offside flag

Permission to Copy, right?

The local government has proposed changes to the copyright laws. This, on the surface, should be a routine procedure to keep the laws up to date with technological advances. However, one proposed amendment has brought netizens away from computers and onto the streets.

The government proposed that anyone making modifications to copyrighted material is liable to be prosecuted and tried in criminal court. This means that someone who, for example, modifies a movie poster and write new lyrics to a song, even in satire, can be criminally charged. The authorities can initiate investigation on whether copyright has been violated upon receiving a complaint, even if someone other than the copyright owner makes the complaint. So if someone is offended by something that is modified from copyrighted material or considers oneself the target of someone else's satire. To make matters worse, anyone creating a link to, and giving a "like" on a social network page showing modifications of copyrighted material is liable to be criminally charged.

I didn't realize the problem with the amendments until I realized that, if similar laws had been in place in Canada 10 years ago, I might be liable to criminal charges simply for using the phrase "Believe It or Not" as the title of a series of articles I wrote. mathNEWS, the newsletter that published the articles, received a cease-and-desist letter from Ripley's, saying that my articles would confuse those looking for Ripley's Believe It or Not. mathNEWS published a letter stating that my articles would not lead to any confusion, and Ripley's took no further action. Recalling this episode made me realize that, should the amendments pass, anyone can report others for using copyrighted material without the owner's permission and the owner may not be required to spend any money in the legal proceedings or proof that the altered material results in any tangible loss to the owner during legal proceedings, should the matter go to the courts.

In Hong Kong, netizens often modify pop song lyrics and movie posters to express their views on political issues and current events. The target of such work (political parties, corporations, individuals) can use the amended copyright law to try to silence those who lampoon them with songs, video clips, and posters that are altered from existing material. Thus it is strong possibility that those who are being parodied may use this amendment to silence those who poke fun at them with songs, video, or images.

The government minister the amendments try to allay the people's fears by saying that consultations (on what constitutes copyright violation and whether someone sharing a link should be exempt from being prosecuted) will be made after the passage of the amendments. One has to wonder if they got the order reversed — under normal procedure, public consultation of a bill should be made before the bill is passed into law.

Many of those whose work are being modified (singers, movie directors) do not support this particular amendment. In fact many singers and songwriters seem to welcome others to modify lyrics of their songs in response to current events, as long as it is done in good faith. If those who are supposed to benefit most from the amendments do not support them with enthusiasm, perhaps the officials should consider whether the clause stating that modifying copyrighted material in the name of satire should be exempt from prosecution. (It can be difficult to determine what constitutes satire, but this is the exact reason why the copyright owner alone should determine whether someone else's creation violates one's copyrighted material.)

Copyright laws are meant to protect copyright owners from tangible (generally monetary) losses, but prosecuting those who distribute (or even share links to) material, modified from copyrighted material, spoofing people and events in a criminal court, without any complaint from the copyright owner, seem to be a waste of time, police manpower, and court sessions. The best solution, therefore, is to remove this particular clause. (Don't worry, I am not going to report anyone who modifies this article in any way to the local authorities.)