Copyright protection must keep up with changing times

The government had planned to get the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2014 passed in theLegislative Council by the end of 2015. This was not only something which the administrationwanted very much, but also tens of thousands of people in Hong Kong as well. 

Nevertheless,like many other bills proposed by the government, this one has inevitably been politicized andheld up in LegCo. 

During the second reading debate on the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2014, lawmakers tried todelay its passage by repeatedly making quorum calls. According to LegCo rules of procedure, "if the attention of the president is drawn to the fact that a quorum is not present, he shall directthe members to be summoned. If after 15 minutes have expired a quorum is not present, heshall adjourn the Council without question put". Outside the LegCo building, some radicalseven set off a small explosion and started a fire to cause further disruption. As a result, the billwas not passed. We will now have to wait until Jan 6 before it can be deliberated on again inLegCo. 

Hong Kong always respects intellectual property rights. The Copyright Ordinance currently inforce in Hong Kong has been in effect since June 27, 1997 to protect the rights of copyrightholders. Subsequently, whether it was songs broadcast on the radio or photos sourced outsideof newspapers or magazines, royalty payments were charged. But since the emergence of theInternet, the original Copyright Ordinance has become outdated. The speed with which thingscan be published online has produced many "grey areas" for copyright infringement. Protectionof intellectual property has become much more difficult. Therefore, an amendment bill isdesperately needed to reset the rules. 

Take the movie industry as an example. In 1993, the box office received more than HK$1.13billion. But the number, two decades later, dropped to HK$350 million in 2013. The annualnumber of local movies screened has also declined considerably from 238 in 1993 to less than50 in 2014. The industry attributes this to the fact that copyright protection has lagged behindthe development of technology. Nowadays, a movie is likely to be available for free - albeitillegal - download on the Internet just when it appears in cinemas. 

Some people are obviously concerned about derivative works. They worry that the amendmentbill would bring an end to creative works of this kind. During the consultation stage of theamendment bill in 2011, the Chinese Manufacturers' Association of Hong Kong was alsoconcerned about this. The association said in its proposal that creativity-related activities andindustries should not be suppressed by the bill. And it is clear that in the Copyright(Amendment) Bill 2014, the government stated in an exemption clause that "commenting oncurrent affairs", "quotation", "parody, satire, caricature and pastiche" and many other derivativeworks are exempted from the bill. Generally speaking, without gaining any commercial benefit,online creative works will mostly remain legitimate. As noted by the Hong Kong Bar AssociationChairperson Winnie Tam, the bill contains broader exemptions than the current CopyrightOrdinance. Therefore, we should view it rationally. 

From this perspective, the SAR is not tightening up the Copyright Ordinance in thisamendment. The bill is aimed at clarifying some ambiguities and reducing disputes. But itcannot please everybody. It is the result of nine years' hard work by different parties. The billrepresents the result of balancing the interests of the industry, freelance creative workers,online users, and lawmakers. Therefore, its enactment will begin a new era for Hong Kong'sintellectual property protection. I believe the government will revise specific rules after it ispassed. But the first prerequisite is to guarantee its implementation.