Proceeding contribution from Ian Gibson (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 20 March 2008. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Creative Industries.
Creative Industries
I am not into sectarian violence in Havana Hall this afternoon, that is for sure. However, the point is well made. We have recognised the problem and produced a solution. Many people may find it a little severe, but I am sure that we can do something about it to encourage younger people starting their careers by giving them some recompense for the work that they produce. We have heard about education. As always, it is half the battle. The DCMS report says that intellectual property rights are poorly understood, and the point has been made that many of the public love a bit of piracy here and there, as they are getting something for free. A large percentage of consumers have looked at pirated video content, and one cannot go to a cinema now without being extolled to report anybody who is holding up a camera and trying to record the film being shown. Teenagers realise that they can download things for free instead of having to use their parents' credit card, which is the alternative. That that is illegal should be inculcated in them through the education system. Adults will download free books, so it is not just teenagers; adults will do it too if it is easy enough. Free music and free books may someday mean no music and no books. People may find it difficult to continue to produce if piracy continues to happen. DCMS says that reducing software piracy would generate 30,000 jobs and £11 billion into the official economy, so it is worth doing. Another recommendation that we have heard about relates to the Strategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property Policy. The board is doing fine, although its predecessor had a few problems—basically, it did not have people who knew what they were talking about. Feargal Sharkey of British Music Rights made that point:"““If the Board on IP wants to contribute to Government thinking on Intellectual Property in a meaningful way, it has to involve people who make their living from their creativity and hence, understand the true value of copyright.””" Everyone here will have read the magnificent report from the Select Committee on Innovation, Universities and Skills, which I chair, ““The Work and Operation of the Copyright Tribunal””. The Copyright Tribunal is basically one man and a dozen different types of lawyer. That one man runs it in his spare time. He sits around trying to unravel copyright disputes between the people who made a work and the people who use it, who may think that the fine imposed on them is too high. Members might be interested to know that even undertakers appear before the tribunal for having downloaded music to use during ceremonies. It is a strange organisation, and the Select Committee makes some stringent comments about it and what might be done to improve it, not the least of which is that we cannot have one senior QC running it in his spare time. One case cost £12 million to resolve. That makes it difficult for the small person who cannot get into that kind of network or a game involving forensic lawyers and lawyers of other dimensions. It is not possible. We must have some new copyright tribunal system, so that when disputes arise—hopefully we can eliminate many of them by other mechanisms; we have heard about some of what is going on with the internet—writers as well as people from the musical world have a fair shot. Orphan works whose source is hard to trace are another problem. The cost of cases needs to be cut and the administration of the tribunal needs to be overhauled. This is an exciting time when, for once, we will be looking seriously at creativity. There will always be problems, but copyright is a problem that has been around for a long time. I do not have immediate solutions to it in terms of catching and punishing those who abuse it. We do so a lot through Home Office functions and so on, if people are downloading information. We need to consider whether we want to give people credit for the work that they produce and pay for it in some way. Both writers and musicians in this country have been undervalued for years and years. I am so pleased that people interested in intellectual property are now calling meetings, including in this House. The Westminster Forum too will be holding one. So something is stirring. I think that Parliament, Ministers and Departments now need to get stuck in and help creativity. The industries will not survive or hit their potential unless we allow the people involved the right to get paid and to own their work. That is the way to encourage many more people into the industry. I am continually amazed by the talent in this small island—it seems endless. I just wonder how much we fail it sometimes with the kind of structures that we set up and the laws that we put in place. How many people get turned off and say, ““Well, there is no living to be made out of this, so I might as well do something else.””? There is a problem in higher education and if we do not watch out, we will lose much of that creativity.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 473 c314-5WH
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Broadcasting Business Arts Copyright Digital broadcasting Film Industry Innovation Media Technology Television Skilled workers
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-03-01 14:20:24 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_457550
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_457550
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_457550