The Executive Yuan on Thursday last week passed what is billed as the largest draft amendment to the nation’s copyright laws in 20 years, and sent it to the Legislative Yuan for review.
Copyright law is crucial for the dissemination of ideas and, with the rapid changes and development of the means of dissemination of ideas, these laws need to be amended regularly if they are to remain relevant.
Since the complete overhaul of the nation’s copyright laws in 1992, there have been very few major revisions.
However, the means of dissemination of ideas continue to change, and in that time have moved from paper and audio and visual recordings to virtual media as the world progresses further into the digital age.
LAGGARD
The 1992 copyright law revisions were largely based on those of Japan and South Korea, but in the 30 years since then, Tokyo has revised its copyright laws almost every two or three years, and Seoul has kept pace. It is only Taiwan that has lagged behind.
Even now, under existing copyright laws in Taiwan, distance learning is illegal unless authorization is obtained, and the fair use of works for libraries and school textbooks remains stuck in the paper era.
Meanwhile, neither the Executive Yuan nor the Legislative Yuan is able to use other people’s works on the Internet for administrative or legislative purposes.
At this time, when the world is still prey to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Internet is the main medium through which information is disseminated, yet Taiwan’s copyright laws lag behind the rest of the world to an absurd degree.
In 2009, the Intellectual Property Office brought together copyright law experts and held a series of consultations to discuss amending the laws. The group met on more than 70 occasions, with each meeting lasting two-and-a-half hours, until it completed a comprehensive copyright law amendment proposal in 2016 and sent it to the legislature for review in 2017.
Due to the complexity of the legislation and the lack of voter engagement on the topic, it languished in the legislature for three years, largely ignored.
According to Article 13 of the Law Governing the Legislative Yuan’s Power (立法院職權行使法), at the end of each legislative session, with the exception of the budget and civil petitions, unresolved motions cannot be considered in the next session.
As a result, the motion was sent back last year and, concerned that the entire amendment proposal would meet the same fate as the one submitted in 2017, the office prepared a truncated version to be submitted to the Executive Yuan. Nonetheless, this proposal is the largest copyright law revision in two decades.
That this copyright law draft amendment proposal was passed by the Executive Yuan so quickly must have been because Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) realizes that these revisions can no longer be delayed, as the digital age is upon us, and pushed them up the schedule.
A DIFFERENT FATE?
However, there is no guarantee that the proposal would not be left to languish in the legislature for three years, as was the fate of its predecessor, and have to be resubmitted in 2025.
If that does happen, then distance learning in Taiwan will continue to be illegal, and the fair use of publications within libraries, school textbooks and within the executive and legislative branches will continue to be stuck in the age of paper.
Hsiao Hsiung-lin is a managing partner at the North Star Copyright Law Office.
Translated by Paul Cooper
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Xiaomi Corp founder Lei Jun (雷軍) on May 22 made a high-profile announcement, giving online viewers a sneak peek at the company’s first 3-nanometer mobile processor — the Xring O1 chip — and saying it is a breakthrough in China’s chip design history. Although Xiaomi might be capable of designing chips, it lacks the ability to manufacture them. No matter how beautifully planned the blueprints are, if they cannot be mass-produced, they are nothing more than drawings on paper. The truth is that China’s chipmaking efforts are still heavily reliant on the free world — particularly on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
Keelung Mayor George Hsieh (謝國樑) of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) on Tuesday last week apologized over allegations that the former director of the city’s Civil Affairs Department had illegally accessed citizens’ data to assist the KMT in its campaign to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) councilors. Given the public discontent with opposition lawmakers’ disruptive behavior in the legislature, passage of unconstitutional legislation and slashing of the central government’s budget, civic groups have launched a massive campaign to recall KMT lawmakers. The KMT has tried to fight back by initiating campaigns to recall DPP lawmakers, but the petition documents they
RSS