Susan Isiko Štrba - The study on limitations and exceptions (L&E) for copyright and related rights for teaching in Africa to be discussed at the nineteenth Session of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) which will take place from 14 to 18 December 2009, is a valuable contribution as it summarizes the status of limitations and exceptions (L&E) for the benefit of teaching in over 30 African countries south of the Sahara. However, by focusing on teaching instead of educational activities and excluding L&E for research or private study jeopardizes the purpose of the study.
Teaching versus educational activities
For some reason, the study focuses on limitations and exceptions on copyright and neighbouring rights for the benefit of teaching (in a strict sense) instead of educational activities as was originally approved at the 17th session of the SCCR. This is not just a question of terminology. While it is true that “teaching” is synonymous with “education”, “educational activities” are not limited to teaching. Teaching presupposes that one person (teacher or professor) gives, transmits instructions or knowledge to another person (pupil or student) in a defined establishment. While “educational activities” include self-learners, researchers who do not receive instructions from anyone or in a formal establishment like an educational institution. It would have been useful to investigate the existence of L&E for such learners. The narrow focus of the study has profound implications for the exercise of devising access solutions to copyright, through limitations and exceptions, for the purpose of access to education, especially in Africa.
Exclusion of research or private study
The study excludes in its scope research or study as aspects of education. The reason given for this exclusion is that researchers are both copyright users and owners. While this may be true, it does not justify ignoring work on L&E for research or private study completely. There are researchers who are not necessarily owners of copyright. But even those that are both users and owners need L&E in their capacity of users. It would have been useful to know whether or not L&E exist for such a group of users and the conditions for their use where they exist.
As I have argued elsewhere when questioning the role of copyright in development aspirations of developing countries, (like education in this case), it is important to specify the level of development and education at issue. It takes a lot more than classroom knowledge to be able to engage in informed discussions and debates on complex themes in international forums like the SCCR. It takes a lot of research and private study.
Purpose of the study
The study on L&E for the benefit of educational activities is part of the process towards finding an access solution. In the first proposal on the analysis of exceptions and limitations Chile underlined the relevance of the SCCR to strengthen international understanding of the need to have adequate limitations, learning from existing models and moving towards agreement on limitations for public interest purposes, like education. The work programme proposed for this purpose included (a) identification, from the national intellectual property (IP) systems of Member States, of national models and practices concerning exceptions and limitations, and (b) analysis of the exceptions and limitations needed to promote creation and innovation and the dissemination of developments stemming there from.
Including all important elements of educational activities like research and private study in the study would be one way of ensuring unbiased, balanced and informed discussion on whether or not the L&E for education in Africa are adequate or not, and to draw useful lessons in devising a solution to access to education on this part of the world.
