| As
the most flexible of the intellectual property rights, copyright is
subject to constant pressure to adapt in order to respond to a variety
of social, cultural, economic and political demands. These demands
are sometimes generated by new developments and sometimes by new perceptions
and approaches to older issues. There is, for example, a widespread
perception that new information and communication technologies have
generated serious problems for the integrity of the copyright regime
that surpass previous technological challenges, such as the development
of the photocopier. As a result there is a demand from certain quarters
for the strengthening of the rights of copyright owners. Copyright
is also being called upon to address lacunae in the intellectual property
regime relating to developments in the areas of genomics and biotechnology.
At the same time, economic and political developments, especially
those promoting regional and global market liberalization, have
generated pressure for harmonization and conformity amongst historically
diverse copyright systems. One effect of this pressure has been
to expose and entrench crucial differences in national copyright
systems. Another effect of the pressures for harmonization and conformity
has been to stimulate existing concerns about the extent to which
the traditional knowledge and other cultural products of indigenous
peoples is capable of being protected under the new global regime
of copyright. Both of these issues, while generating considerable
conflict, have required copyright scholars, policy-makers and legislators
to look again at the role and function of copyright in our diverse,
multicultural society.
Recently, a great deal of concern has been expressed about the
increase in the power of copyright owners at the expense of both
the authors of copyright works and the users of such works. This
is connected with alarm at the way in which copyright law appears
to have facilitated the build up of significant concentrations of
power over diverse forms of cultural products. These concentrations
are constituted by multinational corporations, which enjoy substantial
horizontal and vertical controls over the relevant markets for cultural
products. They also often hold the patent rights over technology
involved in the production or communication of the cultural products
in question. The opaque and unaccountable nature of these corporate
entities, allied with specific instances of the exercise of their
wide intellectual property rights, has raised concerns about the
compatibility of copyright law with human rights concepts, such
as the right to freedom of speech. A similar concern is that the
monological control of cultural communication that may be exercised
by these corporate entities tends to undermine the dialogical nature
of cultural development. This is a clear threat to what is often
described as the cultural development function of copyright law.
The role, function and theoretical basis of copyright law is now
more uncertain than ever. The multifarious challenges to copyright
offer unparalleled opportunities to re-examine copyright law and
to forge a copyright law that serves the interests of society at
large.
|
