Inquiry on Copyright Policy, Creativity, and Innovation in the Internet Economy, 61419-61424 [2010-24863]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Notices
Based on information provided above,
this notice seeks public comment on
revising the somatic cell count for goat
milk from 1,000,000 cells per milliliter
to 1,500,000 cells per milliliter in
sections C7 (9)(d) and C11 (e), (e)(2),
and (f) of the Recommended
Requirements.
Dated: September 30, 2010.
David R. Shipman,
Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–24985 Filed 10–4–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
The Department of Commerce will
submit to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for clearance the
following proposal for collection of
information under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35).
Agency: National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Title: Socioeconomics of Users and
Non Users of Grays Reef National
Marine Sanctuary.
OMB Control Number: None.
Form Number(s): NA.
Type of Request: Regular submission
(request for review of a new information
collection).
Number of Respondents: 248.
Average Hours per Response:
Sanctuary users’ and non-users’ surveys,
one hour; business operations’ surveys,
3 hours.
Burden Hours: 276.
Needs and Uses: The National Marine
Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1431, et seq.)
(NMSA) authorizes the use of research
and monitoring within National Marine
Sanctuaries (NMS). In 1981, the Grays
Reef National Marine Sanctuary
(GRNMS) was added to the system of
NMSs.
The purpose of this information
collection is to obtain socioeconomic
information on this sanctuary. The
GRNMS has recently revised its
management plan, and two issues
emerged as top priorities leading to
efforts to change management strategies
and regulations: (1) Prohibition of spear
fishing and (2) research only area.
Information was obtained to assess the
potential socioeconomic impacts of the
prohibition of spear fishing and research
only area alternatives. The preferred
alternatives have been chosen and the
regulatory process to implement the
regulations is underway. The study
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:36 Oct 04, 2010
Jkt 223001
involves surveys of recreational user
groups, which are potentially impacted
by the regulations, to assess their
knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of
the management strategies and
regulations and how they were actually
impacted post implementation, and to
guide education and outreach efforts.
Information will be collected on
spatial use for all user groups to assess
the extent of potential displacement of
activity from the research only area
alternative.
For business operations, costs and
earnings will be obtained to assess the
impact of regulatory alternatives on
business profits. Socioeconomic/
demographic information on owners/
operators and number of employees and
family members of owners/operators
will also be obtained.
For members of households that
participate in recreational fishing or
recreational SCUBA diving, information
will be collected on socioeconomic/
demographic profiles, spending
associated with their activity, economic
user value associated with their activity,
and knowledge, attitudes and
perceptions about GRNMS management
strategies and regulations.
Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations; individuals or
households.
Frequency: One time.
Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary.
OMB Desk Officer:
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov.
Copies of the above information
collection proposal can be obtained by
calling or writing Diana Hynek,
Departmental Paperwork Clearance
Officer, (202) 482–0266, Department of
Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20230 (or via the Internet at
dHynek@doc.gov).
Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov.
Dated: September 29, 2010.
Gwellnar Banks,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010–24858 Filed 10–4–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
61419
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Office of the Secretary
United States Patent and Trademark
Office
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration
[Docket No. 100910448–0448–01]
RIN 0660–XA19
Inquiry on Copyright Policy, Creativity,
and Innovation in the Internet
Economy
Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Department of Commerce; Patent and
Trademark Office, U.S. Department of
Commerce; National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Inquiry.
AGENCY:
The Department of
Commerce’s Internet Policy Task Force
is conducting a comprehensive review
of the relationship between the
availability and protection of online
copyrighted works and innovation in
the Internet economy. The Department,
the United States Patent and Trademark
Office (USPTO), and the National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) seek public
comment from all interested
stakeholders, including rights holders,
Internet service providers, and
consumers on the challenges of
protecting copyrighted works online
and the relationship between copyright
law and innovation in the Internet
economy. After analyzing the comments
submitted in response to this Notice, the
Internet Policy Task Force intends to
issue a report that will contribute to the
Administration’s domestic policy and
international engagement in the area of
online copyright protection and
innovation.
DATES: Comments are due on or before
November 19, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are
encouraged to file comments
electronically by e-mail to copyrightnoi-2010@ntia.doc.gov. Submissions
should be in one of the following
formats: HTML, ASCII, Word, rtf, or pdf.
Paper comments can be sent to: Office
of Policy Analysis and Development,
NTIA, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Room 4725, 1401 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20230. Please
note that all material sent via the U.S.
Postal Service (including ‘‘Overnight’’ or
‘‘Express Mail’’) is subject to delivery
delays of up to two weeks due to mail
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
61420
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Notices
security procedures. Paper submissions
should also include a CD or DVD in
Word, WordPerfect, or pdf format. CDs
or DVDs should be labeled with the
name and organizational affiliation of
the filer, and the name of the word
processing program used to create the
document. Comments filed in response
to this notice will be made available to
the public on the Internet Policy Task
Force Web page at https://
www.ntia.doc.gov/
internetpolicytaskforce. For this reason,
comments should not include
confidential, proprietary, or business
sensitive information.
For
questions about this Notice, contact:
Dennis Amari, Office of Policy Analysis
and Development, National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Room 4725, Washington DC
20230, telephone (202) 482–1880; or
Michael Shapiro, Office of External
Affairs, United States Patent and
Trademark Office, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Madison Building, 401
Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA 22314,
telephone (571) 272–9300; or send an email to copyright-noi2010@ntia.doc.gov. Please direct media
inquires to NTIA’s Office of Public
Affairs at (202) 482–7002; or USPTO’s
Office of Public Affairs at (572) 272–
8400.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Recognizing the vital importance of the
Internet to U.S. prosperity, education,
and political and cultural life, the
Department has made it a top priority to
ensure that the Internet remains open
for innovation. The Department has
assembled an Internet Policy Task Force
whose mission is to identify leading
public policy and operational
challenges in the Internet environment.
The Task Force leverages expertise
across many bureaus at the Department,
including those responsible for
domestic and international information
and communications technology policy,
international trade, cybersecurity
standards and best practices,
intellectual property, business
advocacy, and export control. This is
one in a series of inquiries from the
Task Force. The Task Force is
conducting similar reviews of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:36 Oct 04, 2010
Jkt 223001
information privacy,1 cybersecurity,2
and the global free flow of information
goods and services. The Task Force may
explore additional areas in the future.
Background: Prior to releasing this
Notice of Inquiry, the Task Force held
listening sessions with a wide range of
stakeholders to understand the current
and most vexing questions related to
online copyright protection as well as
the broader impact of content issues on
innovation in the Internet economy. The
Task Force also convened a public
meeting on July 1, 2010, to air these
issues further.3
Over the course of this dialogue, the
Task Force has identified a dual public
policy imperative—to combat online
copyright infringement more effectively
and to sustain innovative uses of
information and information
technology. By way of this Notice and
a follow-on report, the Task Force seeks
to identify policies that will: (1) Increase
benefits for rights holders of creative
works accessible online but not for
those who infringe on those rights; (2)
maintain robust information flows that
facilitate innovation and growth of the
Internet economy; and (3) at the same
time, safeguard end-user interests in
freedom of expression, due process, and
privacy.4 The report will evaluate
current challenges to protecting online
copyrighted works and to sustaining
robust information flows, and it will
analyze various approaches to meet
those challenges. The Task Force is
hopeful that the dialogue launched here
and the research conducted pursuant to
this inquiry will contribute to
Administration-wide policy positions
and to a global consensus to foster
creativity and innovation online. This
review is being coordinated with the
1 See Notice of Inquiry, Information Privacy and
Innovation in the Internet Economy, 75 FR 21,226
(Apr. 23, 2010). This notice and all documents
related to the Task Force initiative are available at
https://www.ntia.doc.gov/
internetpolicytaskforce.gov.
2 See Notice of Inquiry, Cybersecurity, Innovation
and the Internet Economy, 75 FR 44,216 (July 28,
2010).
3 Notice of Public Meeting, Copyright Policy,
Creativity, and Innovation in the Internet Economy,
75 FR 33,577 (June 14, 2010). An archival webcast
of the public meeting can be found on the Internet
Policy Task Force Web page at: https://
www.ntia.doc.gov/internetpolicytaskforce/
copyright/webcast.html.
4 See e.g., Remarks of Gary Locke, Secretary of
Commerce, Copyright Policy in the Internet
Economy Symposium, July 1, 2010, available at
https://www.commerce.gov/news/secretaryspeeches/2010/07/01/remarks-copyright-policyinternet-economy-symposium; and, Remarks of
Lawrence E. Strickling. Assistant Secretary for
Communications and Information, Copyright Policy
in the Internet Economy Symposium, July 1, 2010,
available at https://www.ntia.doc.gov/presentations/
2010/CopyrightSymposium_Remarks
07012010.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
office of the Intellectual Property
Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC) in the
Office of Management and Budget,
Executive Office of the President, and
other components of the Executive
Office of the President.
E-Commerce and Copyrighted Works:
E-commerce and investment in
information systems continue to create
new jobs in the Internet economy and to
contribute to the nation’s economic
recovery.5 An important component of
the growth in e-commerce is the rapid
increase in the sale of digital content
across the creative industries.6 For
example, sales of digital music
downloads in the United States were
estimated to reach $3.1 billion in 2009,
a 19 percent increase above 2008 sales.7
Likewise, revenues derived from the
sale of online videos were estimated to
reach $1.2 billion in 2008, and are
expected to climb to $4.5 billion by
2012.8 In 2009, revenues from the sale
of e-books were estimated at $313
million, 177 percent above sales from
the previous year and, for the first time
ever, exceeding revenues from the sale
of audio-books.9 The popularity of
online games is also on the rise, with a
forecast to double 2009’s $2.8 billion in
online sales by 2015.10 As these data
suggest, the availability and
consumption of a wide range of lawful
online creative works are increasing
rapidly and contribute an increasingly
important component of our nation’s ecommerce growth.
There are many reasons for the
success that some innovators have had
5 Remarks of Gary Locke, Secretary of Commerce,
Privacy and Innovation Symposium, May 7, 2010,
https://www.commerce.gov/news/secretaryspeeches/2010/05/07/remarks-privacy-andinnovation-symposium.
6 Organization for Economic Co-Operation and
Development (OECD), OECD Information
Technology Outlook 2008, at 250 (2008). The fair
use of copyrighted works is also believed to
contribute to the Internet economy. See Computer
and Communications Industry Association (CCIA),
Fair Use in the U.S. Economy: Economic
Contribution of Industries Relying on Fair Use, at
4, 8 (2010), https://www.ccianet.org/CCIA/files/
ccLibrary Files/Filename/000000000354/fair-usestudy-final.pdf.
7 Joshua P. Friedlander, Recording Indus.
Association of America (RIAA), 2009 Year-End
Shipment Statistics, available at https://
76.74.24.142/A200B8A7–6BBF–EF15–3038–
582014919F78.pdf.
8 Press Release, In-Stat, Explosive Growth
Forecast in Online Video Market, Netflix
Subscription Model Wins (Aug. 13, 2008), https://
www.instat.com/newmk.asp?ID=2373.
9 Press Release, Association of American
Publishers, AAP Reports Book Sales Estimated at
$23.9 Billion in 2009 (Apr. 7, 2010).
10 Press Release, Pike & Fischer, U.S. Online
Game Subscribers to More than Double in Five
Years, Pike & Fischer Projects (Jan. 28, 2010), https://
www.marketwise.com/press-release/US–OnlineGame-Subscribers-to-More-Than-Double-in-Five
Years-Pike-Fischer-Projects-1109049.htm.
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Notices
in selling online digital content. For
one, the open end-to-end architecture of
the Internet enables innovation at the
‘‘edges’’ of the network, making possible
the introduction of such content
services, the development of new
technologies and devices, and the
opportunity to access distant markets.
Thus, while traditional content formats
and distribution channels have been
disrupted, in part, by effects of the
Internet on their markets and by the
growing availability of content online,
an increasing number of enterprises
seem to be successfully adapting their
business models or developing new
ones, and leveraging the Internet’s
architecture for the distribution of
creative works.
Second, the flow of content across the
Internet is enabled by the carefully
constructed balance of roles and
responsibilities among stakeholders set
forth in two key statutes. In 1996,
Congress added Section 230 to the
Communications Act of 1934. It grants
Internet service providers, content
hosting sites, and other so-called
‘‘Internet intermediaries’’ broad
immunity from liability for all content
created by third parties, as well as for
actions taken in good faith to restrict
access to or availability of objectionable
online content posted by third-parties.11
In the realm of copyright, Congress
added Section 512 to the Copyright Act
in 1997 via the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act (DMCA). It fosters a
balance of interests by enabling rights
holders to enforce their rights against
online infringers, while limiting the
liability of Internet intermediaries for
the infringing actions of their
subscribers if they take certain steps
aimed at combating infringement.12
Both provisions of law are seen as
having contributed significantly to
expansion of the digital economy and
both remain essential to promoting
innovation and to protecting intellectual
property online.
Despite the progress unleashed by the
current policy framework, copyright
infringement of works online remains a
persistent and significant problem.
Estimates of economic losses caused by
online infringement to rights holders,
the copyright industries, and the U.S.
economy as a whole vary based on
methodologies and assumptions used in
such estimates, but are nonetheless
substantial.13 In a word, thieves of
11 47
U.S.C. 230 (2006).
U.S.C. 512 (2006).
13 See OECD, The Economic Impact of
Counterfeiting and Piracy 71 (2008); U.S.
Government Accountability Office, GAO–10–423,
Intellectual Property: Observations to Quantify the
Economic Effects of Counterfeit and Pirated Goods
12 17
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:36 Oct 04, 2010
Jkt 223001
61421
online copyrighted works ‘‘unfairly
devalue America’s contribution, hinder
our ability to grow our economy,
compromise good, high-wage jobs for
Americans, and endanger strong and
prosperous communities.’’14
The prevalence of online copyright
infringement is the primary motivation
for the Task Force to seek an updated
understanding of stakeholders’
experiences under the current policy
framework and to learn more about
voluntary, cooperative efforts to address
online infringement. The broader goal is
to gain greater insight into the
opportunities and challenges for
innovation in the creative content sector
of the Internet economy.
The Nexus Between Online Copyright
Policy and the Department’s Role: The
Department has played an instrumental
role in the development of policies that
have helped digital commerce flourish.
Included among these policies is
explicit recognition of the legitimate
rights and commercial expectations of
those whose creation and distribution of
digital works strengthen our economy,
expand our exports, and create jobs in
America. Our ongoing challenge and
commitment is to align the flexibility
needed for innovation in the Internet
economy with effective means of
protecting copyrighted works that are
accessible online.
USPTO serves as the advisor to the
President on national and international
intellectual property policy issues.15
USPTO’s attention to the protection of
online copyrighted works began in 1993
when it chaired the Working Group on
Intellectual Property Rights, one of the
three working groups established by the
White House Information Infrastructure
Task Force. The Working Group
examined and made recommendations
to address copyright protection and
other intellectual property rights in the
context of digital interactive services.16
Subsequently, USPTO participated in
negotiations on the two World
Intellectual Property Organization
(WIPO) treaties known as the ‘‘WIPO
Internet Treaties’’—the WIPO Copyright
Treaty and the WIPO Performances and
Phonograms Treaty—that established
new standards for international
protection of copyright and related
rights in the digital age.17 USPTO
played a key role in the enactment of
the DMCA in the United States which
included a new Section 512 of the
Copyright Act and provisions
implementing the WIPO Internet
Treaties in the United States.18
NTIA serves as the President’s
principal advisor on
telecommunications and information
policy matters and pursues the adoption
of policies that facilitate and contribute
to the full development of competition,
efficiency, and the free flow of
commerce in domestic and international
telecommunications markets.19 In this
role, NTIA has been a lead contributor
to the development of Internet policy in
the Executive branch and played a key
role in devising the first comprehensive
Internet policy strategy, the Framework
for Global Electronic Commerce,
published by the White House
Information Infrastructure Task Force in
1997. The Framework set forth five
principles to guide government support
for the evolution of Internet commerce
and made a set of recommendations for
international discussion to foster
increased business and consumer
confidence in the use of electronic
networks for commerce.20 Among its
recommendations, the Framework
acknowledged the imperative of
protecting intellectual property rights in
electronic commerce and identified
adoption of the WIPO Internet Treaties
as one of the Administration’s top
intellectual property policy objectives.21
Among the other Commerce
Department bureaus engaged on
intellectual property rights issues, the
International Trade Administration
(ITA) administers the Trade Agreements
Program to monitor foreign country
implementation of multilateral and
bilateral trade agreements. This program
also serves to identify access and other
15, 24–25 (2010), https://gao.gov/new.items/
d10423.pdf. See also, 2010 Joint Strategic Plan on
Intellectual Property Enforcement, Intellectual
Property Enforcement Coordinator (Joint Strategic
Plan) at 5 (June 2010), https://www.whitehouse.gov/
omb/assets/intellectualproperty/
intellectualproperty_strategic_plan.pdf (noting that
‘‘[t]hese thieves impose substantial costs.’’).
14 Id.
15 American Inventors Protection Act of 1999,
Public Law 106–113, app. I, § 4001, 113 Stat. 1501,
1501A–552 (1999) (amended 2002 and codified in
scattered sections of title 35 of the U.S. Code).
16 Information Infrastructure Task Force,
Intellectual Property and the National Information
Infrastructure: The Report of the Working Group on
Intellectual Property Rights (1995), https://
www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/doc/ipnii.
17 U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO–
04–912, Intellectual Property: U.S. Efforts have
Contributed to Strengthened Laws Overseas, but
Challenges Remain 17 (2004), https://www.gao.gov/
new.items/d04912.pdf.
18 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Public Law
105–304, § 103, 112 Stat. 2860, 2863 (1998)
(codified at 17 U.S.C. 1201–1205 (2006)).
19 Telecommunications Authorization Act of
1992, Public Law 102–538, 106 Stat. 3533 (codified
in scattered section of titles 47, 28, and 15 of the
U.S. Code).
20 See President William J. Clinton and Vice
President Albert Gore Jr., Framework for Global
Electronic Commerce (1997), https://
clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/Commerce/(pagination
not available).
21 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
61422
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
barriers to trade, including those related
to intellectual property rights. Within
ITA’s Market Access and Compliance
unit, the Office of Intellectual Property
Rights investigates allegations of trade
agreement violations and encourages
policies by foreign governments to
enhance and protect intellectual
property rights for U.S. firms and artists.
This office also develops trade programs
and tools with other Federal agencies to
help U.S. businesses and citizens
enforce and protect their intellectual
property rights in foreign markets.
Across the Federal government, the
Department works closely with the
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative
(USTR) and other agencies to establish,
on a bilateral and multilateral basis,
workable treaty commitments and trade
agreements that address intellectual
property rights. For example, the
Department collaborates with USTR in
negotiations to establish the AntiCounterfeiting Trade Agreement
(ACTA), in the ‘‘Special 301’’ annual
reviews of intellectual property
protection and market access practices
in foreign countries, and in negotiation
and implementation of the intellectual
property chapters of free trade
agreements—all of which address online
copyright issues in foreign jurisdictions.
The Department also works with the
Department of Justice to develop
proportionate, deterrent penalties for
commercial scale counterfeiting and
piracy around the world. Additionally,
the Department works with the National
Intellectual Property Rights
Coordination Center, led by U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
to leverage resources, skills and
authorities to provide a comprehensive
U.S. Government enforcement response
to intellectual property rights
infringement. Through these and other
work streams, the Department is
committed to effective systems that
protect intellectual property rights at
home and abroad.
Request for Comment
The questions below are intended to
assist in identifying issues relevant to
the Department’s Task Force and should
not be construed as a limitation on the
scope of comments parties may submit.
Intellectual property law and policy
affects almost every aspect of Internet
content and technology. And, because
the digital economy is intrinsically
international in scope, most policy
questions need to be understood within
both a domestic and an international
context. Therefore, in addressing these
questions, commenters should identify
what they consider lessons learned from
other jurisdictions.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:36 Oct 04, 2010
Jkt 223001
Comments that contain references,
studies, research, and other empirical
data that are not widely published
should include copies of the referenced
material with the submitted comments.
Comments filed in response to this
notice will be made available to the
public on the Internet Policy Task Force
Web page at https://www.ntia.doc.gov/
internetpolicytaskforce. For this reason,
comments should not include
confidential, proprietary, or business
sensitive information.
creative works. Partnerships among
copyright owners and online service
providers to distribute content are
increasingly common. Still, rights
holders continue to face challenges in
detecting online infringement, in
curbing infringement, and in attracting
users to legitimate sources of
copyrighted content.
What are stakeholders’ experiences
and what data collection has occurred
related to trends in the technologies
used to engage in online copyright
piracy, and what is the prevalence of
1. Rights Holders: Protection and
such piracy? What new studies have
Detection Strategies for Online
been conducted or are in-process to
Infringement
estimate the economic effects of this
During the listening sessions, the Task piracy? What assumptions are made in
such studies on the substitution rates
Force heard that online copyright
infringement is depriving U.S. copyright among the different forms of content?
What technologies are currently used to
owners of their rights and
detect or prevent online infringement
compensation, and causing substantial
and how effective are these
economic harm to the copyright
technologies? What observations, if any,
industries, their employees,
independent authors and artists, and the have been made as to patterns of online
infringement as broadband Internet
U.S. economy as a whole. The Task
access has become more available? Is
Force also heard that the use of peer-tolitigation an effective option for
peer (P2P) file-sharing technology to
preventing Internet piracy? Consistent
engage in unauthorized distribution of
with free speech, due process, antitrust,
copyrighted works is still a significant
and privacy concerns, what incentives
problem, but that other technologies,
such as cyber lockers and streaming, are could encourage use of detection
technologies by online services
becoming increasingly prevalent as
providers, as well as assistance from
means for illegal online copying and
payment service providers, to curb
distribution.22 Stakeholders indicated
online copyright infringement?
that in some cases, unauthorized
What challenges have the creative
distribution of copyrighted works over
the Internet originates in other countries industries experienced in developing
new business models to offer content
and that Web sites facilitating online
online and, in the process, to counteract
infringement have become more
infringing Internet downloads and
sophisticated in order to mislead
streaming? Can commenters make any
consumers into believing they are
generalizations about the online
legitimate.
business models that are most likely to
To address the problem of online
piracy, stakeholders rely on a number of succeed in the 21st century, as well as
technologies to detect infringing content the technological and policy decisions
on the Internet.23 Stakeholders have also that might help creators earn a return for
their efforts? (Again, keeping in mind
developed an array of online content
free speech, due process and privacy
services using various business models
concerns.) How can government policy
to offer consumers legitimate access to
or intellectual property laws promote
music, films and television
successful, legitimate business models
programming, games, books, and other
and discourage infringement-driven
models? And, how can these policies
22 See Cisco, Visual Networking Index: Forecast
advance these goals while respecting the
and Methodology, 2009–2014, at 1–2 (2010), https://
www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/collatetal/ns341/
myriad legitimate ways to exchange
ns525/nr537/ns705/ns827/white_paper_c11–
non-copyrighted information (or the fair
481360.pdf (forecasting a higher amount of Internet
use of copyrighted works) on the
video traffic than P2P traffic by the end of 2010, the
Internet?
first time that P2P will not be the largest type of
Internet traffic since 2000; but also forecasting
continued growth in the overall volume of P2P
traffic).
23 Technologies known to be in use for purposes
of identifying online copyright infringement
include watermarks, fingerprinting, and content
filtering. See In the Matter of a National Broadband
Plan for Our Future, Comments of the Motion
Picture Association of America, Inc., in Response to
the FCC Workshop on the Role of Content in the
Broadband Ecosystem, GN Docket No. 09–51, at 21
(Oct. 2009).
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2. Internet Intermediaries: Safe Harbors
and Responsibilities
As described earlier, Section 230 of
the Communications Act and Section
512 of the Copyright Act limit the
liability of Internet intermediaries for
content made available on their
services. Section 512 provides online
service providers of transitory
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
communications, caching, storage, and
data location services a qualified safe
harbor in cases of online infringement.
The safe harbor is predicated on a
‘‘notice and takedown’’ regime in which
the provider must act expeditiously to
remove or disable access to allegedly
infringing content upon notice by the
copyright owner. Stakeholders in
listening sessions also described
collaborative efforts to reduce online
infringement. For example, a large
number of stakeholders are
collaborating to develop a common
digital standard to facilitate the
authorized and efficient distribution of
content to any device.24 In addition, the
Task Force heard from stakeholders
about a collaborative effort to establish
comprehensive guidelines for usergenerated content designed to protect
copyrighted works and to bring more
content to consumers through legitimate
channels.25 Cooperative efforts by the
private sector such as these are
explicitly encouraged in the Joint
Strategic Plan (Plan) on Intellectual
Property Enforcement, released by the
office of the U.S. Intellectual Property
Enforcement Coordinator in June
2010.26
What are stakeholders’ experiences
with the volume and accuracy of
takedown notices issued for allegedly
infringing content across the different
types of online services (i.e., storage,
caching, and search) and technologies
(e.g., P2P, cyber lockers, streaming,
etc.)? What processes are employed by
rights holders to identify infringers for
purposes of sending takedown notices?
What processes do Internet
intermediaries employ in response to
takedown notices? Are Internet
intermediaries’ responses to takedown
notices sufficiently timely to limit the
damage caused by infringement? What
24 The ‘‘Digital Entertainment Content Ecosystem’’
(DECE) is a consortium of entertainment, software,
hardware, retail, infrastructure and delivery
companies. DECE has developed a common file
format with copy protection and remote file storage
to be used by participating content providers,
services, and devices enabling consumers to
download legal content. DECE announced that
‘‘UltraViolet’’ will be the brand name for associated
offerings. Press Release, Digital Entertainment
Content Ecosystem, Digital Entertainment Content
Ecosystem Unveils UltraViolet Brand (July 20,
2010), https://www.uvvu.com/press/UltraViolet_
Brand_Launch_Release_07_20_2010_FINAL.PDF.
25 Principles for User Generated Content Services,
https://www.ugcprinciples.com (last visited May 27,
2010).
26 The Plan calls upon content owners, Internet
service providers, advertising brokers, payment
processors and search engines to ‘‘work
collaboratively, consistent with antitrust laws, to
address activity that has a negative economic
impact and undermines U.S. businesses, and to
seek practical and efficient solutions to address
infringement.’’ Joint Strategic Plan, supra note 13,
at 17.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:36 Oct 04, 2010
Jkt 223001
are the challenges of managing this
system of notices? What are
stakeholders’ experiences with online
copyright infringement by users who
change URLs, ISPs, locations, and/or
equipment to avoid detection? What
challenges exist to the identification of
such systematic infringers? What are
stakeholders’ experiences with Section
512(i) on the establishment of policies
by online service providers to inform
subscribers of service termination for
repeat infringement? What are
stakeholders’ experiences with the
framework in Section 512(j) for
injunctive relief to prevent or restrain
online infringement? Would
stakeholders recommend improvements
to existing legal remedies or even new
and additional legal remedies to deal
with infringing content on a more
timely basis?
What are stakeholders’ experiences
with developing collaborative
approaches to address online copyright
infringement? What range of
stakeholders participated in the
development of such collaborative
approaches? Have collaborative
approaches resulted in the formulation
of best practices, the adoption of private
graduated response systems, or other
measures to deter online infringement
that can be replicated? What other
collaborative approaches should
stakeholders consider? How can
government best encourage
collaborative approaches within the
private sector?
The Internet was developed by, and
continues to evolve through,
collaborative multi-stakeholder efforts.
These efforts often have proven
successful at addressing difficult
challenges flowing from the growth of
Internet communications and digital
commerce. In confronting the challenges
of online content and copyright
infringement, to what extent have all
relevant stakeholder groups, such as
independent creators and Internet users,
participated in or had a window on
collaborative approaches to curb online
infringement? Recognizing the inherent
challenges in engaging a wide variety of
stakeholders—large and small, noncommercial, multinational (among
others)—in such collaborative
approaches, what strategies, if any, have
been used to collect third-party input
and feedback or communicate the
outcomes to users and other nonparticipating stakeholders? For those
engaged in collaborative efforts to
protect copyrighted works, what are the
practical challenges, if any, in
promoting transparency, inclusiveness,
clarity in expected behavior, and fair
process for end users? Are there
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
61423
examples of voluntary arrangements
that effectively meet these challenges?
3. Internet Users: Consumers of Online
Works and User-Generated Content
The 1997 Framework for Global
Electronic Commerce was prescient in
describing the future of e-commerce in
stating, ‘‘Consumers will be able to shop
in their homes for a wide variety of
products [and] view these products on
their computers or televisions, access
information about the products * * *
and order and pay for their choice, all
from their living rooms.’’ 27 Indeed, as
consumers and providers adapt to
change, the ease and efficiency of
downloading and streaming digital
content over the Internet will
increasingly favor this medium over
more traditional methods of acquiring or
delivering creative works. With
increasing frequency, consumers are
also turning to online services to
generate and post content of their own
creation (‘‘user-generated content’’) and
to access such creative works, a
phenomenon that has exploded in
recent years. To provide a measure of
balance on behalf of Internet users who
access and/or create online content,
Section 512 includes a counternotification mechanism that enables
Internet users to respond to takedown
notices that allege online copyright
infringement.28
What initiatives have been
undertaken to improve the general
awareness of Internet users about online
copyright infringement and the
availability of legitimate sources to
access online copyrighted works? What
are stakeholders’ experiences with the
awareness and appropriate use by
Internet users of the counter-notification
mechanism? What are stakeholders’
experiences regarding inappropriate use
by Internet users of the counternotification mechanism, if any? What
are stakeholders’ experiences with the
volume of counter-notices filed? Do
current methods of detecting
infringement affect consumers’ ability to
legally obtain copies of copyrighted
works and/or share legal user-generated
content? What are the experiences of
universities in raising general awareness
with their communities about the harms
of digital piracy? What are stakeholders’
experiences in foreign countries and on
27 Framework for Global Electronic Commerce,
supra note 20.
28 Through the issuance of a counter-notice to the
online service provider, an Internet user can assert
a good faith belief that the removal or disabling of
content by an online service provider upon receipt
of a takedown notice was done by mistake or
misrepresentation. 17 U.S.C. 512 (g)(3)(C).
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
61424
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Notices
university campuses in reducing online
copyright infringement?
In turn, are independent creators and
Internet users able to fully exploit the
Internet platform for the distribution of
their works and, if not, what barriers
have been encountered? What
mechanisms are there, or should there
be, for creators of user-generated content
to seek compensation for their work?
Dated: September 29, 2010.
Gary Locke,
Secretary of Commerce.
David J. Kappos,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual
Property and Director of the United States
Patent and Trademark Office.
Lawrence E. Strickling,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for
Communications and Information.
[FR Doc. 2010–24863 Filed 10–4–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–60–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Availability of Seats for the Monterey
Bay National Marine Sanctuary
Advisory Council
Office of National Marine
Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Ocean
Service (NOS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Department of Commerce (DOC).
ACTION: Notice and request for
applications.
AGENCY:
The ONMS is seeking
applications for the following vacant
seats on the Monterey Bay National
Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: AtLarge (1), Education, Diving, and
Tourism. Applicants are chosen based
upon their particular expertise and
experience in relation to the seat for
which they are applying; community
and professional affiliations; philosophy
regarding the protection and
management of marine resources; and
possibly the length of residence in the
area affected by the sanctuary.
Applicants who are chosen should
expect to serve until February 2014.
DATES: Applications are due by
November 12, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Application kits may be
obtained from 299 Foam Street,
Monterey, CA, 93940 or online at
https://montereybay.noaa.gov/.
Completed applications should be sent
to the same address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nicole Capps, 299 Foam Street,
Monterey, CA, 93940, (831) 647–4206,
nicole.capps@noaa.gov.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:36 Oct 04, 2010
Jkt 223001
The
MBNMS Advisory Council was
established in March 1994 to assure
continued public participation in the
management of the Sanctuary. Since its
establishment, the Advisory Council has
played a vital role in decisions affecting
the Sanctuary along the central
California coast.
The Advisory Council’s twenty voting
members represent a variety of local
user groups, as well as the general
public, plus seven local, state and
federal governmental jurisdictions. In
addition, the respective managers or
superintendents for the four California
National Marine Sanctuaries (Channel
Islands National Marine Sanctuary,
Cordell Bank National Marine
Sanctuary, Gulf of the Farallones
National Marine Sanctuary and the
Monterey Bay National Marine
Sanctuary) and the Elkhorn Slough
National Estuarine Research Reserve sit
as non-voting members.
Four working groups support the
Advisory Council: The Research
Activity Panel (‘‘RAP’’) chaired by the
Research Representative, the Sanctuary
Education Panel (‘‘SEP’’) chaired by the
Education Representative, the
Conservation Working Group (‘‘CWG’’)
chaired by the Conservation
Representative, and the Business and
Tourism Activity Panel (‘‘BTAP’’)
chaired by the Business/Industry
Representative, each dealing with
matters concerning research, education,
conservation and human use. The
working groups are composed of experts
from the appropriate fields of interest
and meet monthly, or bi-monthly,
serving as invaluable advisors to the
Advisory Council and the Sanctuary
Superintendent.
The Advisory Council represents the
coordination link between the
Sanctuary and the state and federal
management agencies, user groups,
researchers, educators, policy makers,
and other various groups that help to
focus efforts and attention on the central
California coastal and marine
ecosystems.
The Advisory Council functions in an
advisory capacity to the Sanctuary
Superintendent and is instrumental in
helping develop policies, program goals,
and identify education, outreach,
research, long-term monitoring, resource
protection, and revenue enhancement
priorities. The Advisory Council works
in concert with the Sanctuary
Superintendent by keeping him or her
informed about issues of concern
throughout the Sanctuary, offering
recommendations on specific issues,
and aiding the Superintendent in
achieving the goals of the Sanctuary
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
program within the context of
California’s marine programs and
policies.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1431, et seq.
(Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog
Number 11.429 Marine Sanctuary Program)
Dated: September 24, 2010.
Daniel J. Basta,
Director, Office National Marine Sanctuaries
National Ocean Service, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010–24916 Filed 10–4–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE M
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XZ37
Endangered Species; File No. 15596
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; receipt of application.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the North Carolina Aquarium at Fort
Fisher, North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources,
Atlantic Beach, NC, 28512 [Hap
Fatzinger, Responsible Party], has
applied in due form for a permit to hold
shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser
brevirostrum) for the purposes of
enhancement.
DATES: Written, telefaxed, or e-mail
comments must be received on or before
November 4, 2010.
ADDRESSES: The application and related
documents are available for review by
selecting ‘‘Records Open for Public
Comment’’ from the Features box on the
Applications and Permits for Protected
Species (APPS) home page, https://
apps.nmfs.noaa.gov, and then selecting
File No. 15596 from the list of available
applications.
These documents are also available
upon written request or by appointment
in the following office(s):
Permits, Conservation and Education
Division, Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room
13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone
(301)713–2289; fax (301)713–0376 and;
Southeast Region, NMFS, 263 13th
Avenue South, Saint Petersburg, Florida
33701; phone (727)824–5312; fax
(727)824–5309.
Written comments on this application
should be submitted to the Chief,
Permits, Conservation and Education
Division, at the address listed above.
Comments may also be submitted by
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 192 (Tuesday, October 5, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61419-61424]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24863]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Office of the Secretary
United States Patent and Trademark Office
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
[Docket No. 100910448-0448-01]
RIN 0660-XA19
Inquiry on Copyright Policy, Creativity, and Innovation in the
Internet Economy
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Commerce; Patent
and Trademark Office, U.S. Department of Commerce; National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Inquiry.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce's Internet Policy Task Force is
conducting a comprehensive review of the relationship between the
availability and protection of online copyrighted works and innovation
in the Internet economy. The Department, the United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO), and the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA) seek public comment from all
interested stakeholders, including rights holders, Internet service
providers, and consumers on the challenges of protecting copyrighted
works online and the relationship between copyright law and innovation
in the Internet economy. After analyzing the comments submitted in
response to this Notice, the Internet Policy Task Force intends to
issue a report that will contribute to the Administration's domestic
policy and international engagement in the area of online copyright
protection and innovation.
DATES: Comments are due on or before November 19, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are encouraged to file comments
electronically by e-mail to copyright-noi-2010@ntia.doc.gov.
Submissions should be in one of the following formats: HTML, ASCII,
Word, rtf, or pdf. Paper comments can be sent to: Office of Policy
Analysis and Development, NTIA, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 4725,
1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. Please note that
all material sent via the U.S. Postal Service (including ``Overnight''
or ``Express Mail'') is subject to delivery delays of up to two weeks
due to mail
[[Page 61420]]
security procedures. Paper submissions should also include a CD or DVD
in Word, WordPerfect, or pdf format. CDs or DVDs should be labeled with
the name and organizational affiliation of the filer, and the name of
the word processing program used to create the document. Comments filed
in response to this notice will be made available to the public on the
Internet Policy Task Force Web page at https://www.ntia.doc.gov/internetpolicytaskforce. For this reason, comments should not include
confidential, proprietary, or business sensitive information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this Notice,
contact: Dennis Amari, Office of Policy Analysis and Development,
National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room 4725,
Washington DC 20230, telephone (202) 482-1880; or Michael Shapiro,
Office of External Affairs, United States Patent and Trademark Office,
U.S. Department of Commerce, Madison Building, 401 Dulany Street,
Alexandria, VA 22314, telephone (571) 272-9300; or send an e-mail to
copyright-noi-2010@ntia.doc.gov. Please direct media inquires to NTIA's
Office of Public Affairs at (202) 482-7002; or USPTO's Office of Public
Affairs at (572) 272-8400.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Recognizing the vital importance of the
Internet to U.S. prosperity, education, and political and cultural
life, the Department has made it a top priority to ensure that the
Internet remains open for innovation. The Department has assembled an
Internet Policy Task Force whose mission is to identify leading public
policy and operational challenges in the Internet environment. The Task
Force leverages expertise across many bureaus at the Department,
including those responsible for domestic and international information
and communications technology policy, international trade,
cybersecurity standards and best practices, intellectual property,
business advocacy, and export control. This is one in a series of
inquiries from the Task Force. The Task Force is conducting similar
reviews of information privacy,\1\ cybersecurity,\2\ and the global
free flow of information goods and services. The Task Force may explore
additional areas in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Notice of Inquiry, Information Privacy and Innovation in
the Internet Economy, 75 FR 21,226 (Apr. 23, 2010). This notice and
all documents related to the Task Force initiative are available at
https://www.ntia.doc.gov/internetpolicytaskforce.gov.
\2\ See Notice of Inquiry, Cybersecurity, Innovation and the
Internet Economy, 75 FR 44,216 (July 28, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background: Prior to releasing this Notice of Inquiry, the Task
Force held listening sessions with a wide range of stakeholders to
understand the current and most vexing questions related to online
copyright protection as well as the broader impact of content issues on
innovation in the Internet economy. The Task Force also convened a
public meeting on July 1, 2010, to air these issues further.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Notice of Public Meeting, Copyright Policy, Creativity, and
Innovation in the Internet Economy, 75 FR 33,577 (June 14, 2010). An
archival webcast of the public meeting can be found on the Internet
Policy Task Force Web page at: https://www.ntia.doc.gov/internetpolicytaskforce/copyright/webcast.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the course of this dialogue, the Task Force has identified a
dual public policy imperative--to combat online copyright infringement
more effectively and to sustain innovative uses of information and
information technology. By way of this Notice and a follow-on report,
the Task Force seeks to identify policies that will: (1) Increase
benefits for rights holders of creative works accessible online but not
for those who infringe on those rights; (2) maintain robust information
flows that facilitate innovation and growth of the Internet economy;
and (3) at the same time, safeguard end-user interests in freedom of
expression, due process, and privacy.\4\ The report will evaluate
current challenges to protecting online copyrighted works and to
sustaining robust information flows, and it will analyze various
approaches to meet those challenges. The Task Force is hopeful that the
dialogue launched here and the research conducted pursuant to this
inquiry will contribute to Administration-wide policy positions and to
a global consensus to foster creativity and innovation online. This
review is being coordinated with the office of the Intellectual
Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC) in the Office of Management and
Budget, Executive Office of the President, and other components of the
Executive Office of the President.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See e.g., Remarks of Gary Locke, Secretary of Commerce,
Copyright Policy in the Internet Economy Symposium, July 1, 2010,
available at https://www.commerce.gov/news/secretary-speeches/2010/07/01/remarks-copyright-policy-internet-economy-symposium; and,
Remarks of Lawrence E. Strickling. Assistant Secretary for
Communications and Information, Copyright Policy in the Internet
Economy Symposium, July 1, 2010, available at https://www.ntia.doc.gov/presentations/2010/CopyrightSymposium_Remarks
07012010.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Commerce and Copyrighted Works: E-commerce and investment in
information systems continue to create new jobs in the Internet economy
and to contribute to the nation's economic recovery.\5\ An important
component of the growth in e-commerce is the rapid increase in the sale
of digital content across the creative industries.\6\ For example,
sales of digital music downloads in the United States were estimated to
reach $3.1 billion in 2009, a 19 percent increase above 2008 sales.\7\
Likewise, revenues derived from the sale of online videos were
estimated to reach $1.2 billion in 2008, and are expected to climb to
$4.5 billion by 2012.\8\ In 2009, revenues from the sale of e-books
were estimated at $313 million, 177 percent above sales from the
previous year and, for the first time ever, exceeding revenues from the
sale of audio-books.\9\ The popularity of online games is also on the
rise, with a forecast to double 2009's $2.8 billion in online sales by
2015.\10\ As these data suggest, the availability and consumption of a
wide range of lawful online creative works are increasing rapidly and
contribute an increasingly important component of our nation's e-
commerce growth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Remarks of Gary Locke, Secretary of Commerce, Privacy and
Innovation Symposium, May 7, 2010, https://www.commerce.gov/news/secretary-speeches/2010/05/07/remarks-privacy-and-innovation-symposium.
\6\ Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development
(OECD), OECD Information Technology Outlook 2008, at 250 (2008). The
fair use of copyrighted works is also believed to contribute to the
Internet economy. See Computer and Communications Industry
Association (CCIA), Fair Use in the U.S. Economy: Economic
Contribution of Industries Relying on Fair Use, at 4, 8 (2010),
https://www.ccianet.org/CCIA/files/ccLibrary Files/Filename/
000000000354/fair-use-study-final.pdf.
\7\ Joshua P. Friedlander, Recording Indus. Association of
America (RIAA), 2009 Year-End Shipment Statistics, available at
https://76.74.24.142/A200B8A7-6BBF-EF15-3038-582014919F78.pdf.
\8\ Press Release, In-Stat, Explosive Growth Forecast in Online
Video Market, Netflix Subscription Model Wins (Aug. 13, 2008),
https://www.instat.com/newmk.asp?ID=2373.
\9\ Press Release, Association of American Publishers, AAP
Reports Book Sales Estimated at $23.9 Billion in 2009 (Apr. 7,
2010).
\10\ Press Release, Pike & Fischer, U.S. Online Game Subscribers
to More than Double in Five Years, Pike & Fischer Projects (Jan. 28,
2010), https://www.marketwise.com/press-release/US-Online-Game-Subscribers-to-More-Than-Double-in-Five Years-Pike-Fischer-Projects-
1109049.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are many reasons for the success that some innovators have
had
[[Page 61421]]
in selling online digital content. For one, the open end-to-end
architecture of the Internet enables innovation at the ``edges'' of the
network, making possible the introduction of such content services, the
development of new technologies and devices, and the opportunity to
access distant markets. Thus, while traditional content formats and
distribution channels have been disrupted, in part, by effects of the
Internet on their markets and by the growing availability of content
online, an increasing number of enterprises seem to be successfully
adapting their business models or developing new ones, and leveraging
the Internet's architecture for the distribution of creative works.
Second, the flow of content across the Internet is enabled by the
carefully constructed balance of roles and responsibilities among
stakeholders set forth in two key statutes. In 1996, Congress added
Section 230 to the Communications Act of 1934. It grants Internet
service providers, content hosting sites, and other so-called
``Internet intermediaries'' broad immunity from liability for all
content created by third parties, as well as for actions taken in good
faith to restrict access to or availability of objectionable online
content posted by third-parties.\11\ In the realm of copyright,
Congress added Section 512 to the Copyright Act in 1997 via the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). It fosters a balance of interests by
enabling rights holders to enforce their rights against online
infringers, while limiting the liability of Internet intermediaries for
the infringing actions of their subscribers if they take certain steps
aimed at combating infringement.\12\ Both provisions of law are seen as
having contributed significantly to expansion of the digital economy
and both remain essential to promoting innovation and to protecting
intellectual property online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 47 U.S.C. 230 (2006).
\12\ 17 U.S.C. 512 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite the progress unleashed by the current policy framework,
copyright infringement of works online remains a persistent and
significant problem. Estimates of economic losses caused by online
infringement to rights holders, the copyright industries, and the U.S.
economy as a whole vary based on methodologies and assumptions used in
such estimates, but are nonetheless substantial.\13\ In a word, thieves
of online copyrighted works ``unfairly devalue America's contribution,
hinder our ability to grow our economy, compromise good, high-wage jobs
for Americans, and endanger strong and prosperous communities.''\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See OECD, The Economic Impact of Counterfeiting and Piracy
71 (2008); U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-10-423,
Intellectual Property: Observations to Quantify the Economic Effects
of Counterfeit and Pirated Goods 15, 24-25 (2010), https://gao.gov/new.items/d10423.pdf. See also, 2010 Joint Strategic Plan on
Intellectual Property Enforcement, Intellectual Property Enforcement
Coordinator (Joint Strategic Plan) at 5 (June 2010), https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/intellectualproperty/intellectualproperty_strategic_plan.pdf (noting that ``[t]hese
thieves impose substantial costs.'').
\14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The prevalence of online copyright infringement is the primary
motivation for the Task Force to seek an updated understanding of
stakeholders' experiences under the current policy framework and to
learn more about voluntary, cooperative efforts to address online
infringement. The broader goal is to gain greater insight into the
opportunities and challenges for innovation in the creative content
sector of the Internet economy.
The Nexus Between Online Copyright Policy and the Department's
Role: The Department has played an instrumental role in the development
of policies that have helped digital commerce flourish. Included among
these policies is explicit recognition of the legitimate rights and
commercial expectations of those whose creation and distribution of
digital works strengthen our economy, expand our exports, and create
jobs in America. Our ongoing challenge and commitment is to align the
flexibility needed for innovation in the Internet economy with
effective means of protecting copyrighted works that are accessible
online.
USPTO serves as the advisor to the President on national and
international intellectual property policy issues.\15\ USPTO's
attention to the protection of online copyrighted works began in 1993
when it chaired the Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights, one
of the three working groups established by the White House Information
Infrastructure Task Force. The Working Group examined and made
recommendations to address copyright protection and other intellectual
property rights in the context of digital interactive services.\16\
Subsequently, USPTO participated in negotiations on the two World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) treaties known as the ``WIPO
Internet Treaties''--the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO
Performances and Phonograms Treaty--that established new standards for
international protection of copyright and related rights in the digital
age.\17\ USPTO played a key role in the enactment of the DMCA in the
United States which included a new Section 512 of the Copyright Act and
provisions implementing the WIPO Internet Treaties in the United
States.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ American Inventors Protection Act of 1999, Public Law 106-
113, app. I, Sec. 4001, 113 Stat. 1501, 1501A-552 (1999) (amended
2002 and codified in scattered sections of title 35 of the U.S.
Code).
\16\ Information Infrastructure Task Force, Intellectual
Property and the National Information Infrastructure: The Report of
the Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights (1995), https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/doc/ipnii.
\17\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-04-912,
Intellectual Property: U.S. Efforts have Contributed to Strengthened
Laws Overseas, but Challenges Remain 17 (2004), https://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04912.pdf.
\18\ Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Public Law 105-304, Sec.
103, 112 Stat. 2860, 2863 (1998) (codified at 17 U.S.C. 1201-1205
(2006)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NTIA serves as the President's principal advisor on
telecommunications and information policy matters and pursues the
adoption of policies that facilitate and contribute to the full
development of competition, efficiency, and the free flow of commerce
in domestic and international telecommunications markets.\19\ In this
role, NTIA has been a lead contributor to the development of Internet
policy in the Executive branch and played a key role in devising the
first comprehensive Internet policy strategy, the Framework for Global
Electronic Commerce, published by the White House Information
Infrastructure Task Force in 1997. The Framework set forth five
principles to guide government support for the evolution of Internet
commerce and made a set of recommendations for international discussion
to foster increased business and consumer confidence in the use of
electronic networks for commerce.\20\ Among its recommendations, the
Framework acknowledged the imperative of protecting intellectual
property rights in electronic commerce and identified adoption of the
WIPO Internet Treaties as one of the Administration's top intellectual
property policy objectives.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Telecommunications Authorization Act of 1992, Public Law
102-538, 106 Stat. 3533 (codified in scattered section of titles 47,
28, and 15 of the U.S. Code).
\20\ See President William J. Clinton and Vice President Albert
Gore Jr., Framework for Global Electronic Commerce (1997), https://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/Commerce/(pagination not available).
\21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Among the other Commerce Department bureaus engaged on intellectual
property rights issues, the International Trade Administration (ITA)
administers the Trade Agreements Program to monitor foreign country
implementation of multilateral and bilateral trade agreements. This
program also serves to identify access and other
[[Page 61422]]
barriers to trade, including those related to intellectual property
rights. Within ITA's Market Access and Compliance unit, the Office of
Intellectual Property Rights investigates allegations of trade
agreement violations and encourages policies by foreign governments to
enhance and protect intellectual property rights for U.S. firms and
artists. This office also develops trade programs and tools with other
Federal agencies to help U.S. businesses and citizens enforce and
protect their intellectual property rights in foreign markets.
Across the Federal government, the Department works closely with
the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) and other agencies
to establish, on a bilateral and multilateral basis, workable treaty
commitments and trade agreements that address intellectual property
rights. For example, the Department collaborates with USTR in
negotiations to establish the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement
(ACTA), in the ``Special 301'' annual reviews of intellectual property
protection and market access practices in foreign countries, and in
negotiation and implementation of the intellectual property chapters of
free trade agreements--all of which address online copyright issues in
foreign jurisdictions. The Department also works with the Department of
Justice to develop proportionate, deterrent penalties for commercial
scale counterfeiting and piracy around the world. Additionally, the
Department works with the National Intellectual Property Rights
Coordination Center, led by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
to leverage resources, skills and authorities to provide a
comprehensive U.S. Government enforcement response to intellectual
property rights infringement. Through these and other work streams, the
Department is committed to effective systems that protect intellectual
property rights at home and abroad.
Request for Comment
The questions below are intended to assist in identifying issues
relevant to the Department's Task Force and should not be construed as
a limitation on the scope of comments parties may submit. Intellectual
property law and policy affects almost every aspect of Internet content
and technology. And, because the digital economy is intrinsically
international in scope, most policy questions need to be understood
within both a domestic and an international context. Therefore, in
addressing these questions, commenters should identify what they
consider lessons learned from other jurisdictions.
Comments that contain references, studies, research, and other
empirical data that are not widely published should include copies of
the referenced material with the submitted comments. Comments filed in
response to this notice will be made available to the public on the
Internet Policy Task Force Web page at https://www.ntia.doc.gov/internetpolicytaskforce. For this reason, comments should not include
confidential, proprietary, or business sensitive information.
1. Rights Holders: Protection and Detection Strategies for Online
Infringement
During the listening sessions, the Task Force heard that online
copyright infringement is depriving U.S. copyright owners of their
rights and compensation, and causing substantial economic harm to the
copyright industries, their employees, independent authors and artists,
and the U.S. economy as a whole. The Task Force also heard that the use
of peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing technology to engage in unauthorized
distribution of copyrighted works is still a significant problem, but
that other technologies, such as cyber lockers and streaming, are
becoming increasingly prevalent as means for illegal online copying and
distribution.\22\ Stakeholders indicated that in some cases,
unauthorized distribution of copyrighted works over the Internet
originates in other countries and that Web sites facilitating online
infringement have become more sophisticated in order to mislead
consumers into believing they are legitimate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See Cisco, Visual Networking Index: Forecast and
Methodology, 2009-2014, at 1-2 (2010), https://www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/collatetal/ns341/ns525/nr537/ns705/ns827/white_paper_c11-481360.pdf (forecasting a higher amount of Internet video
traffic than P2P traffic by the end of 2010, the first time that P2P
will not be the largest type of Internet traffic since 2000; but
also forecasting continued growth in the overall volume of P2P
traffic).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To address the problem of online piracy, stakeholders rely on a
number of technologies to detect infringing content on the
Internet.\23\ Stakeholders have also developed an array of online
content services using various business models to offer consumers
legitimate access to music, films and television programming, games,
books, and other creative works. Partnerships among copyright owners
and online service providers to distribute content are increasingly
common. Still, rights holders continue to face challenges in detecting
online infringement, in curbing infringement, and in attracting users
to legitimate sources of copyrighted content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Technologies known to be in use for purposes of identifying
online copyright infringement include watermarks, fingerprinting,
and content filtering. See In the Matter of a National Broadband
Plan for Our Future, Comments of the Motion Picture Association of
America, Inc., in Response to the FCC Workshop on the Role of
Content in the Broadband Ecosystem, GN Docket No. 09-51, at 21 (Oct.
2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
What are stakeholders' experiences and what data collection has
occurred related to trends in the technologies used to engage in online
copyright piracy, and what is the prevalence of such piracy? What new
studies have been conducted or are in-process to estimate the economic
effects of this piracy? What assumptions are made in such studies on
the substitution rates among the different forms of content? What
technologies are currently used to detect or prevent online
infringement and how effective are these technologies? What
observations, if any, have been made as to patterns of online
infringement as broadband Internet access has become more available? Is
litigation an effective option for preventing Internet piracy?
Consistent with free speech, due process, antitrust, and privacy
concerns, what incentives could encourage use of detection technologies
by online services providers, as well as assistance from payment
service providers, to curb online copyright infringement?
What challenges have the creative industries experienced in
developing new business models to offer content online and, in the
process, to counteract infringing Internet downloads and streaming? Can
commenters make any generalizations about the online business models
that are most likely to succeed in the 21st century, as well as the
technological and policy decisions that might help creators earn a
return for their efforts? (Again, keeping in mind free speech, due
process and privacy concerns.) How can government policy or
intellectual property laws promote successful, legitimate business
models and discourage infringement-driven models? And, how can these
policies advance these goals while respecting the myriad legitimate
ways to exchange non-copyrighted information (or the fair use of
copyrighted works) on the Internet?
2. Internet Intermediaries: Safe Harbors and Responsibilities
As described earlier, Section 230 of the Communications Act and
Section 512 of the Copyright Act limit the liability of Internet
intermediaries for content made available on their services. Section
512 provides online service providers of transitory
[[Page 61423]]
communications, caching, storage, and data location services a
qualified safe harbor in cases of online infringement. The safe harbor
is predicated on a ``notice and takedown'' regime in which the provider
must act expeditiously to remove or disable access to allegedly
infringing content upon notice by the copyright owner. Stakeholders in
listening sessions also described collaborative efforts to reduce
online infringement. For example, a large number of stakeholders are
collaborating to develop a common digital standard to facilitate the
authorized and efficient distribution of content to any device.\24\ In
addition, the Task Force heard from stakeholders about a collaborative
effort to establish comprehensive guidelines for user-generated content
designed to protect copyrighted works and to bring more content to
consumers through legitimate channels.\25\ Cooperative efforts by the
private sector such as these are explicitly encouraged in the Joint
Strategic Plan (Plan) on Intellectual Property Enforcement, released by
the office of the U.S. Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator in
June 2010.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ The ``Digital Entertainment Content Ecosystem'' (DECE) is a
consortium of entertainment, software, hardware, retail,
infrastructure and delivery companies. DECE has developed a common
file format with copy protection and remote file storage to be used
by participating content providers, services, and devices enabling
consumers to download legal content. DECE announced that
``UltraViolet'' will be the brand name for associated offerings.
Press Release, Digital Entertainment Content Ecosystem, Digital
Entertainment Content Ecosystem Unveils UltraViolet Brand (July 20,
2010), https://www.uvvu.com/press/UltraViolet_Brand_Launch_Release_07_20_2010_FINAL.PDF.
\25\ Principles for User Generated Content Services, https://www.ugcprinciples.com (last visited May 27, 2010).
\26\ The Plan calls upon content owners, Internet service
providers, advertising brokers, payment processors and search
engines to ``work collaboratively, consistent with antitrust laws,
to address activity that has a negative economic impact and
undermines U.S. businesses, and to seek practical and efficient
solutions to address infringement.'' Joint Strategic Plan, supra
note 13, at 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
What are stakeholders' experiences with the volume and accuracy of
takedown notices issued for allegedly infringing content across the
different types of online services (i.e., storage, caching, and search)
and technologies (e.g., P2P, cyber lockers, streaming, etc.)? What
processes are employed by rights holders to identify infringers for
purposes of sending takedown notices? What processes do Internet
intermediaries employ in response to takedown notices? Are Internet
intermediaries' responses to takedown notices sufficiently timely to
limit the damage caused by infringement? What are the challenges of
managing this system of notices? What are stakeholders' experiences
with online copyright infringement by users who change URLs, ISPs,
locations, and/or equipment to avoid detection? What challenges exist
to the identification of such systematic infringers? What are
stakeholders' experiences with Section 512(i) on the establishment of
policies by online service providers to inform subscribers of service
termination for repeat infringement? What are stakeholders' experiences
with the framework in Section 512(j) for injunctive relief to prevent
or restrain online infringement? Would stakeholders recommend
improvements to existing legal remedies or even new and additional
legal remedies to deal with infringing content on a more timely basis?
What are stakeholders' experiences with developing collaborative
approaches to address online copyright infringement? What range of
stakeholders participated in the development of such collaborative
approaches? Have collaborative approaches resulted in the formulation
of best practices, the adoption of private graduated response systems,
or other measures to deter online infringement that can be replicated?
What other collaborative approaches should stakeholders consider? How
can government best encourage collaborative approaches within the
private sector?
The Internet was developed by, and continues to evolve through,
collaborative multi-stakeholder efforts. These efforts often have
proven successful at addressing difficult challenges flowing from the
growth of Internet communications and digital commerce. In confronting
the challenges of online content and copyright infringement, to what
extent have all relevant stakeholder groups, such as independent
creators and Internet users, participated in or had a window on
collaborative approaches to curb online infringement? Recognizing the
inherent challenges in engaging a wide variety of stakeholders--large
and small, non-commercial, multinational (among others)--in such
collaborative approaches, what strategies, if any, have been used to
collect third-party input and feedback or communicate the outcomes to
users and other non-participating stakeholders? For those engaged in
collaborative efforts to protect copyrighted works, what are the
practical challenges, if any, in promoting transparency, inclusiveness,
clarity in expected behavior, and fair process for end users? Are there
examples of voluntary arrangements that effectively meet these
challenges?
3. Internet Users: Consumers of Online Works and User-Generated Content
The 1997 Framework for Global Electronic Commerce was prescient in
describing the future of e-commerce in stating, ``Consumers will be
able to shop in their homes for a wide variety of products [and] view
these products on their computers or televisions, access information
about the products * * * and order and pay for their choice, all from
their living rooms.'' \27\ Indeed, as consumers and providers adapt to
change, the ease and efficiency of downloading and streaming digital
content over the Internet will increasingly favor this medium over more
traditional methods of acquiring or delivering creative works. With
increasing frequency, consumers are also turning to online services to
generate and post content of their own creation (``user-generated
content'') and to access such creative works, a phenomenon that has
exploded in recent years. To provide a measure of balance on behalf of
Internet users who access and/or create online content, Section 512
includes a counter-notification mechanism that enables Internet users
to respond to takedown notices that allege online copyright
infringement.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Framework for Global Electronic Commerce, supra note 20.
\28\ Through the issuance of a counter-notice to the online
service provider, an Internet user can assert a good faith belief
that the removal or disabling of content by an online service
provider upon receipt of a takedown notice was done by mistake or
misrepresentation. 17 U.S.C. 512 (g)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
What initiatives have been undertaken to improve the general
awareness of Internet users about online copyright infringement and the
availability of legitimate sources to access online copyrighted works?
What are stakeholders' experiences with the awareness and appropriate
use by Internet users of the counter-notification mechanism? What are
stakeholders' experiences regarding inappropriate use by Internet users
of the counter-notification mechanism, if any? What are stakeholders'
experiences with the volume of counter-notices filed? Do current
methods of detecting infringement affect consumers' ability to legally
obtain copies of copyrighted works and/or share legal user-generated
content? What are the experiences of universities in raising general
awareness with their communities about the harms of digital piracy?
What are stakeholders' experiences in foreign countries and on
[[Page 61424]]
university campuses in reducing online copyright infringement?
In turn, are independent creators and Internet users able to fully
exploit the Internet platform for the distribution of their works and,
if not, what barriers have been encountered? What mechanisms are there,
or should there be, for creators of user-generated content to seek
compensation for their work?
Dated: September 29, 2010.
Gary Locke,
Secretary of Commerce.
David J. Kappos,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of
the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
Lawrence E. Strickling,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information.
[FR Doc. 2010-24863 Filed 10-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-60-P