Notice

2014 copyright changes: post-implementation reviews Call for Evidence

Published 30 January 2019

Following the implementation of policy, the Government aims to complete a post-implementation review (PIR). These reviews evaluate whether the regulation has met the intended objectives, and are usually carried out five years after implementing the policy. A PIR gathers evidence, which will be summarised in a report and published. The report will consider whether the regulation is still required; is not required; or should be amended.The formal criteria are whether the regulation:

• has achieved its original objectives;
• has objectives that remain appropriate;
• is still required and remains the best option for achieving those objectives; and
• could be achieved in another way which involves less onerous regulatory provision to reduce the burden on business and/or increase overall societal welfare

PIRs should be proportionate, and if the impact of a policy has been estimated at £5 million then it will only require a de minimis review. The impact figure is the net cost to business per year, as reported in the original impact assessments. These are published alongside the statutory instruments and available on www.legislation.gov.uk.

In 2014, several different statutory instruments were passed to amend copyright law. This call for evidence has been published to obtain data on the impact of three areas:

1. Archive exception - the original impact assessment expected a benefit of over £5 million, so a full PIR will be completed.
2. Other copyright exceptions: research and private study, text and data mining, education; public administration; quotation, and parody, caricature and pastiche - the combined impact assessments either estimated an impact of less than £5 million or could not quantify the impact at the time, so a de minimis PIR will be completed unless data is received to suggest that a full PIR should be conducted.
3. Extended collective licensing and orphan works: extended collective licensing (ECL); orphan works licensing scheme; orphan works exception - the combined impact assessments estimated an impact of less than £5 million, so a de minimis PIR will be completed unless data is received to suggest that a full PIR should be conducted.

Many of you will be aware of the continuing negotiations on the Digital Single Market in the EU, including the draft Copyright Directive. At the time of publication, this directive is not yet finalised, so any areas potentially affected by that directive remain in the review process. If the directive is agreed, we may need to consider removing the following areas from the scope of these PIRS: archive exception; text and data mining exception; the extended collective licensing framework; and the orphan works exception.

Three statutory instruments will NOT be reviewed as part of the PIR process and are not included in this call for evidence:

• Codes of conduct for collective management organisations - these regulations were revoked following implementation of the Collective Rights Management Directive.
• Private copying exception - this exception was quashed by the High Court following a judicial review.
• Disability exception - this exception was updated by the Marrakesh Treaty Directive for which new impact data was collected.

The remainder of this document comprises questions on each of the three areas which are being reviewed. If you have answers to these questions - or any more general evidence on the impact of these changes to copyright law – we encourage you to submit the evidence. We remind you of the criteria for good evidence (PDF, 320 KB) which we aim to use in copyright policy making: evidence should be clear, verifiable and peer-reviewed.

This call for evidence will last for 10 weeks and will close on 10 April 2019.

Email responses are encouraged to copyrightconsultation@ipo.gov.uk.

You may also send written responses to:

Copyright Directorate,
Intellectual Property Office,
4 Abbey Orchard Street,
London
SW1P 2HT.

Group 1: Archive exception

Copyright exception for archiving and preservation

Questions directed at galleries, libraries, archives, museums and archivists

• have you or your organisation used this exception for archiving or preservation purposes?
• if yes, can you tell us how often you have used this exception in each of the last 5 years?
• how has the presence of the exception changed your approach to dealing with preservation of copyright works? Please give examples, such as a reduction in contacting rights holders
• how much time or resource has been spent determining commercial availability of works?
• on average, what have been the time or resource savings due to not needing to clear rights in a work for archiving and/or preservation purposes? Please provide examples, such as changes in obtaining legal advice
• how frequently are copies made for archiving and preservation? Is this done work by work or in a project to preserve a set of works?
• please provide an estimate of the annual savings to your organisation because of this exception

Questions directed at rightsholders

• have you experienced a loss of income as result of not being able to monetise your works because of the exception for archiving and preservation? If so, can you say what this has been so far?
• if you had licensed permissions for the use of your work, prior to this exception being implemented, are you able to say what your licence fee income was?
• have you or your organisation made any time or resource savings from not having to answer requests for archiving and/or preservation?

Group 2: Other Copyright exceptions

Copyright exception for research and private study

• have you or your organisation/institution used this exception for research and private study?
• if yes, can you tell us how often you have used this exception in each of the last 5 years?
• can you provide us with an estimate as to how much money and/or time is saved by having this exception? Please provide examples, such as changes in obtaining legal advice.

Questions directed at rightsholders

• what has been the cost/benefit of this exception for you?
• has this exception had an impact on your licensing practices for research purposes? If so, can you describe what these have been?
• what has been the drop, if any, in your licensing income over the last 5 years?

Questions directed at rightsholders

• what has been the cost/benefit of this exception for you?
• has this exception had an impact on your licensing practices for research purposes? If so, can you describe what these have been?
• what has been the drop, if any, in your licensing income over the last 5 years?

Copyright exception for text and data mining (TDM)

• have you or your organisation/institution used this exception for text and data mining (TDM)?
• if yes, can you tell us how often you have used this exception in each of the last 5 years?
• can you provide us with an estimate as to how much money and/or time is saved by having this exception? Please provide examples, such as changes in obtaining legal advice.

Questions directed at rightsholders

• what has been the cost/benefit of this exception for you?
• how has this impacted upon your licensing practices for non-commercial research purposes? How much of this do you estimate flows from the implementation of the exception?
• what has been the drop, if any, in your licensing income over the last 5 years? How much of this do you estimate flows from the implementation of the exception?
• has there been an impact on any other services you provide to paying customers because of the exception? Please provide examples.

Copyright exceptions for educational use

• have you or your institution/organisation used this exception for educational use?
• if yes, can you tell us how often you have used this exception in each of the last 5 years?
• what impact has the exception had on enabling teachers to use extracts of copyright works when using digital channels? Please provide examples, such as use of interactive whiteboards or other digital displays
• what impact has the exception had in enabling distance learners to access copyright works over secure networks without infringing copyright? Please provide examples, such as an uptake in such courses due to better materials being available
• what impact has the exception had in enabling educators to increase the amount of a copyright work that can be copied under the education exceptions?
• what savings in costs and time do you or your institution/organisation attribute to this exception? Please provide examples, such as changes in obtaining legal advice
• have you found it easier to obtain licences for educational use of copyright materials since the exception was implemented? Have these licences met your educational needs?

Questions aimed at rightsholders/licence providers

• has there been a change in the take-up of licences since this exception was implemented? Please provide examples
• what has been the drop, if any, in the relevant licensing income over the last 5 years? How much of this do you estimate flows from the implementation of the exception?

Copyright exception for public administration

• have you or the public body you work for used this exception?
• if yes, can you tell us how often you/your organisation have used this exception in each of the last 5 years?
• what has been the impact on the costs to you or your organisation? Please provide examples, such as changes in obtaining legal advice

Copyright exception for use of quotations or extracts of copyright works

• have you or your organisation used this exception on quotations?
• if yes, can you tell us how often you/your organisation have used this exception in each of the last 5 years?
• what impact has this exception had on you as a user, and what have been its costs and benefits? Please provide examples, such as changes in obtaining legal advice
• what impact has this exception had on you as a rightsholder? Please provide examples

Copyright exception for parody, caricature and pastiche

• have you or your organisation used this exception on parody, caricature or pastiche?
• if yes, can you tell us how often you/your organisation have used this exception in each of the last 5 years?
• what impact has this exception had on you as a user, and what have been its costs and benefits? Please provide examples, such as changes in obtaining legal advice
• what impact has this exception had on you as a rightsholder? Please provide examples

Group 3: extended collective licensing and orphan works

Extended collective licensing (ECL)

Questions directed at Collective Management Organisations

• have you made, or considered making, an application for an Extended collective licensing (ECL) scheme? What was the cost of this?
• have you experienced any other impacts because of the introduction of the ECL framework? Please provide examples, such as changes to communication practices

Questions directed at rightsholders

• have you become a member of a Collective Management Organisation because of the existence of the ECL framework?
• has the existence of an ECL framework changed your relationship with a Collective Management Organisation, either as a member or a non-member? Please provide examples

Orphan works licensing scheme

Questions directed at users or potential users of the scheme

• what economic impact does the orphan works licensing scheme have on you as an individual or an organisation?
• if you licensed an orphan work through the licensing scheme, what benefit(s), if any, did using the orphan work have for you or your organisation?

Questions aimed at rightsholders

• has the orphan works licensing scheme changed your behaviour in managing your own works? Please provide examples, such as checking the orphan works register on a scheduled basis. What is the cost of this in time or financial resource?

Orphan works EU exception

• what impact has this exception had on you as a cultural heritage institution? Please provide examples