – either contact ariadna.matas[at]ifla.org, or leave your ideas below.

You may also be interested in this blog post that we posted before the end of 2018. It looks at what happened throughout 2018 and what copyright reforms were finalized. Marrakesh implementation efforts are not included in this overview, but you can check our regularly-updated tables on that matter, available here.

And from there, we start with what is coming up in the following months:

Africa

Botswana

There is a 2018 copyright review extended to several sectors including libraries.

Kenya

A Copyright amendment Bill was introduced in 2017. The main areas of the amendments proposed by the Copyright (Amendment) Bill are the following:

  • Computer Programs, captured within fair dealing;
  • Circumvention of Technological Protection measures, now a possibility in limited situations;
  • Exceptions for reproduction of works in formats accessible specifically by the visually impaired or otherwise disabled (Marrakesh Treaty);
  • Introduction of artist resale rights and the provision for visual artists to form CMO’s;
  • Collection of royalties by the Kenya Revenue Authority of imports of audio recording equipment and accessories (has elicited much debate);
  • Protection now availed for the rights of a producer of sound recordings;
  • Introduction of circumstances affording protection of ISP’s against infringement;
  • Introduction of corporate liability for infringement;
  • Mechanisms for investigation of CMO’s and actions against board members.

Sources:  http://www.eifl.net/news/eifl-and-klisc-comment-kenya-isp-liability-proposals; https://www.musicinafrica.net/sites/default/files/attachments/article/201801/copyrightamendmentbill2017no33.pdf.

Namibia

The government has announced its intention to review the current copyright legislation and is welcoming inputs

Nigeria

The Nigerian copyright bill was approved by the Cabinet and is now before Parliament.

Source: www.copyright.gov.ng/index.php/public-notice/item/268-nigerian-copyright-reform-review-of-the-copyright-act-cap-c28-laws-of-the-federation-of-nigeria-2004

IFLA will be submitting comments once the official approved Bill is available online.

Uganda

The Uganda Law Reform Commission is working on a draft document. It appears like the draft is still closed to the public for discussion.

Asia-Pacific

Australia

A consultation paper was released in March. It looked mainly at flexible exceptions, access to orphan works and contracting out of copyright exceptions.

Source: https://www.communications.gov.au/have-your-say/copyright-modernisation-consultation

IFLA’s full submission is available here: https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/clm/submission_international_federation_library_associations_and_institutions_ifla.pdf

The Australian LIbraries Copyright Committee’s submission is available here http://libcopyright.org.au/our-work/submission/alcc-submission-copyright-modernisation-consultation.

Myanmar

A draft law was published in 2015, and the current status is unclear. There are provisions on foreign protection, and also some regarding libraries and education.

Source: www.eifl.net/news/getting-ready-myanmars-new-copyright-system; www.eifl.net/eifl-in-action/copyright-reform-myanmar

New Zealand

The review of New Zealand copyright law continues, with news of Google visits to the country to undertake lobbying. A coverage in Stuff suggests efforts by the company to gain legal recognition for its upload filtering technologies (as may happen in Europe). We are waiting on further updates on legislation, as well as on Marrakesh Ratification, which is also under discussion.

Source: https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/105892772/google-and-rights-holders-battle-over-copyright-reform

Singapore

There was a first public consultation in October 2016 with 16 proposals, and a second one in May 2017. It is a broad reform, with some steps for libraries and archives: expiry date for copyright protection of unpublished works, use of orphan works, educational exceptions to reflect digital education, facilitating the work of libraries and archives, museums and galleries, provisions for print-disabled users, among others. Text and data mining is also on the table.

Europe

European Union

The Commission proposed a Draft Directive for copyright in the Digital Single Market in 2016. Discussions are ongoing between the Commission, the Parliament and the Council, but close to being finalized. Preliminary agreements have been reached on several exceptions and limitations and on the out of commerce works provisions.

Reviews of the Orphan Works Directive and Collective Rights Management Directives are also due, but there is no indication of when these may be launched

Sources:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52016PC0593

Position papers by IFLA available here: https://www.ifla.org/publications/node/91774

Armenia

The new draft copyright law, published in 2017, was expected to be completed by the end of 2018. It contains provisions for libraries, archives & education, and orphan works.

Source: www.eifl.net/eifl-in-action/copyright-reform-armenia

Estonia

The potentially broad copyright reform is on hold, while waiting for EU legislation on copyright to pass.

Israel

Israel has recently passed legislation on orphan works which would create welcome new possibilities for libraries, subject to reasonable diligence in a search for rightholders.

Switzerland

The copyright working group reached an agreement on various issues related to the modernisation of copyright law in March 2017. The Bill should contain provisions with regards to orphan works, cataloguing, extended collective licensing, secondary right of publication, and implement the Beijing and the Marrakesh treaties.

Sources: https://www.ige.ch/en/law-and-policy/national-ip-law/copyright-law/archive/agur12.html; https://www.ejpd.admin.ch/dam/data/ejpd/aktuell/news/2017/2017-11-22/medienrohstoff-f.pdf

Ukraine

Jan 2018, amendments were approved by the Cabinet of Ministers. There was an impact assessment on balanced goals; allow use of online licenses, freedom of panorama, orphan works and Marrakesh treaty provisions.

Latin America and the Caribbean

Argentina

There was a green paper proposal made to stakeholders with a meeting in December 2016. A public consultation process was open in March 2017 to reform the copyright law. Broad proposals, including on reprographics, preservation, document supply and Marrakesh. Consultations are still ongoing.

Sources: https://www.vialibre.org.ar/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/2017.03.Propuestas-para-una-actualizaci%C3%B3n-de-la-Ley-11723.Documento.Oficial.DNDA_.pdf

Green paper readout: http://www.ip-watch.org/2017/02/17/argentinian-copyright-office-proposes-add-exceptions-limitations-copyright-act/.

Open discussion forum on proposals to modify the law, in platform of justice: https://www.justicia2020.gob.ar/; http://laijle.alacde.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1036&context=journal; http://revistaacc.econ.uba.ar/entrevista.php?n=YaeV

Brazil

There was some talk of a review in 2017, and the decree supporting a move towards passing legislation necessary to implement Marrakesh was signed. This could also be an opportunity for further changes in a country that currently has no exceptions and limitations for libraries.

Chile

We received news on discussions around open access to publicly funded research at Congress in 2018.

Uruguay

The copyright bill contains a large number of exceptions (first in Uruguay): for the communication to the public, distribution, interpretation, execution, translation or adaptation of works by educational and research institutions; for reproductions of short extracts of works by educational institutions; for the reproduction of works for an analysis through computer means; for reproductions for preservations or to replace a work by cultural heritage institutions; for the public lending of works, exception for translations by cultural heritage institutions; and for the use of orphan works. The dossier is pending for discussion at the Comisión de Educación y Cultura de la Cámara de Representantes.

Sources: position by the Library Association of Uruguay: http://www.abu.net.uy/tag/derechos-de-autor/ and an update from Creative Commons Uruguay http://www.creativecommons.uy/tag/reforma-del-derecho-de-autor/

IFLA has written to encourage progress.

North America

Canada

The Canadian government launched a copyright review in December 2017. There will most likely be discussions on fair dealing and on the so-called “value gap”. Throughout 2018, the Canadian Parliament continues to carry out its review of the country’s copyright laws, taking evidence from different sides of the debate. Libraries are arguing for the current fair dealing provisions to be safeguarded, as well as engaging in discussions around copyright and indigenous knowledge, technological protection measures, and contract override. In parallel, legal processes involving Canadian universities, education ministries and the reprographic rights collecting society Access Copyright continue, as does a review of how copyright royalties are defined. You can read more on the pages of the Canadian Association of Research Libraries and the Canadian Federation of Library Associations. Results of the review are expected towards the middle of next year and will inform policy choices made by whoever wins the elections due in October 2019.

Sources: http://www.ourcommons.ca/Committees/en/INDU/StudyActivity?studyActivityId=9897131; http://www.carl-abrc.ca/influencing-policy/copyright/2018-review-of-the-copyright-act/; http://cfla-fcab.ca/fr/copyright/

IFLA submitted comments in October 2018: https://www.ifla.org/node/82020.

Library/university institutions submitted comments, for instance: CFLA-FCAB http://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/INDU/Brief/BR9921734/br-external/CanadianFederationOfLibraryAssociations-e.pdf; Universities Canada http://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/INDU/Brief/BR10002433/br-external/UniversitiesCanada-e.pdf; or the Canadian Association of Research Libraries http://www.carl-abrc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/CARL_brief_to_INDU_copyright_en.pdf.

United States

Discussions continue around whether the Register of Copyrights (Head of the US Copyright Office) should be a presidential appointment, or rather hired by the Librarian of Congress. The issue was not decided by the previous Congress.

Sources: https://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/blogs/the-scoop/keep-copyright-office-in-library-of-congress/, https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1010?r=86

Trade Agreements

EU-Mercosur

The EU is currently negotiating a trade agreement with the four founding members of Mercosur (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay). The first negotiation round took place on 11 May 2016, followed by a negotiation round in October 2016. The chapter on intellectual property rights contains some worrying provisions: art. 4.7 sets the term of protection of a literary or artistic work in death+70 years (some of the parties have a shorter term), and art. 4.11 mandates the provision of adequate legal protection against the circumvention of TPMs. There is very little reference to exceptions and limitations (art. 4.10, which only adds temporary reproductions which are part of technological processes). A later version was leaked by Greenpeace. It contains some slight changes on the topic of exceptions and limitations. has a list of mandatory exceptions and limitations (art. 9.9.1): criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, research, and facilitating access to published works for persons who are blind, visually impaired or otherwise print disabled, and a provision recognising their cross-border effect (9.9.2), both proposals by the Mercosur countries.

Resources: https://trade-leaks.org/mercosur-leaks/intellectual-property-rights-3/.

EU-Japan

The EU-Japan Free Trade Agreement, signed in July, contains a chapter on intellectual property. The agreement is expected to become effective as soon as 1 February 2019. It includes the following provisions relevant to libraries:

  • An encouragement to both sides to ratify the Marrakesh Treaty (this should be achieved by next year) (14.4.3(f))
  • Encouragement to raise awareness about the protection of intellectual property (although there is a reference to the use of IP) (14.7)
  • Exclusive Rights (14.8):
    • Reproduction, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means (for authors)
    • Distribution, by sale or otherwise (but the details of exhaustion/first sale are left to the parties) (for authors)
    • Communication to the public (for authors)
    • To note that there are also fixation and post-fixation rights for broadcasters (14.11)
    • Term of protection set at life+70 for authors, and 70 years from creation for works by moral persons (14.13)
  • Limitations and Exceptions (14.14)
    • Each Party may provide for limitations or exceptions to the rights set out in Articles 14.8 to 14.12 only in certain special cases which neither conflict with a normal exploitation of the subject matter nor unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holders, in accordance with the conventions and international agreements to which it is party.
  • Resale Right (14.15)
    • There is to be an exchange of views on this
  • Collective Management (14.16)
    • The agreement promotes cooperation, transparency, and non-discrimination
  • Public Domain (14.17)
    • At least works that are already in the public domain are not going to be brought back under copyright.

Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RECP)

RCEP is a free trade agreement between the ten member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations – ASEAN (Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam) and the six states with which ASEAN has existing free trade agreements (Australia, China, India, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand). The chapter on intellectual property (not sure it is the right document) has been strongly criticised. It only contains a provision on exceptions and limitations similar to the three-step-test, a provision forbidding the circumvention of TPMs, and a provision on the transparency and accountability of CMOs, among a few others.

Resources: Status of the RCEP Negotiations (as at November 2018) in the Australian Government’s webpage: https://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/negotiations/rcep/news/Pages/joint-leaders-statement-on-the-rcep-negotiations-14-november-2018-singapore.aspx

EU-Australia

Negotiations have opened on a trade deal between the European Union and Australia. A blog from Rita Matulionyte at the University of Newcastle, Australia, explores the potential impact on copyright, suggesting that the EU is unlikely to have much to ask for beyond the concessions Australia already made as part of its trade deal with the United States. The main area is likely to be platforms where, the blog suggests, the EU may both push for extension of safe harbour provisions to commercial operators, but also application of whatever rules on upload filtering come out of the current copyright reforms within the blog.

Resources: http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2018/08/02/future-eu-australia-fta-copyright-expect-ip-chapter/

 

New Opportunities: Libraries and the United Nations in 2019

Libraries and the United Nations in 2019

As those who were able to attend the relevant sessions at the World Library and Information Congress in Kuala Lumpur heard, 2019 will be a big year at the United Nations for libraries. There will be a focus on Sustainable Development Goals that are particularly relevant for our institutions, and key steps will be taken towards a review both of the overall 2030 agenda, and the indicators used to measure progress.

But it’s also an important year for the UN itself, with new structures now in place. These also have implications for the way libraries engage with the SDGs at the national level. This blog sets out some of the key moments and opportunities in the coming year.

 

A High Level Political Forum Focused on Core Library Business

Each year, the UN selects a number of SDGs as a focus for the High Level Political Forum. These also shape the preparations for the event, and even voluntary national reviews.

This year, the focus is on education (SDG4), employment and growth (SDG8), equality (SDG10), climate change (SDG13) and strong institutions, including access to information (SDG16). These are all areas where it does not take too much effort to build understanding of how libraries make a difference to individual’s lives and societal progress.

These themes will each be the subject of a ‘thematic’ meeting. While education has already taken, place, SDG 8 will be the subject of a meeting on 4-5 April in Geneva, Switzerland, SDG10 of one in Accra, Ghana on 27-28 March, SDG13 will be addressed on 1-3 April in Copenhagen, and SDG16 is provisionally on the agenda on 3-5 April in Rome, Italy.

These will discuss key challenges and progress made, and set out recommendations for how the world can do better and acheive the goals set out in the 2030 Agenda.

There will also be five regional meetings: for Europe and North America (21-22 March, Geneva), Asia-Pacific (27-29 March, Bangkok), Arab Countries (16-18 April, Beirut), Latin America and the Caribbean (22-26 April, Santiago), and Africa (16-18 April, Morocco, tbc).

These give the chance to take a regional perspective, looking at the specific issues in different parts of the world, as well as facilitating peer learning. They are also great opportunities to meet with national officials leading on coordinating SDG implementation.

IFLA will be looking to take the chance to be heard at the High Level Political Forum – and the thematic and regional meetings. We hope that local libraries will also be involved! But all libraries can also contribute by reminding national SDG teams of the contributions they make in these areas.

We’ll be in touch with ideas for how to do this!

 

A Review of the 2030 Agenda and Indicator Framework

Four years on from the agreement of the SDGs, the original text agreed by member states provided for a review of the agenda as a whole. We are now at that stage, offering an opportunity to think again about how work around the SDGs is organised and implemented.

In parallel, an expert group made up of governments and representatives of various UN agencies will hold a consultation about updates to the set of indicators used to measure progress against the SDGs.

In both of these processes, it will be important both to defend what is good about the SDGs – not least the reference to access to information – but also work to improve things. Civil society organisations – not least IFLA and library associations – could have more voice, and voluntary national reviews could be more inclusive. We also need better indicators of access to information across the board.

A key point will be the SDG Summit, held in September as part of the UN General Assembly, which will set out a political declaration, present a number of voluntary commitments and reaffirm the 2030 Agenda as a whole.

We’ll be in touch at key moments in the year to explain how you can help convince your governments of the need to promote the changes libraries need to make the 2030 Agenda better still.

 

New Contacts, New Possibilities

The UN is a huge organisation. In addition to its core elements (including the Sustainable Development Division within the Department of Economic and Social Affairs), there are many agencies and other bodies linked to it, not least the UN Development Programme (UNDP).

Many of these do work in different countries, operating offices, supporting projects, and raising awareness.

In order to promote greater consistency in this work, the UN agreed to give more power to the ‘resident coordinators’ – the top member of staff in each country, to help them coordinate better. This is part of a broader reform strategy,  covering internal organisation, responsibilities and funding.

The resident coordinators will have a particular role in focusing support efforts linked to the SDGs (taking this over from local UN Development Programme representatives), and will also have more formal powers and funding, making them an even stronger potential contact for library associations.

Especially in countries where there are a number of UN projects in place, the new resident coordinators are potentially very useful contacts for libraries and library associations. They will be happy to know that local institutions are promoting the SDGs, and could help ensure that libraries benefit from projects aimed at implementing them.

You can find details of the coordinator in your country – and other relevant contacts, by clicking on the map at the bottom of the UN country activities page.

 

2019 will be a year of opportunities to underline the value of libraries. We will only need to make sure we are ready to seize them. IFLA will work with its members to ensure that this is the case.

 

You can find further information on libraries and the SDGs on the IFLA website. See in particular our briefs about Voluntary National Reviews, and Data and the SDGs,  our timeline, and our webinar from September 2018 (in English, French and Spanish).

In order to get involved yourself, take a look also at our toolkit, our poster ‘This Library Supports the SDGs’, and our infographic setting out all of the SDG targets where access to information is implicitly or explicitly mentioned. You can find some great ideas for advocacy around the SDGs in the slidepack from our session at WLIC 2019, and look out for our ‘10-Minute Library Advocate‘ guide coming very soon!

Introducing… the 10-Minute Library Advocate

The 10-Minute Library Advocate

Libraries do not exist in a vacuum – they are there to serve.

Through providing access to knowledge, as well as an open, welcoming public space, they help others help themselves.

But they are also dependent on external support. This isn’t just about the politicians, officials or senior management who decide on budgets, staffing, or laws. It’s also about those who influence the decision-makers, about public opinion itself.

To thrive, libraries and librarians need to work to shape the environment around them, and build a community which doesn’t just have sympathy for the library, but are ready to act for it.

And the best way to do this is to advocate.

 

Advocacy Is For You!

Too often, advocacy is seen as something for the few, for senior management, for the extroverts. However, as IFLA’s Global Vision Summary Report underlines, every librarian should be an advocate.

This does not mean that every individual librarian should try and organise a meeting with the mayor, or go on TV. There are many different ways of getting involved from advocacy.

It also doesn’t necessarily require you to go on a course, or receive other training, even if these certainly make a difference.

There are lots of things that you can do – even in ten minutes – both to think and to act like a library advocate.

And this is what this series is for. Every week, we will be presenting one idea for an activity that will contribute to stronger advocacy for libraries.

Not all will be suitable in all situations, or to all personalities. Some will be about planning, thinking, rehearsing your arguments. Others will be practical, and bring you directly into contact with users and others. You won’t be able to do all of them, but we certainly hope that everyone can do some of them.

Each idea will include a short description, and often suggestions of places you can look if you would like to (and can) go deeper. And of course, we encourage anyone interested to find opportunities to learn more about advocacy, and get more involved.

So we hope you’re looking forward to getting started. If you spend ten minutes, ten hours or ten days, you will be supporting the future of our institutions and our field.

Living in Interesting Times – Three Key Debates in Information Politics

Libraries and the politics of information in 2019

Information has long been political – who has it, who should have it, and how can it be used to shape decision-making. However, it is only relatively recently that this has been recognised.

On the philosophical side of things, much comes from the work of thinkers such as Michel Foucault, who explained the power that comes from organising information in specific ways (‘knowledge is power’). On the more practical side, the emergence of the internet has given a practical focus to broader reflections on how information is created and shared.

It therefore makes sense to think about the politics of information – the discussions and disagreements that take place around key issues. These questions are particularly key for libraries, as central stakeholders in how information is accessed, shared and governed.

2018 has seen a number of key debates come into focus, with further developments expected in 2019. These relate to whether information should be privatised or made publicly available, where privacy should triumph over access, and where free speech should give way to public order concerns.

This blog will offer a short introduction to each question, and relevant examples of legal and policy discussions which will shape information politics in the coming year.

 

Privatisation vs Public Availability of Knowledge

Knowledge – at least in the form of books or other documents – was long subject to constraints both on producers and users. These helped avoid widespread copying, but at the same time allowed users some flexibility in what they did with the written knowledge they held.

The expense of owning a printing press meant that the number of people who could publish was limited (although of course not enough to prevent calls for copyright to be invented in 1709). At the same time, once a book or newspaper had been sold, it was easy enough to share it with others or use it for research or other purposes.

Therefore, while the concept of copyright was intended to give the writings contained in books and other documents the same status as physical objects (in terms of the possibility of owning them), it was only ever an imperfect solution.

Digital technologies have weakened these constraints. It is far easier to publish (or copy) and share works than ever before, but also to place limits (through a mix of legal and technological means) on their uses. In other words, it has never been easier to provide universal access to knowledge, but at the same time, it is also simpler to make the knowledge contained in a book or other document private, with all access and use subject to licences.

These new possibilities have created a gap in legal provisions in many countries, given that there had, previously, been no cause to make rules. With this has come a sense that laws also need to be updated, rather than leaving things up to the market or the courts. This is the underlying reason for the ongoing European Union copyright reform, but also elsewhere.

Specific questions raised in this reform, as elsewhere, include whether people involved in teaching should be able to use materials to which they have access, whether researchers and others should be allowed to carry out text and data mining, and whether libraries should be allowed to take preservation copies.

There are also questions about whether the platforms which allow users to share materials should place the protection of intellectual property above the right of their users to free expression.

2019 is likely to see some sort of conclusion to discussions on these subjects in the European Union, South Africa and Nigeria, as well as key steps forwards in Canada, Singapore, and Australia.

 

Protecting Privacy vs Giving Access

The idea of ‘ownership’ of information is not only associated with intellectual property rights. Increasingly, it also comes up when we talk about personal information – anything that says anything about a person.

Once again, the idea that people have an interest in information about them is not new – there have long been laws on libel which allow individuals to act against writings that are unfair or defamatory. Rulers have also been prolific users of laws against sedition or lèse-majesté. However, such provisions have tended to be limited to the wealthy and powerful.

Here too, digital technologies have changed things by allowing for a much greater potential to collect and use information about people, be it for advertising, security or other purposes. They have also – for example through search engines – made it much easier for ordinary people to access information that might otherwise have been forgotten or too difficult to find.

With this, the idea of a right over information about you has emerged in a number of privacy and data protection laws around the world. The primary focus tends to be on data gathered by companies, with justifications running from a desire to understand advertising choices to enabling customers to shop around between service providers.

In parallel, security concerns have tended to see greater powers given to governments in the types of data they can collect and use, as well as limitations on the transparency obligations they face.

2018 saw the entry into force of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, and similar rules emerge in a number of US States and Latin American countries. There have also been new security rules applied giving governments new powers to gather data on suspected terrorists (as well as many others).

2019 may well see more similar efforts, as well as new efforts to take advantage of new powers over personal information.

 

Protecting Free Speech vs Tackling ‘Dangerous’ Content

A key way in which the political value of information has long been recognised is through the efforts made to control free expression. Ideas and writings deemed to be dangerous to political, economic or social goals, for example through calling for insurrection, infringement of copyright, or simply because it is criminal, have long been the subject of attention by governments.

It is true that the right to free speech is a crucial one, but it is not absolute. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights notes that all rights can potentially be limited when this is necessary to fulfil the rights of others. As regards the right to equality, there is explicit mention of the importance of combatting incitement to discrimination.

More recently, the way the internet has developed has both made it easier for people to share and spread ideas (dangerous or otherwise). It has also involved relatively well defined actors and channels – search engines, social media platforms, internet service providers – with key powers over what is shared. Through their own actions – or actions they are obliged to take – there is a possibility to exert much greater control over what can be said and shared than when someone opens their mouth.

We come across this debate in discussions around concepts like ‘fake news’, terrorist content, hate speech, criminal content, and to some extent copyright infringement. In each situation, there is content that is clearly illegal and clearly legal. But there are also often grey areas, where judgement and nuance may be needed.

The problem is that the solution often proposed for identifying and blocking such content – automatic filtering, brings its own challenges. There are issues that go from the practical (are they good enough?), to the political (without incentives to protect free speech, do they risk ‘accidentally’ blocking legal content?), and human rights-related (should rights be given and taken away by a machine?).

At the same time, human moderation is expensive (in particular if done properly, by people with knowledge of relevant cultures), and can cause serious psychological damage to the people doing it. The costs are likely too high for smaller actors.

Clearly, this is a particularly difficult problem in information politics, not helped by cross-over with other areas of politics. This can make it hard to promote proportionate or nuanced approaches.

There is legislation in a number of jurisdictions which seeks to crack down on terrorist content and copyright infringement through (explicitly or otherwise) automatic filtering. Some have sought to ban ‘fake news’ (a highly dubious step), and others have put pressure on internet platforms to do the same, creating incentives to take an ever tougher line on content. With public pressure growing, major internet companies seem set to implement ever more conservative approaches in order to avoid blame.

 

What Implications for Libraries?

As highlighted at the beginning, libraries are key actors in information politics. They are central – both practically and symbolically – to the idea that everyone should have meaningful access to information.

A first priority is to defend this core idea. Too many are still offline, too many lack formal education or the possibility to learn throughout life, too many cannot find the information they need to live healthily, find work or start businesses, or to engage in public life.

Libraries are also unique, as public, welcoming institutions, with a clear social interest goal, rather than a focus on profit. Nonetheless, this status does not spare them from the effects of decisions taken in relation to the three major debates set out above.

They clearly depend on limitations on the privatisation of knowledge in order to do their jobs, but need a system that allows writers, researchers and others to keep on producing. They need to protect privacy (key to giving users the sense that they can seek and share information freely), but must also resist sweeping restrictions on what materials they can collect, hold and give access to.

And while they understand the need to act against dangerous speech, they know from long experience that managing information is complicated and requires skilled judgements based on expertise and values – something that a machine cannot replicate.

While it may not always be popular – or easy to explain – libraries will need to set out and defend the importance of a balanced approach, one that allows for meaningful access to information for all, not just in 2019 but long into the future.

 

This blog is based on a presentation initially given at the Eurolib conference in Brussels on 12 November 2018.