The Copyright Debate & Why PR Should Pay Attention

: Image via Wikipedia

Claire Thompson, Freelance PR Consultant, Waves PR

“Copyright Tribunal Rules In Favour Of PRCA After NLA Challenges License Opposition”

That’s today’s PR Week headline regarding the latest on the NLA copyright charging situation. It looks like the NLA has lost the right to stop Meltwater and the PRCA objecting to license, which means that it’s now anyone’s guess which way things will go.

With a year before legal proceedings get underway, that’s a lot of time for the clock to tick on unissued invoices from cuttings agencies to clients. PR companies could be facing some whopping bills, with little chance of claiming them back from clients.

Meanwhile the FT has taken a laudably clear approach to its copyright. In February they gave notice that from July of this year the FT will be responsible for licensing all of its own digital rights., taking back the mandate for digital rights currently managed by the NLA, although the NLA will retain the mandate for paper copying.

It’s charges to access content on-line are transparent and clear – you can access a certain number of copies, according to the license that you hold, and after that you pay. The site does the hard work of calculating this for you.

I’m all for people charging for content if they so choose. Writers, with only a few, notable exceptions, are rarely well rewarded for their talents.

The paid content debate will no doubt rage on until new models are found, but the copyright issues are complex and confusing at best. However, all PR people should be watching closely, since the NLA situation is merely the tip of the iceberg. Decisions made around NLA licensing will give an indicator for future charging models, both direct and indirect, as well as influencing the right to link to sites/content, share links to content and event print from the web.