legislation. Levies need to be applied consistently to prevent copyright users seeking the cheapest source of recording material or equipment.
Collecting societies at present operate on a geographical basis and so it is impossible to get global clearance, thus creating a potentially huge administrative workload. This is in contrast with the Terms of Reference of the Gowers Review:
‘The award and observance of IP should be predictable and transparent, with minimal information costs and transaction costs for firms and citizens.’ [author’s emphasis] (Source: http://www.hm- t r e a s u r y . g o v . u k / i n d e p e n d e n t _ r e v i e w s / g o w e r s _ r e v i e w _ i n t e l l e c t u a l _ p r o p e r t y / g o w e sreview_scope.cfm ) r
IP owners in the form of publishers, which include universities, are being encouraged by funders of research such as the Wellcome Foundation and some Research Councils to make the results of funded research available on open access which means the business model has to change. Music publishers have already faced the challenge and there is a move afoot to make music available ‘free’ with advertising support.
It is feared technological protection measures will inhibit the use of permitted exceptions and ultimately be more restrictive than current legislation. Intellectual property law is intended to be a balance between the creator’s economic and other interests and the user’s interests. To achieve a balance between the camps is challenging.
It will be interesting to see how the European Commission recommendation on the digitisation and online accessibility of cultural material and digital preservation can be implemented to facilitate preservation of cultural heritage while respecting intellectual property laws.
There are challenges to be met with regard to IPR in multimedia repositories and their use in storing, managing, conservation and providing access for research purposes. The situation is somewhat better where multimedia repositories are used to manage materials for teaching purposes. Current licensing bodies are wary of permitting the inclusion of material in repositories because of the ease of reproduction and transmission of high quality copies and the possibility that material could be used for purposes other than those licensed.
The position regarding sharing of material across institutions is not easy because producers of materials may view the work’s inclusion in a multimedia repository as ‘conflicting with the normal exploitation of the work ‘ and ‘prejudicing the legitimate interests of the author’. Currently some digital material may be loaned in hard copy e.g. CDs, DVDs thus limiting the benefits of cross-institutional multimedia repositories.
At present it seems there are two routes possible for material where the IPR is not owned by the institution: