Public Consultation Session on Proposed Changes to the Copyright Act

Internet Society Singapore Chapter

Copyright Registry

Question 1(a): Do you think having a copyright registry will be useful? NO

Question 1(c): What other issues and/or problems in relation to copyright in

Singapore might a copyright registry help to resolve? Please give a brief description of the issue and/or problem and how a copyright registry might help to resolve it.  NO

Copyright Registry

Question 1(d): Should a “title” registry or a “deposit” registry be established? If your preference is that of a “deposit” registry, please let us know if there are any features of such a registry that you feel are beneficial and why. For example, the copyright owner may have the option of allowing copying of the deposited work by the public for a fee. NO

Copyright Registry

Question 1(e): Do you agree that registration of a work with a national copyright registry should give rise to a presumption of the validity and ownership of copyright as stated in the certificate? NO

Copyright Registry

Question 1(f): Do you have any views/comments on the proposed recordation of rights/dealings in a relation to a registered copyright work? NO

Contract Terms

Question 6(a): Do you agree that certain exceptions in the CA should not be restricted by contractual terms? Contract can override statute

Question 6(b): What specific exceptions within the CA (including existing exceptions, new ones proposed in this public consultation document, and any other new exceptions you wish to propose) should not be restricted by contractual terms? Not applicable

21:00

Fair Use

Question 7(a): Do you agree to the removal of the fifth factor, which relates to obtaining a copy of the work within a reasonable time at an ordinary commercial price, from the exception of “fair use”?  No Change

Question 7(b): Are there any other changes to the “fair use” defence that can better fulfil the purposes of a balanced copyright regime? (a) Provide examples e.g. satire and parody, or illustrations

(b) Consider an exemption for User Generated Content subject to conditions like Canada

Orphan works

Question 8(b): What should the minimum level of due diligence searches be? Are there any activities that you think should be mandatory and what can be optional?

 There should be a mandatory simple zero cost search checklist, which is listed in Rules or Regulations for easy updating

Alternatively, publish it at a designated place (e.g. orphan registry) for a designated time

Orphan works

Question 8(a): Which of the three options do you view as most desirable and why? Option 3

Please help to state whether you would potentially be a copyright owner or a

copyright user in your response. Will the proposed options change how you currently deal with the issue of orphan works? User. Yes we will happily use orphan works now and pay later.

Question 8(b): What should the minimum level of due diligence searches be? Are there any activities that you think should be mandatory and what can be optional?

Unreachable owners

Question 8(c): Should works with unreachable owners also benefit from any of the

proposed three options? How long should the appropriate duration be, in order to

consider the owner to be unreachable?

Owners should not be under a burden to respond or be reached. Lack of response should not make a work into an orphan work.

An orphan work = a work where the owner is NOT KNOWN

Data Analysis

9: Should there be a new exception for copying of works for the purposes of data analysis?

There should be examples or illustrations of data mining under s35, instead of a stand alone exception. It must still be subject to Fair Use factors.

Educational use

Question 10(a): Should there be a new exception for non-profit educational institutions for giving or receiving instruction? Yes - they should be listed in Rules or Regulations for clarity

Question 10(b): Are there any other situations that might be useful to provide an exception in the CA for educational purposes, but would not be covered

User Generated educational materials e.g. tutorial videos

Educational tools; expressly allow deep linking / hyperlinking as example of Fair Use

Educational Use

Question 10(c): Do you agree that the threshold for copying by or on behalf of a non-profit educational institution should be aligned with the threshold for the purposes of research and study (i.e. changed to 10%)? Yes - standardize

Question 10(d): Do you agree that exception for insubstantial copying on the premises of a non-profit educational institution should be removed?

Circumvention of Technological Protection Measures

Question 16(a): Do you agree with the existing list of exceptions that allow for circumvention of TPMs listed in Part 1 of Annex B? Should they continue to be exceptions in the next EWO or are any of them irrelevant? Remain

Circumvention of Technological Protection Measures

Question 16(b): Do you have any views/comments on the proposed exceptions that allow for circumvention of TPMs listed in Part 2 of Annex B? We support them all

Question 16(c): Are there any other copyrighted works or specific uses of copyrighted works, which you think should be exempted from the prohibition against circumvention of TPMs, which are not already listed in Annex B?

We propose that VPNs and other similar technologies shall remain allowed and SHALL NOT be deemed to be circumvention of TPM