Hallo,
Es gibt eine Zusammenfassung der EU-Konsultation über digitale Bibliotheken:
http://europa.eu.int/information_society/activities/digital_libraries/doc/c…
Angesichts insgesamt Stellungnahmen darf nicht erwartet werden, dass die
Forderungen von Wikimedia Deutschland direkt übernommen wurden, aber
einige unserer Punkte finden sich in etwa wieder. Beim Überfliegen sind
mir folgende Abschnitte aufgefallen:
4.3:
- Other ideas brought forward are: tax incentives or
other incentives
for rightholders releasing their (out-of print) material in the public
domain; a European charter by which the digitising party commits to
the digitisation cataloguing and preservation, but promises not to
enter into any commercial relation; and the widespread use of Creative
Commons type licences.
- Several comments are also made about the way public sector
institutions exercise their own intellectual property rights. The
suggestion is made by some private and public organisations to bring
cultural institutions within the scope of the directive on the re-use
of public sector information. Other replies suggest that libraries
waive their database rights, to make the widest re-use possible, and
that publicly funded material should be in the public domain
(including scientific research publications through open access
models).
...
4.4:
- Proposed solutions for handling orphan works vary
widely: they range
from changing copyright legislation to developing better tools for
locating right owners and making a common European code for dealing
with this type of material. Several replies propose to generalise the
Nordic model of extended collective licensing for orphan works,
whereas other replies recommend the French model as operated for
audiovisual orphan works. The Canadian model is also mentioned, in
which collecting societies do not play a role. A reserve fund is
suggested to compensate authors if they are found after all. Some
replies want to go much further, e.g. by making orphan works generally
useable until a copyright holder opposes (eventually after a certain
period a work has been advertised as an orphan work), or by
creating a legal ‘safe haven’ for people using orphan works.
Rightholders and collecting societies are generally opposed to
legislative change to accommodate the orphan works issue.
- The absence of an overview of orphan works is seen as a serious
problem. Up-to-date databases of orphan material would help. For
running these databases the public could be involved, as well as the
collecting societies.
...
4.5:
- Practical arrangements proposed to increase the
transparency of
public domain material and other material available for general use
concern the encouragement of repositories of public domain material
as well as the creation of overviews of public domain works (e.g.
databases with public domain works, or databases with all works and
their date of publication, and death date of the authors). Some
replies suggest drawing upon the information of collecting societies
on public domain works for making these overviews or to engage the
public.
- Systematic metadata tagging of public domain content (clear and
simple labels which are machine-readable) is seen as a way forward.
This could possibly be combined with technologies that allow finding
and crawling public domain material.
- Some replies submit that the use of Creative Commons or similar
licences should be systematically recommended and that best practices
and examples of voluntary sharing should be widely spread. There
should be support for machine-readable schema for licences and
intellectual property rights. Another idea is introducing Creative
Commons-like options for authors in the legal deposit process.
- The Commission is called upon by some to establish and promote
initiatives on open access. In this context reference is made to the
Berlin and Budapest declarations on open access. Other contributions
suggest that the EU should take the lead in defining a digital
public domain rights management scheme, that it should carry out a
study on the economic importance of public domain material, and that
it should encourage a discussion on the use of public domain material.
Speziell zur Problematik sogenannter "verwaister Werke" hat Klaus Graf
auch gerade etwas geschrieben:
http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/1734191/
http://www.ub.uni-dortmund.de/listen/inetbib/msg30071.html
http://log.netbib.de/archives/2006/03/23/verwaiste-werke-2/
Gruß,
Jakob