PIR Discussion on SCADR Systematic Copyright Alternative Dispute Resolution
As a followup to topic discussion on the Systematic Copyright Alternative Dispute Resolution with the PIR Advisory Committee I am taking the liberty of sharing some points from the new PIR advisory member Farzaneh Badii.
This some of the key points by Faraneh
Private dispute resolution mechanisms (and sometimes even overzealous public ones) for protection of copyright can lead to censorship.
Copyright owners have access to public institutions remedies. Reduction of the legal transaction costs for them can lead to unfair requests and copyright overreach. At the present, there are no laws that mandate PIR to enforce copyrights or to come up with a dispute resolution mechanism. If a law that mandates PIR in the future is issued and passed, then that is when we should think about due process that should be present in that system.
By having SCADR in place, PIR will run into many liability issues. I have not seen the policy (are we going to receive that?) but I have researched on intermediary liability. There are many instances which the intermediary can be held liable when providing dispute resolution. This is not a legally mandated ADR and not required by law, so if PIR chooses this path it might well expose itself to being sued. While arbitral liability is a well-established doctrine, PIR's process might not constitute arbitration ( I don't know the policy, have to look at it) there are instances that even referral to a certain dispute resolution mechanism can expose the intermediary to liability. And bearing such liability is for a cause that is against the mission of PIR in this instance.
Best regards,
Farzaneh
Comment
Thanks to Farzaneh leading the charge on this issue and I would suggest to pick up this topical discussion and provide comments to myself and Maureen ( a new PIR Member) apparently a full document is pending from PIR
Thoughts
G