The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) should scrap ...

Intel said it opposes giving broadcasters -- and perhaps webcasters along with them -- new rights to control uses of content they broadcast that are separate from existing copyrights in the material. Proponents of the treaty “have not demonstrated that the benefits of creating new exclusive rights outweigh the burdens that these new rights impose,” Intel said. It said those burdens include: (1) Potentially giving broadcast organizations the right to control legitimate and noninfringing uses of content within homes by, say, forcing PVR makers to get licenses and agree to limitations imposed by broadcasters. (2) Requiring technical protection measures that limit design freedom. (3) Potentially exposing software developers, device makers and ISPs to secondary liability for infringements by unrelated parties. (4) Creating a denser thicket of copyright rights that content users must negotiate to obtain clearance from rights-holders. (5) Reducing royalties to copyright owners by making content users pay broadcasters as well as content owners. (6) Potentially limiting “fair uses” of copyrighted materials and restricting content otherwise in the public domain. Efforts to enact the treaty “should be abandoned,” Intel said. Its scope should at least be “dramatically narrowed” to signal theft, the company said. Intel has only recently “really taken a close look at this broadcast treaty” and decided to air some of the questions it raises, said Donald Whiteside, vp-corporate technology group. Many others in the industry -- companies that make TiVo, for example -- still aren’t aware the treaty could give broadcasters the right to say, “my content shall not be tivoed,” he told us. Intel has taken its concerns to nongovernmental organizations participating in the treaty talks and to the U.S. WIPO delegation, he said. The SCCR meets May 1-5 to discuss the latest treaty draft.