An independent report in the UK recommends that a copyright marketplace be established to streamline the licensing process, with the intention of benefiting creators of copyrighted works, copyright holders and users, writes CIARA O'BRIEN

THE ISSUE of copyright is a contentious one, particularly as the laws and regulations increasingly struggle to apply their analogue age roots to the digital age. While copyright owners are often – rightly – keen to protect their intellectual property, it can be difficult for those who want to use it to find a way to do so legally.

With more of the contentious cases concerning online issues, copyright has been thrust to the fore. It’s easier to share content than ever, and with global reach, tracking down copyright holders isn’t always as straightforward as it may seem.

The UK may be about to help solve that problem, with recommendations that it establish a copyright hub.

An independent report, released last week, recommends that a copyright marketplace be established that will streamline the licensing process, with the intention of benefiting creators of copyrighted works, copyright holders and users.

Carried out by Richard Hooper and Dr Ros Lynch, the report was the culmination of an eight-month review of a recommendation in a May 2011 report by Prof Ian Hargreaves to establish a Digital Copyright Exchange that would work across a number of sectors.

It’s another step towards creating such a project. However, setting up the hub won’t be a straightforward process.

Although Hooper, who led the report, wants the creative industries to get involved with its establishment, and they are already supporting the idea, he admitted to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme last week that it will be a complex process, with major funding and governance issues to overcome.

He estimates that at least a year will be needed to get things going properly. “It’s a major IT project and requires a lot of people collaborating and working together,” he said.

But it’s a necessary one. Hooper explained that the current system in use in the UK wasn’t fit for the challenges posed by the digital era.

“Copyright licensing was really designed in the analogue age, in that world long ago; it now needs to be fit for purpose for the digital age, which we’re right in the middle of. And it’s got to be easier to use, it’s got to be simpler, it’s got to be more accessible, more transparent, and also the transaction cost of licensing has to come down,” he said. “Thus we move to the world of automated licensing.”

The report recommended that the hub be on a not-for-profit basis, industry led and industry funded, and that a steering group be established to oversee its design and implementation.

Once up and running, the hub would link into national and international copyright databases, exchanges and rights registries.

It would all be voluntary of course. Copyright owners can choose to register their works and all the associated rights to them, along with permitted uses.

Fees for the service have not yet been discussed, but one of the main aims of the new project is that it will cut the cost of licensing, while also provide potential licensees with a transparent, easy-to-use system.

It’s been widely welcomed by the industry in the UK. When carrying out his review, Hooper involved a number of representatives from the various affected industries, from music and publishing to educational institutions and libraries.

Part of the problem is that the existing system is not geared towards dealing with a high volume of small transactions that is possible in the digital age. Instead, the more traditional way of doing things dealt with a low volume of high-value transactions. But times have changed. The growth of user- generated content on sites such as YouTube throws up issues with the use of licensable content on a regular basis.

Improving the quality of the data is also important, the report said, making it easier for potential licensees to see who actually owns the rights and eliminating out-of-date and conflicting data.

Hooper’s review said it would support two main database projects that would show what the ideal was: the Global Repertoire Database in music publishing; and the Global Recording Database.

“The aspiration is for collecting societies around the world to be able to draw on one authoritative database which is kept updated (a key requirement for rights databases), replacing multiple databases where the data conflicts and is not kept up-to-date,” the report said.

The databases also need to be able to communicate not only across sectors, but across national borders.

Hooper is of the opinion that if the licensing process is easier, in an ideal world, the new system would mean more money for creators and rights holders, while also facilitating users who want to license the content.

“What’s happening at the moment is that people don’t use an image or a piece of text, or they use a pirated version,” he told BBC Radio 4. “What this is trying to do is get more legal uses of copyrighted content.”

The hub could also be used as a way to teach students about copyright; for example, by allowing children to register the copyright for something they have created. It’s a concept that Hooper backs.

“I think that would get through to the child or the student much more quickly than an abstract education about copyright,” he said.

The UK model is designed to make it easier to deal with so-called orphan works, ie one where the copyright owner cannot be contacted or identified, such as with photographs. As a result, works often cannot be digitised in case the copyright owner is eventually found, meaning the consumer cannot gain access to certain content.

While the Intellectual Property Office in the UK is establishing a legislative response to orphan works, the copyright hub could be used to carry out the diligent searches required by the government before a work can be licensed as orphan. Remuneration for potential rights holders of the works would also be set aside.

Hooper’s review threw its support behind the Arrow (Accessible Registries of Rights Information Orphan Works) and Arrow Plus projects, which show how due diligence for such works can be automated through linking and searching libraries around the world.

The hub certainly won’t be the end of the slog for the industry, the DCE review said, warning that the streamlining of the processes would be a constant for the creative and internet industries in the coming years.

“Like modernisation and innovation in any company or organisation, the task of streamlining never ends. All stakeholders in the creative industries must keep up momentum and have accepted that challenge,” Hooper said in the report.

It’s not just the UK that is making changes to its copyright laws. Last year, the Government decided it was time Ireland’s own copyright protections were examined, with a view to supporting innovation in the country.

It established the Copyright Review Committee, which has been looking at the issue for several months. As part of its work, it asked for public submissions on the topic; the deadline for these submissions was extended twice due to the level of submissions received.

The committee has yet to report its findings – the final deadline for submission was June 29th.