Memorandum submitted by BECTU
1. BECTU is the trade union for workers
(other than performers and journalists) in broadcasting, film,
independent production and live entertainment. Our evidence focuses
on two of the issues highlighted by the Committee:
The extent to which a regulatory environment
should be applied to creative content accessed using non-traditional
media platforms.
2. We believe a focus on this issue is timely,
in the light of the current discussions arising from the revision
of the Television Without Frontiers Directive (TWF).
3. We note Commissioner Reding's proposals
for an extension of TWF to cover non-traditional media such as
television over the internet, television via mobile phones and
video on demand, and the new distinction between linear (ie traditional
broadcasting) and non-linear services. We further note the strong
but in our view premature opposition to this from Government and
relevant corporate interests.
4. We support, in principle, the proposals
for regulation of non-traditional media through TWF.
— We believe the proposal is already
sufficiently measured and graduated ie it does not seek to apply
the full traditional broadcast regulations to the new media platforms.
— We regard the opposition from telecom/mobile
phone/internet companies as blatant self interest from a sector
that would prefer the more market-orientated environment of the
E-Commerce Directive or complete self-regulation.
— We take the view that viewer/consumer
interests are best served in a TWF regulatory environment which
is attuned to issues of creative content as well as commerce.
5. We believe decisions taken now will have
far-reaching consequences for the future of the media and that
we should seek to retain the highest possible regulatory standards
consistent with a commercially viable sector. So far, TWF—despite
similar initial opposition to "excessive regulation"—has
worked well for the broadcast media in Europe. We believe it can
do so equally well for the non-traditional media.
Where the balance should lie between the rights
of creators and the expectations of consumers in the context of
the BBC's Creative Archive and other developments.
Many of our members operate as freelances and
are creative professionals owning copyright in the work they create
for the sector. Their skills are wide ranging from directors,
designers and art directors, script and screenwriters, to costume
designers, scenic artists, photographers and animators. All produce
content whether in the form of films/programmes or contributions
to films and programmes. They look to residuals or re-use payments
to supplement their incomes.
They also value the moral rights in their work,
that is, the right to be identified as the author and to protect
the integrity of their work, though due to pressure from broadcasters
and producers, many are pressurised into waiving those rights
for audio visual uses.
While we understand and appreciate the BBC's
willingness to experiment with new forms of public accessibility
to broadcast material, the rights needed by the BBC for this public
access may in some cases have been acquired as part of a so called
"buy out" ie for no extra payment from the BBC. We hope,
but cannot be certain, that all such rights have been cleared
or paid for in the first instance.
It is from this starting point that creators
must watch the BBC inviting the public to "Find it Rip it
Mix it Share it Come and Get it" but without any suggestion
of "Respect it"! Such an approach, in our view unfairly
raises consumer expectations about what they can do with materials
available from the Archive. We also have doubts about whether
consumers signing up to the BBC's "Provisional Creative Archive
Licence" will take the trouble to read it and thus be aware
that it is for non-commercial or educational use only.
As a public service broadcaster the BBC also
has a responsibility to educate and we are disappointed that,
as an experienced communicator, it has not used this opportunity
to explain the importance of copyright to the public, or to explain
how copyright benefits creativity and culture. Positive information
on copyright should, in our view, be presented to the public at
the very start of the website but disappointingly it can only
be found in the FAQs and even there information is expressed in
a way which suggests copyright as an inhibitor of use rather than
as a facilitator. This is despite the fact that the Creative Archive
Licence is in itself a licence based on existing UK copyright
law. We hope this issue can be addressed by the BBC.
24 February 2006
| 
