I am delighted the Minister of State is in the House this evening because he has direct responsibility for the topic I want to discuss.
EU Directive 2001/29/EC was brought forward to protect copyright, but the importance of access to the information society was also addressed in the directive. I have some concerns regarding the regulations the Minister is about to introduce. I have seen them in draft form and they may, in some instances, limit access which should be legally available. For example, S.I. No. 406 of 2000 permits organisations to make adapted copies for the disabled, but does not allow the individual disabled person to do so unless it is for research or private study. For example, a blind person cannot put a book on their own scanner and make an aural copy for themselves. A deaf person cannot turn a tape into print. These are one-off copies. They are for their own use but for interest or entertainment. As I said, they can only do it if it is for research or private study. They can obtain copies by going to an organisation. All this seems rather patronising and belittling when disabled people themselves, and we as a society, are encouraging them to be more independent. Surely this can be changed. It will not cost anyone any money.
This is an inadvertent omission. The directive allows a simple change from obsolescent hardware and software to updated forms, but the regulations do not address that point. Rapidly changing technology could allow a situation to arise where it is impossible to access information even though one has permission to do so. I urge the Minister of State to implement the provisions of the directive regarding format shifting to avoid people running into serious trouble accessing information.
Technological protection measures are very important. One must accept the need, therefore, for breaks or inhibitions on access to information, but a supplier must make available a means whereby a legitimate user can avail of their rights to access a document and this is provided under the legislation. The problem, however, is that if the supplier does not comply, there is no means of redress except recourse to the High Court under the regulation. That would be very expensive and time consuming for anyone who already has a legal right to get the information.
Would it not be possible for the person to sign a statutory declaration as to their interests and bona fides before a public notary or peace commissioner? I understand one is allowed to do this in respect of telecommunications licences for deflectors and that this is already possible in the Department.
When we discussed this extensive legislation with the former Minister of State at the Department, Deputy Tom Kitt, we agreed that a blanket obligation on all libraries to charge for copies under the library exemptions was introduced solely for the benefit of libraries. I remember pointing out that it could cost libraries more than they could hope to collect, especially when dealing with students. As I recall, the Minister of State indicated he would remove the obligation when the opportunity arose. I assure the Minister of State present that some libraries are not in a position to enforce the charges and ask him to transform the obligation into an option, now that we have the opportunity to do so. The directive seeks to promote access to the information technology society, while regulating it. I am sure this, rather than a limitation on legal access, is what the Minister of State wants.