UK Podcasters Association

This Blog Is Moving To UKPA.INFO

2007-04-13T12:22:00.000Z

To celebrate the first anniversary of UK Podcasters Association, we're moving this blog to our new site, UKPA.INFO.

The existing site, ukpodcasters.org.uk will continue to function as a domain.

AIM Podcast License

2007-04-09T10:17:00.000Z

Exciting developments in the world of UK music podcasting - UKPA has been in discussion with AIM (Association of Independent Music) about their podcast license. We anticipate making an announcement on this in the next few days.

Coming up in the UKPA Podcast: interview with Simon Wheeler, head of AIM Digital.

International Podcast Group

2007-01-23T10:00:00.000Z

The UKPA along with affiliated organisations Podrepbod and Podcastverband have started the International Podcast Group.

Having set up the UKPA back in April 2006, affiliated to several other national groups, taken part the successful WIPO campaign, introduced the UK government to podcasting, advised several members in various legal and rights issues, and joined the Association of Online Publishers, we thought it would be a good idea to extend a democratic umbrella to podcasters internationally.

Our first aim is to form a collective global voice, democratically run, for the benefit of podcasters. If you are part of a group, and interested to be a founder member, we’d be glad for your involvement.

We are currently drafting our aims and we welcome input into this process.

Bye Bye, Britcaster, Hello National Grid

2006-12-02T17:58:00.000Z

Popular UK forum Britcaster is to close 15th December, it was announced yesterday. Neil Dixon the man behind it, who now works for PodShow in the UK, has decided to pull the plug after two years.

A new forum, National Grid, is already in existance, set up by the UK Podcasters Association.

This UK Community Podcast forum is open to podcasters from anywhere in the world.

Sony Podcast Award

2006-11-29T09:10:00.000Z

Next year's Sony Radio Awards will include The Internet Programme Award, which has been created specifically for streamed, Podcast and download programmes. UK Podcasters Association has been pushing for recognition, and a category to include podcasting.

"We now have a more level playing field," said UKPA Chairman Dean Whitbread. "Thanks go to Trevor Dann, head of the Radio Academy, who had the far-sightedness to organise a meeting with us on his first day in the job, and who persuaded me to join his organisation. It remains to be seen whether the award will go to one of the usual high-profile media suspects, or whether the judges will look at the great range of independently produced content that's out there."

Curry Wants A UKPA Tshirt

2006-11-27T19:41:00.000Z

Photo by CC Chapman

This may thrill fans of the PodShow host, Adam Curry - about 14 minutes into his podcast Daily Source Code #504, he glowingly describes our fund-raising tshirt.

Tshirts cost £15. Leave comments here and we'll process your orders - all proceeds go to the UK Podcasters Association - a non-profit company.

Swecasters Join Hands Across The North Sea

2006-11-08T18:54:00.000Z

A new podcast group, Swecasters, has emerged in Sweden which we happily welcome into the national podcast group fraternity. You have to be a native Swede to join this group.

Two Victories at WIPO!

2006-10-02T13:11:00.000Z

Via Gwen Hinze, EFF, and Glyn Wintle, Open Rights Group:

The negotiations have been tough (we hear), but the 2007 WIPO General Assemblies have come to a close with two huge victories for the public interest. On the Broadcasting Treaty, while the GA agreed to convene a Diplomatic Conference in November/December 2007, we now have two welcome safeguards in place (document after the jump).

First, there will be two more meetings of the SCCR to work through some of the issues on which countries are still clearly divided (Technological Protection Measures, and coverage of certain Internet transmissions) and a "pre-conference" before the November/December dipcon. In effect, this represents a rejection by the GA of the recommendation passed amidst controversy at last month's WIPO Copyright Committee meeting (the SCCR). The previous schedule included only a pre-conference, at which nothing substantive would have been accomplished before a July Diplomatic Conference. The four month reprieve and two additional meetings are good news indeed. The full text of the decision follows, below.

Second, and most importantly, the GA's compromise has an escape clause that allows for the convening of a dipcon *only if all outstanding issues are resolved* in those two SCCR meetings. By implication, for the first time, WIPO has indicated that there might not be a diplomatic conference and a new treaty if all member countries can't reach agreement. An eminently appropriate outcome if countries are not able to reach agreement after almost nine years of negotiations.

It has also been decided that the treaty will now take a signal-based approach instead of the messy, dangerous rights-based approach that is used in the current treaty text. This, too, is good news for the Internet community, and reflects the concerns raised by many WIPO member countries at last month's meeting. There's much support for narrowing the treaty's overbroad scope to signal protection. The key question will now be how the next treaty draft reflects this in practice.

The colossal effort required to broker this deal was recognized when the meeting's Chair said, "I would like especially to thank Mr. Jukka Liedes, who must have lost a few kilos trying to work out this agreement." Liedes, the Chair of the infamous meeting earlier in September that closed by an unpopular "silence as consent" procedure, was charged with finding a compromise at the GA, and appears to have done so this time.

On the Development Agenda, there's good news also. The GA agreed to continue the dialogue, and most importantly, to keep all the issues on the table, not just those that have the support of the developed countries. The Assemblies agreed to extend the mandate of the Provisional Committee on Proposals Related to a WIPO Development Agenda (the now non-provisional PCDA).

And so we end this year's WIPO General Assemblies with good news on all fronts. We're mighty chuffed.

US Companies Say No To WIPO Broadcast Treaty

2006-09-21T22:48:00.000Z

In brief: post about the group of US corporations who are asking the US Government to reject the Broadcast Treaty.

The companies are:

AT&T
Broadband Service Providers
Association
Cingular Wireless
Computer and Communications Industry
Association
Consumer Electronics Association
CTIA - The Wireless Association
Dell Inc.
Hewlett Packard Company
Home Recording Rights Coalition
Intel Corporation
Panasonic Corporation of North America
RadioShack Corporation
Sony Electronics Incorporated
TiVo Inc.
U.S. Internet Industry Association
USTelecom
Verizon Communications Inc.
Verizon Wireless

Lack of formatting to follow - I'm pasting this from email...

This afternoon a coalition of industry groups submitted the following
Request for US Government Opposition to Advancing a Diplomatic Treaty
Conference on the Proposed WIPO Treaty on the Protection of
Broadcasting Organizations From Certain Information Technology,
Consumer Electronics and Telecommunications Industry Representatives.

Contact:
James M. Burger
Attorney at Law
Dow Lohnes
1200 New Hampshire Avenue, NW Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036-6802
T 202-776-2300
F 202-776-4300
E jburger@dowlohnes.com
www.dowlohnes.com

*********************************************************************
REQUEST FOR US GOVERNMENT OPPOSITION TO ADVANCING A DIPLOMATIC TREATY
CONFERENCE ON THE PROPOSED WIPO TREATY ON THE PROTECTION OF
BROADCASTING ORGANIZATIONS FROM CERTAIN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY,
CONSUMER ELECTRONICS AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY REPRESENTATIVES

On behalf of the undersigned companies and associations, many of whom
attended last week's SCCR 15th session in Geneva, we would like to
express our concerns about the controversial decision to convene a
Diplomatic Conference on the proposed WIPO Treaty on the Protection
of Broadcasting Organizations which is proposed for mid-2007. We ask
that the US Government reach out to other country delegations and
express its objections to proceeding with a Diplomatic Conference at
this time.

The outcome of last week's meeting leaves us with broad draft treaty
language which is not limited to signal theft, does not address
network intermediary liability, does not adequately address
limitations and exceptions, and includes broad technical protection
measure (TPM) protections language. In addition, the actual text of
proposed treaty language, which would form the basis of a diplomatic
conference, was, at the end of last week's meeting, very much up in
the air.

During the last day of the 15th SCCR, the Chairman did promote a
different approach to developing a treaty. His approach appears to
provide a basic framework more consistent with both US law and the
undersigned companies' interests. In addition, it is our view as
observers that there was growing support for such an approach on the
floor. Given the amount of disagreement regarding the SCCR 15/2 text,
and the strong support throughout these negotiations by most
delegations for protecting signals only, we do not believe that it is
appropriate to proceed to a Diplomatic Conference without doing so on
the basis of a text which clearly has consensus and is focused on
such an approach.

In discussions between industry and delegations, we detected shared
concerns regarding the state of the SCCR 15/2 text. We believe that
the US Delegation should engage in bilateral outreach to a number of
countries that expressed concern and seek support to: (1) reject
moving forward with a Diplomatic Conference until there is a stable
text; (2) narrow the treaty's scope to signal theft; (3) narrow the
term of protection; (4) ensure limitations on network intermediary
liability; (5) ensure other appropriate limitations and exceptions,
such as excluding home and personal networks; and, (6) exclude TPMs
from the scope of the treaty.

We appreciated the opportunity to consult with the US Delegation and
we were disappointed that the initial objections they raised at the
meeting about proceeding with a Diplomatic Conference were ignored.
We therefore would encourage the USG to send a follow up letter to
the Director General of WIPO and other appropriate parties further
expressing its strong objections to authorizing a Diplomatic
Conference at the General Assembly.

Should there be a proposal to convene the SCCR again in early 2007 to
consider a redraft of the Draft Basic Proposal based on the
Chairman's outline and associated comments, as well as the many
interventions of a similar nature by other delegations including the
USA at SCCR 15, such a draft text should be developed and broadly
circulated before such a meeting is held. No Diplomatic Conference
should be authorized until there is a real consensus text.

The role of WIPO in norm setting is extremely important to the
undersigned, all of whom are significant intellectual property
holders. Given the unstable condition of the current draft treaty,
there is a low probability of a successful Diplomatic Conference. The
damage to the institution of a failed Diplomatic Conference would
detract from international intellectual property norm setting - a
fate all of the undersigned wish to avoid.

We recognize that there is limited time to undertake outreach to
other country delegations; however, we believe this outreach is
critical. We stand ready to meet with the US Delegation at any time
to further express our concerns and lend our support.

AT&T
Broadband Service Providers
Association
Cingular Wireless
Computer and Communications Industry
Association
Consumer Electronics Association
CTIA - The Wireless Association
Dell Inc.
Hewlett Packard Company
Home Recording Rights Coalition
Intel Corporation
Panasonic Corporation of North America
RadioShack Corporation
Sony Electronics Incorporated
TiVo Inc.
U.S. Internet Industry Association
USTelecom
Verizon Communications Inc.
Verizon Wireless

************************************************
Manon Anne Ress
manon.ress@cptech.org,
www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20009 USA
Tel.: +1.202.332.2670, Ext 16 Fax: +1.202.332.2673

Consumer Project on Technology
1 Route des Morillons, CP 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 791 6727

Consumer Project on Technology
24 Highbury Crescent, London, N5 1RX, UK
Tel: +44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252 Fax: +44(0)207 354 0607

_______________________________________________
A2k mailing list
A2k@lists.essential.org
http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k

Subscriptions

2006-09-21T08:59:00.000Z

I was asked to explain the reasons why individual members of the UKPA need to pay £36.00 per year membership.

1 : Lobbying
The UKPA is a fledgling organisation with new podcasters requesting to join every day. We envisage that by Christmas our membership will represent at least half of the serious podcasters in the country. Our members will expect the UKPA to actively research, lobby and protest any new and draconian legislation that will be introduced by any governmental or official body that seeks to licence or impede the progress of this new communication. This will have financial implications as we will need to canvas membership and run a campaign office with administrative staff that will not always include volunteers.

2 : Credibility
Anyone can form a club, its easy, you get two or three people that do the same thing and say "lets form a club" - The UKPA represents and protects the interests of UK podcasters. Membership entitles you to use that when you are making your own headway in the podcasting community. It gives you credibility as a podcaster and proves that you are committed to the medium and will not just treat podcasting as a five minute wonder, producing one or two podcasts and then dropping it, as has happened in the blogging community, this will cloud the podcasting arena for genuine podcasters. The UKPA badge represents a sign of quality and gives gravitas to you as a podcaster.

3 : Association
As a group the UKPA can affiliate itself to larger and more established bodies that have a huge amount of clout in the new media arena. This way, by default, we have more muscle. Becoming members of quality organisations of course costs money and as we are a democratic organisation we will inform and request feedback from our membership as to what bodies we join.

4 : Community
Podcasting can be a solitary business as it is a fledgling medium. By becoming a member you become part of the ever increasing podcast "family" and can identify other family members through the display of the UKPA badge.The UKPA will be organising meetings, forums, seminars and conferences where members can meet, exchange ideas, find out about new innovations and discuss issues.

If any member would like to add reasons, argue against or make suggestions then please do not hesitate to comment on this blog, or email the UKPA at : members[at]ukpodcasters[dot]org[dot]uk

Thank you

Mark Crook

Treasurer, UK Podcasters Association

Pods and Blogs

2006-09-18T09:12:00.000Z

Nice to see the trusty BBC taking an active interest.

Michael Geist on WIPO

2006-09-15T04:37:00.000Z

Canadian Internet law professor Michael Geist on the Broadcast Treaty - BBC article.

Michael Geist's blog.

WIPO Steamrolls Member States and Insists on Controversial Broadcast Treaty

2006-09-14T12:01:00.000Z

The Broadcast Treaty is on course to drastically affect the way the Internet works. If you enjoy this vibrant new culture of podcasts, blogs and shared media, take the time to follow some of the links, understand the issues, and most importantly, tell your friends.

September 11th - 13th in Geneva, Switzerland: WIPO (the World Intellectual Property Organisation - see below) attempts to finalise the new Broadcast Treaty, a project which has been going on for nine years. The Broadcast Treaty is intended to do things such as prevent signal theft., i.e. someone illegally taking your TV program and retransmitting it. Some WIPO members have been trying to 'add in' the Internet to the new Treaty, and at this late stage they have introduced podcasting to their legislation.

This is where the UK Podcasters Association comes in. UKPA has been campaigning for three months with the Irish and German podcast groups, the Open Rights group in the UK, and EFF in the United States, and representing thousands of concerned Internet users, EFF attorney Gwen Hinze presented a joint statement to WIPO on why podcasting should not be included in the Broadcast Treaty.

http://www.eff.org/IP/WIPO/broadcasting_treaty/podcasting.php

UKPA is part of an extraordinarily broad coalition against this version of the Treaty, alongside technology companies, NGOs, and member states such as India, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, Iran, Nigeria and South Africa. Even the corporation-dominated United States eventually stated its opposition to calling for a diplomatic conference based on the existing draft - although for entirely different reasons than developing countries.

The main arguments against this extension of the Treaty into the Internet are that it gives new, wide-ranging and long-lasting rights to broadcasters over Internet content; it does not respect the Creative Commons system of content licencing which has been adapted by 49 countries and used for millions of works worldwide, including podcasts and blogs; and it threatens to impose severe restrictions on the development of technology and the personal use of media.

It also creates a whole set of problems for new technologies. Intel's Global Policy Director Jeffrey Lawrence explained how the treaty will prevent the roll out of home networking technologies because permission will be required from broadcasting companies for consumers to access and use the cable and television programs that they have already paid for in their own homes. Verizon Vice-President Sarah Deutsch said that Internet service providers and other intermediaries also face significant legal liability under the treaty for transmitting programming. "A broadcaster's right of control should stop at the front door of the home," she said.

IP Justice Executive Director Robin Gross:

"It is already illegal to steal cable television under existing law in all countries. This proposal, however, will give broadcasting companies the power to control what consumers can do with those programs.

This creates a problem for a growing number of consumers who use technology to copy, edit, comment on, and re-use media in otherwise lawful ways. Internet bloggers and websites such as YouTube where people post snippets of media programming based on copyright law's fair use privilege are also at risk. Since this is not copyright, but rather a brand new type of IP right, traditional fair use privileges would not apply to protect consumers. Television programs like Jon Stewart's "Daily Show," which uses short video clips of politician's speeches and other news to provide political commentary on them, can also be prevented from re-using the footage if this treaty is passed.

One of the most dangerous provisions in the treaty is the proposal to grant broadcasters the right to lock up public domain programming using technological restrictions that it will then be illegal to bypass in order to access the public domain information."

Despite lengthy objections, at the end of this three-day session, Chairman Liedes dismissed all arguments against the Treaty, and

"...dropped the gavel to conclude the meeting after announcing there would be no time for further discussion on the controversial treaty.

Rather than address legitimate concerns about theft of broadcast signals, the treaty would create 8 new intellectual property rights over broadcasts that are so broad they will stifle technological innovation, freedom of expression and access to knowledge." (RG)

Despite this, we at UKPA and the other EU podcast groups take heart from the fact that we have come together with so many different and disparate bodies, groups and corporations agreeing to a cohesive position - this is a real achievement. The Broadcast Treaty is a direct threat to much of the culture we all share, and this has created exceptional unity.

UKPA is going to continue to lobby the UK Government to bring pressure on WIPO, via our elected representatives at national level, to challenge what we consider to be an autocratic and dangerous decision. What we share with many thousands worldwide is the view that podcasting is an important new medium which deserves proper consideration in any leglislative framework.

About WIPO

World Intellectual Property Organisation is one of the most powerful international bodies in the world. It controls the regulation of Intellectual Property - ideas - and it occupies a uniquely powerful position in important development areas such as patents and copyrights, and this impacts upon new technologies, media content, and transmission rights.

WIPO is composed of many parts: broadcasters, technology and internet companies, NGOs, public interest groups, and member nations. WIPO is a United Nations mandated organisation - its decisions pass into international law at the diplomatic level and are internationally binding. The organisation has been run by on man for over 10 years - Chairman Liedes of Finland, sometimes referred to as "chairman for life".

The WIPO General Assembly will decide whether to accept Liedes’ recommendation at its annual meeting which takes place 25 September – 3 October 2006.

More Information on WIPO Broadcasting Treaty:

Electronic Frontier Foundation:
http://www.eff.org/IP/WIPO/broadcasting_treaty/

Open Rights Group:
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/orgwiki/index.php/WIPO_Broadcast_Treaty

IP Justice:
http://www.ipjustice.org/WIPO/broadcasters.shtml

Chairman's current draft proposal [SCCR/15/2]
http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/doc_details.jsp?doc_id=64712

Cory Doctorow on TWiT:
http://www.twit.tv/68

Creative Commons:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_commons

Petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/ukpod001/petition.html

Fax Your MP:
http://www.writetothem.com/

WIPO Casting Treaty: CPTech Blog

2006-09-13T08:28:00.000Z

Follow events as they unfurl...

Joint Statement of Podcasting Organizations and Podcasters on the Proposed Wipo Treaty for the Protection of Broadcasts and Broadcasting Organizations

2006-09-11T10:29:00.000Z

Joint Statement of Podcasting Organizations and Podcasters on the Proposed Wipo Treaty for the Protection of Broadcasts and Broadcasting Organizations Presented to 15th Session of Wipo Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights

Sept 11-12, 2006

We, the undersigned individuals and organizations, representing the views of thousands of individuals who create audio and audiovisual podcasts and make them available on the Internet for others to listen to and enjoy, are extremely concerned about the draft World Intellectual Property Organization Treaty for the Protection of Broadcasts and Broadcasting Organizations (the Treaty) and its proposed extension to the Internet.

The rapid adoption of podcasting by groups and individuals, both commercial, semi-professional and non-profit, for political commentary, news reporting, music distribution, and other important information dissemination is testament to its effectiveness. The Treaty proposes to create new rights that are not only unnecessary to sustain novel forms of online communication such as podcasting, but will also inhibit their growth.

The Treaty will stifle innovation in podcasting-related technologies because the Treaty would require signatory countries to provide legal protection for technological protection measures (TPM) and is likely to lead to technology mandate laws controlling the design of broadcast-receiving devices. The Treaty will also inhibit online communication by impeding access to and non-infringing use of copyrighted content. At the same time, where podcasts are made available under a Creative Commons licence, the Treaty could allow subsequent casters to make podcasts available on more restrictive terms, overriding the wishes of the podcast creator.

We oppose the extension of the draft Treaty to the Internet for three reasons.

1. There is no need for the proposed new rights. Webcasting, podcasting, and myriad other forms of online distribution have flourished without the sort of rights this Treaty would grant. Though podcasting is only in its infancy, tens of thousands of podcasts are already being made available, reaching an estimated total audience in the millions. To the extent this Treaty would grant rights to podcasters who also stream their content, including many of the undersigned, we have no desire for such rights.

2. Innovation in podcasting and other new Internet distribution tools will suffer. Podcasting came about because of the widespread adoption of general purpose portable audio players like iPods, as well as use of web syndication technologies like RSS. Had these novel tools been hampered by the secondary liability concerns that the treaty's overbroad intellectual property rights pose for technology developers and manufacturers of devices that could be used to infringe the new rights, podcasting might never have flourished. This Treaty would hinder innovation in future tools by forcing technology developers to obey government TPM mandates over device design. Along with increasing the potential financial costs for innovators, the TPM mandates will limit the types of features on new devices.

3. Extending the Treaty to the Internet will harm the flow of information and free speech online. Podcasters' freedom of expression is likely to suffer as a result of reduced innovation. Moreover, the treaty will impede podcasters' access to and non-infringing use of copyrighted content. Podcasters can currently rely on national copyright laws to lawfully include copyrighted materials in their programs, whether for news reporting, education, or other permitted uses. The proposed Treaty would undermine those uses by layering a new and overbroad set of rights on top of copyright. This will require a second layer of rights clearance for transmitted materials. This will increase transaction costs for podcasters, who already face significant hurdles in obtaining necessary copyright clearances due to undeveloped licensing markets. But it will also give broadcasters the ability to silence podcasters who depend on use of copyrighted materials.

Signed,

United Kingdom Podcasters' Association (UKPA)

Irish PodRepBod

German Podcastverband

U.S. Podcast Guild

Ev Williams Odeo, Inc., USA

Emmanuelle Bordes, Canada

Frederick Wells, USA

Andrew Hoehler, USA

Cory Doctorow, USA The Cory Doctorow Podcast

James Anthony Christian, United Kingdom The Posithink Podcast (http://www.posithink.net)

Jonathan M. Reiter, USA, Oregon Free Culture Movement.

Michael Thebo, United States of America Podcaster of the Twilight and Thebes Show

Stephanie Thebo,United States of America Podcaster of the Twilight and Thebes Show

Miles Metcalfe Head of IT Research and Development Ravensbourne College of Design & Communication Chislehurst, United Kingdom http://www.rave.ac.uk/

Jon Berlin, USA

Melissa Gira, USA melissagira.com, 'whorecast'

Matthew Wayne Selznick, USA MWS Media

Tomislav Medak, Croatia Multimedia Institute, http://www.mi2.hr

Brandon McGrody

Alan Wolf, Ph.D, USA

Patrick Buckley, USA

Douglas E. Welch, USA Career Opportunities Podcast

Kevin H. Devin In the Trenches podcast, http://kevindevin.com Friends in Tech, http://www.friendsintech.com

Jamie Nelson, USA The Didgeplanet Podcast

Kara Shallenberg http://kayray.org/; http://librivox.org/

Cheryl Oda

Chuck Tomasi http://www.chuckchat.com/

Steven Garrity

James L. Johnson Jr., USA

Mark Rafferty

Janne Jalkanen, Finland podcaster ("Saunan Takaa", and "Verkkokakkonen")

Martin McKeay, CISSP, CCNA The Network Security Podcast http://www.mckeay.net/ http://podcastroundtable.com/

James M. Van Verth The Vintage Gamer podcast, www.thevintagegamer.net

Dennis R. Miller

Laura Ross coffeeandteashow.com rockyhorrorpodshow.libsyn.com

Wrong Notes Podcast, The Music Blog of the Ear Reverends HearJam Records http://earreverends.com/

Stephen Okay, USA

Billy Bowers

Michael C Young, Canada

Ron Brinkmann Co-host VFXShow Podcast

Victor Cajiao Typical PC User Podcast, www.typicalpcuser.com Typical Mac User Podcast, www.typicalmacuser.com Immigration Tales Podcast, www.immigrationtales.com

Brian Vawter

Strange Company

Dennis Hays http://www.haysdesign.com Secrets of Digital Imaging, http://www.imagingsecrets.com Photo News Today, http://photonewstoday.com The Blues and Jazz Show, http://bluesandjazz.thepodcastnetwork.com

The Command Line Podcast http://thecommandline.net/

Daniel Emery

William J. Beaty, USA

The Pixel Corps, Guild of Digital Content Creators, 2000 members in 35 countries Producers of "Macbreak", "Macbreak Weekly", "this WEEK in MEDIA"

Michael Croke

Samantha Murphy SMtv Podcast http://www.samanthamurphy.com

Neal Foley The Podchef http://www.podchef.motime.com feeds.feedburner.com/podchef

Rick Kleffel Editor, The Agony Column Book Reviews, News, Interviews and Commentary http://trashotron.com/agony

Christian Splie and Sheryl The Drunken Clam Girl
"Life On Tap" Podcast, http://www.lifeontap.net/

AudioLuxe, Inc, USA
www.audioluxe.org

James Raygan Kelly
Co-Producer Dollars: Dog of Privilege Podcast, http://dollars.libsyn.com

Carl Malamud, USA
Chief Technology Officer, Center for American Progress, Washington, D.C.
Founder of the Internet Multicasting Service, distributor of first audio programs on the Internet in 1993.

George Nemeth, USA
Managing Partner, Meet The Bloggers LLC
Meet The Bloggers podcast

Paul Parkinson
Podcaster and Editor of Podcast User Magazine
http://www.podcastusermagazine.com

Hrvoje Mitic, Croatia

Jay King
Audio Lingo Podcast, http://www.audiolingo.org

Anja Ivekovic-Martinis, Croatia

Howard Shepherd

Goran Pavlic, Croatia

Tobias D. Robison, USA

Peter Scheidl

David Bruce Hughes

Rick Jackson Publisher, www.wonderaudio.com

Howard Chang

Action for civil transparency (ACT)
Non-governmental organization, Croatia

Nenad Baric, Croatia
Confusion - association for promoting audio-visual arts

Robert Newson
Publisher of original Creative Commons-licensed music at http://feeds.feedburner.com/Newsonic

Podiobooks.com (representing 50+ authors releasing audio versions of their books under Creative Commons license)

Lauren McLaughlin

Maggie Bonham
Host of the Sci Fi Traveling Road Show

http://www.eff.org/IP/WIPO/broadcasting_treaty/podcasting.php

Letter From Emily Thornberry, MP, To Lord Sainsbury Re: WIPO

2006-08-21T09:35:00.000Z

WIPO Update

2006-08-07T10:30:00.000Z

You may remember that WIPO co-organized an event in Barcelona entitled "From the Rome Convention to Podcasting" on June 21. Despite the title, there was apparently little discussion of podcasting. Here's notes of the meeting from Michelle Childs of CP Tech, who was a panelist at the meeting:

http://downontheriver.blogspot.com/2006/06/notes-of-wipo-barcelona-seminar.html

We've been waiting for a new draft of the treaty to be released by WIPO. That happened on Wednesday. The new draft is at:

http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/doc_details.jsp?doc_id=64712

At the last WIPO meeting in May, it was agreed that "webcasting" would be taken out of the new draft, and put into a separate instrument. It was also agreed that "simulcasting" (meaning simultaneous transmission of broadcasts and cable transmissions) would be taken out and put into the 2nd, separate instrument. The new draft has removed webcasting, but not simulcasting.

This week the US delegation submitted a new definition of "netcasting" to WIPO so it may well be discussed at the next meeting, even if "webcasting" (as previously defined) is not in the new draft of the treaty treaty.

WIPO has set the dates for the next meeting. It will be at WIPO HQ in Geneva on September 11-13 (not 11-15 as previously thought). We received the formal invitation today. This will be the last meeting before the treaty is put forward to the WIPO General Assembly on September 25-October 3, and member countries will be asked to vote to convene an inter-governmental diplomatic conference in early 2007. The treaty would be formally agreed and adopted at that conference.

The concerns that we UKPA members have :

- Not wanting to be regulated in the same way as broadcasters, and wanting to ensure that broadcasters could not use the treaty to use and obtain rights over podcast content. The treaty states that it is not intended to interfere with existing copyright rights, but because of the unclear drafting and the overlap with copyright, there's some concern about how this will work in practice.

There's also concern that Creative Commons-licensed podcasts could be restricted by later users including "webcasters" under the Treaty, particularly if these use "technological measures" or DRM.

Thanks to Gwen Hinze from EFF.

BBC Radio Five Live Up All Night

2006-06-20T08:57:00.000Z

Great coverage of our WIPO campaign from the BBC - Tuesday 20th June, BBC Radio Five Live, Howard Benson interview. - it will be available for the next seven days.

European Podcasters Team Up To Lobby WIPO

2006-06-19T17:23:00.000Z

Podcasters across the world have come together to emphatically reject the re-drafted Broadcast Treaty. UK Podcasters Association has been joined by the Irish Podrepbod and German Podcastverband to lobby WIPO in a pan-european effort to assert podcasters' rights at the WIPO meeting in Barcalona Wednesday, June 21st, presenting a petition, the text of which follows:

To: World Intellectual Property organization (WIPO)

This is a petition to the World Intellectual Property organization (WIPO) regarding the Broadcast Treaty as it affects podcasting and podcasters.

This treaty as it stands gives broadcasters (not creators or copyright holders) the right to tie up the use of audiovisual material for 50 years after broadcasting it, even if the programs are in the public domain, Creative Commons licensed, or not copyrightable. We consider this to be an infringement of the right of the originator of a work to determine its form of licence, future usage and copyright status. Further, the extension of the Broadcast Treaty to include Podcasting does not take into account the many forms of the new medium of podcasting which do not correspond to broadcast models. We uphold our right to be different from broadcasting and therefore subject to legislation which takes these differences into account.

We, podcast creators, producers and supporters of the global podcasting community, earnestly request that WIPO respect, acknowledge and include the following in any revision of the Broadcast Treaty:

- Broadcaster copyright cannot overrule podcast copyright or other licence
- Podcasting is not broadcasting and the two must not be conflated (forced together)
- The wishes of the creator regarding their rights in their work must be respected
- Creative Commons licences, GPU licences, "free forever" licences (in whatever form) are legitimate and must be upheld in perpetuity.

http://www.petitiononline.com/ukpod001/petition.html

UKPA Chairman Dean Whitbread said: “UK Podcasters Association is pleased to team up with our European colleagues in Germany and Ireland in order to present a united front for these very important lobbying issues. WIPO must respect the rights of podcasters and not superimpose a out-dated model which will have a negative impact upon this fast-growing cultural industry.”

Brian Greene, head of the Irish Podcasters Representative Body, said, “Extending IPRs at the expense of the public domain is a developing trend that will be to the detriment of all media, be it corporate, state or citizen-developed.”

Thomas Wanhoff from the German Podcastverband said, “As radio and TV loses its audience, podcasters are finding their own means of making content in a very creative way. We just want to maintain our rights - and this is what we are fighting for."

Download PDF here.

Open Rights WIPO Wiki

2006-06-18T13:22:00.000Z

The issues re: the Broadcast Treaty are laid out here.

WIPO Podcast Petition

2006-06-18T11:40:00.000Z

To: World Intellectual Property organization (WIPO)

This is a petition to the World Intellectual Property organization (WIPO) regarding the Broadcast Treaty as it affects podcasting and podcasters.

This treaty as it stands gives broadcasters (not creators or copyright holders) the right to tie up the use of audiovisual material for 50 years after broadcasting it, even if the programs are in the public domain, Creative Commons licensed, or not copyrightable.

We consider this to be an infringement of the right of the originator of a work to determine its form of licence, future usage and copyright status.

Further, the extension of the Broadcast Treaty to include Podcasting does not take into account the many forms of the new medium of podcasting which do not correspond to broadcast models. We uphold our right to be different from broadcasting and therefore subject to legislation which takes these differences into account.

We, podcast creators, producers and supporters of the global podcasting community, earnestly request that WIPO respect, acknowledge and include the following in any revision of the Broadcast Treaty:

- Broadcaster copyright cannot overrule podcast copyright or other licence

- Podcasting is not broadcasting and the two must not be conflated (forced together)

- The wishes of the creator regarding their rights in their work must be respected

- Creative Commons licences, GPU licences, "free forever" licences (in whatever form) are legitimate and must be upheld in perpetuity.

Sincerely,

Sign the petition.

WIPO Puts Podcasting Back In Firing Line

2006-06-16T20:54:00.000Z

Glyn Wintle from the Open Rights Group sent me this link about the WIPO plans to regulate podcasting in Barcalona on June 21st.

This treaty gives broadcasters (not creators or copyright holders) the right to tie up the use of audiovisual material for 50 years after broadcasting it, even if the programs are in the public domain, Creative Commons licensed, or not copyrightable.

Podcasting Is Selling Music - And It's Legal

2006-06-08T12:03:00.000Z

This alternative UKPA graphic has been provided by Mark.

Broadcasters are not Podcasters, says UKPA: Music Alliance Review UK podcasting Licence “Podcast Rules”

2006-06-01T10:55:00.000Z

The UK Podcasters Association met Tuesday 30th May with the MCPS-PRS Music Alliance, the two principal UK music licensing and royalty collection agencies at their Berners Street offices. The objectives of the meeting were to establish working contact, indicate the important differences between UK podcasting activities and formats and broadcast, discuss access to the licensed music catalogue to which they act as gate-keepers, and to give direct feedback on their podcast music licence. The meeting was a fair and frank exchange of views conducted in a friendly and supportive way by both groups.

UKPA is greatly concerned by the imposition of format restrictions applying to all podcasters who pay for the licence, and the results of the Podcast Nation poll on this hot topic were presented to and welcomed by the Music Alliance as valuable feedback.

UKPA's view was that imposing restrictive controls developed from the broadcast media model, rather than taking a new sheet of paper for a new entertainment and business model, was preventing take-up of the license as in its current draft, and the MCPS-PRS podcasting licence could inhibit the development of new content formats and stifle a nascent industry.

The Music Alliance’s podcast licence was initially released in March 2006 and, because of a number of vague and imprecise clauses contained within it, appeared to be attempting to set up a licensing scheme for all podcasts, including podsafe and speech-only podcasts. This was later withdrawn by the MA, but a large proportion of the 300 or so independent UK podcast producers remained concerned that in order to play the mainstream music the Music Alliance control, they were being forced into adopting a set of “rules” controlling the way they create, adapt and release their content and this proved to be the rallying cry that launched the first UK representative body for podcasters.

“We are interested in working with the Music Alliance to improve their understanding of podcasting, podcasters, and to evolve a model of licensing which strikes a balance between their concerns and ours” said Dean Whitbread. “We would like to be able to pay a reasonable fee, without worrying about restrictive "rules" whilst we pioneer, develop and exploit new commercial formats. If they let us do that, ultimately they'll make a lot more money out of us.”

Taking scales of economy into account is also an issue. Since its inception, the cost of the licence has risen from £200 pa to £400 pa, and the licence has expanded from 2 to 30 pages which may now mean the independent podcaster has to take legal advice which will add several hundred pounds to the licence cost. As commercial broadcasters who benefit from advertising revenue move into the medium, there is a real danger that the small percentage (estimated 20%) of would-be commercial independent podcasters who might wish to play MA-licensed content could be priced out of the market.

The MCPS-PRS was firm in its view that the record labels were the ultimate gate-keepers to the content and their concerns needed to be addressed. It was agreed that there is an educative role for the UKPA to explain to publishers and record companies that podcasting is not file sharing – podcasters are program-makers - and opportunities to explain the differences will be sought.

The advantages of including MA-licensed repertoire within podcasting were laid out, and UKPA accepted the great benefit of a one-stop licensing shop which removes the need to negotiate with multiple content owners. On the other hand, the huge influx of artists self-licensing their work into “podsafe” podcasts was potentially fuelling an alternative to existing rights organisations.

Podcasting actually boosts sales of licensed music. Before the vast majority of podcasters went “podsafe” some played licensed music and the bands played noted spikes in sales on service such as iTunes. “Bands which might never have got a record deal are now generating sales and significant income from plays on “podsafe” podcasts which tell the listener where to buy the music – direct from the band and cutting the middle man (the record company) out of the loop completely,” said Paul Parkinson.

Discussed at some length were the anomalies which the widely-adopted Creative Commons licenses bring to the exclusive nature of MCPS-PRS licence schemes, MySpace, and other artist-driven variants of online music, and the difficulties in establishing an effective global scheme, which is currently being researched by the MA. Marla Shapiro reported that the MA were planning to release a General Entertainment on Demand scheme later this year.

UKPA presented the case for podcasting as a medium in itself, establishing the major differences between the original programmed content of the majority of UK podcasters and radio stations re-purposing broadcast content. Podcasting started with individuals creating fresh and exciting content breaking the mould of the stale audio and video formats. Podcasting now has been seized upon by broadcast radio as a way of regurgitating their shows on a time-shift basis.

In 2006 independent UK podcasts deliver in multiple media to hundreds of thousands of listeners in more than 100 countries. Independent UK podcasters have invented new styles of content, provided very specialised niche shows (knitting, anyone?) through to mass appeal shows covering technology, soccer, parenting, and of course, music. UKPA requested recognition in the licensing scheme of individuals, small groups, communities and small-to-medium sized businesses who were now using and creating successful podcasts using different commercial models to those that applied to established traditional businesses.

The Music Alliance accepted the need to distinguish between the small-scale, amateur enthusiast “bedroom” podcasters, new podcast businesses, and the commercial broadcasters’ use of the medium, but it was also clear that they had not seen very much hard data on UK podcasting from UK podcasters. It was agreed that working contact would be established between the two organisations on this basis.

Representing the UKPA was Dean Whitbread. Businesses who are also UKPA members were represented in the room by Paul Parkinson from Podcast User Magazine, Paul Pinfield from Pinnacle Media, and Mark Crook from Funk. Also present were Ben Brassington from Harbottle and Lewis, and Louise Ferguson from the Open Rights group. This group met with Jez Bell, Online Director, Marla Shapiro, Broadcast and Online Projects Director, and Chris Morrison, Online Licensing Manager.

Download a press release PDF document.

Open Rights Group Wiki

2006-05-25T09:04:00.000Z

Edited the Open Rights Group wiki to their standard format.

New Members Add Definition To UKPA

2006-05-23T21:56:00.000Z

Pleased that UK podcasters are adding their constructive input to the basic set up of the organisation. Thanks in particular to Alasdair of Aycliffe Podcast for his review of the Memorandum and Articles and the Terms and Conditions, which will be revised and improved in response to his meticulous work.

UKPA Members Get Involved

2006-05-19T00:18:00.000Z

In the midst of much debate about the purpose and relevance of UKPA, we go from strength to strength.

Martin from Green Dragon has designed this logo, perfect for members' websites and blogs should they wish to add it. I also added some details about who is "behind" UKPA and clarified the Founders' statement, in response to blog and forum comments.

UKPA Links To German & Irish Podcast Groups

2006-05-14T16:02:00.000Z

UKPA has established contact with German Podcasters Group and the Irish Podcasters Representative Body. Both groups have aims very similar to UK Podcasters Association.

The Irish group is 40+ strong and have met the equivalents of PRS and MCPS IMRO, and are soon due to meet the Irish Recorded Music Association IRMA.

Open Rights Group

2006-05-05T07:24:00.000Z

Edited the podcast section of the Open Rights Group wiki.

UK Podcasters Association

2006-04-12T08:42:00.000Z

Here is the poll ran in March / April 2006 which indicated a 70%-plus majority in favour of setting up the organisation.

Here is the debate on the Britcaster forum.