Copyright 1996 The Washington Post Company
Reproduced here with permission

THE NEW communications technologies have scrambled the world's copyright laws not just nationally but internationally. The immediate effect is that international treaties, even more than national legislation, are going to be increasingly important in shaping the way information moves and is used throughout the world. This month three such treaties, all highly important, are being negotiated at a three-week meeting of the World Intellectual Property Organization in Geneva. One would update the laws on protection of literary or artistic work, one focuses more on music and recordings, and a third -- the largest departure from current practice and the one most urgently in need of international scrutiny -- affects ownership of, and could sharply curtail access to, facts compiled in electronic databases.

The three treaty proposals are packed with arcana, but collectively they would set a system of rules with massive implications for both the shape of the information system and its economic winners and losers. Some of the issues -- particularly matters of what constitutes "fair use" of copyrighted data and what is a violation -- carry staggering financial implications for the software, entertainment, media and record industries; they also dramatically affect what will be available at low cost or free in such venues as libraries, schools and universities.

The fair-use doctrine, for one, has been hotly contested already at home. Congress tried last year to push through a copyright law "update" only to be stalemated by vociferous opposition from libraries, scientists and other nonprofit interests that feared loss of access to data. But the U.S. delegation, one of 160 at Geneva and a major player, is pushing hard for a policy that includes many of the same provisions that failed to get through Congress. Critics say these would decisively tilt access to information away from "consumers" -- citizens wanting to look up facts about the government, for instance -- and toward the large companies that buy the rights to distribute them electronically for fees. Of particular concern is the database treaty, which has never even gone through hearings here and, if adopted in the form that the European Union and others are pressing for, could trade long-term citizen access to information for a short-term financial gain by a few companies.

It's a real question what constitutes national consensus under such circumstances, though Assistant Commerce Secretary Bruce Lehman, who heads the delegation, argues that this is no different from other treaties that must be ratified afterward by a straight up-or-down vote. It's true that Congress can refuse to ratify or delay for years, as it did with the last copyright treaty updates. But the velocity of change in this sector puts heavy burdens on countries to agree on some law rather than hold out against one on which other countries have agreed. It makes a lot more sense to approach this one critically, resist railroading and negotiate something that addresses the legitimate concerns being expressed at home.