On October 19, the News/Media Alliance sent a letter together with Digital Content Next and the European Publishers Council to the G7 member states and the European Union regarding the Group’s efforts to develop global AI principles and a voluntary code of conduct under the so-called Hiroshima AI Process. The letter expressed support for the process and encouraged the member states to include strong transparency obligations and copyright protections in the G7 framework. The letter was accompanied by the Global AI Principles signed by the Alliance and over two dozen other content and media organizations in September, covering issues related to intellectual property, transparency, accountability, quality and integrity, fairness, safety, design, and sustainable development. The G7 are expected to finalize the framework in the coming weeks. The European Commission recently published a draft version of the principles, including a reference to copyrights and transparency measures.

The post News/Media Alliance Commends G7’s Hiroshima AI Process, Calls for Strong Copyright Protections appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

Credit: blackdovfx / iStock/Getty Images Plus via Getty Images

Download as a PDF

Introduction

AI developers and regulators have a unique opportunity to establish an ethical AI framework to boost innovation and create new business opportunities, while ensuring that AI develops in a way that is responsible and sustainable. To achieve this, it is essential that AI systems are trained on content and data which is accessed lawfully, including by appropriate prior authorisations obtained for the use of copyright protected works and other subject matter, and that the content and sources used to train the systems are clearly identified. This document sets out principles that the undersigned publisher organisations believe should govern the development, deployment, and regulation of Artificial Intelligence systems and applications. These principles cover issues related to intellectual property, transparency, accountability, quality and integrity, fairness, safety, design, and sustainable development.

The proliferation of AI Systems, especially Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI), present a sea change in how we interact with and deploy technology and creative content. While AI technologies will provide substantial benefits to the public, content creators, businesses, and society at large, they also pose risks for the sustainability of the creative industries, the public’s trust in knowledge, journalism, and science, and the health of our democracies.

We, the undersigned organisations, fully embrace the opportunities AI will bring to our sector and call for the responsible development and deployment of AI systems and applications. We strongly believe that these new tools will facilitate innovative breakthroughs when developed in accordance with established principles and laws that protect publishers’ intellectual property (IP), valuable brands, trusted consumer relationships, and investments. The indiscriminate appropriation of our intellectual property by AI systems is unethical, harmful, and an infringement of our protected rights.

Our organisations represent thousands of creative professionals around the world, including news, magazine, and book publishers and the academic publishing industry such as learned societies and university presses. Our members invest considerable time and resources creating high-quality content that keeps our communities informed, entertained, and engaged. These principles – applying to the use of our content to train and deploy AI systems, as they are understood and used today – are aimed at ensuring our continued ability to innovate, create and disseminate such content, while facilitating the responsible development of trustworthy AI systems.

Intellectual Property

1) Developers, operators, and deployers of AI systems must respect intellectual property rights, which protect the rights holders’ investments in original content. These rights include all applicable copyright, ancillary rights, and other legal protections, as well as contractual restrictions or limitations imposed by rightsholders on the access to and use of their content. Therefore, developers, operators, and deployers of AI systems—as well as legislators, regulators, and other parties involved in drafting laws and policies regulating AI—must respect the value of creators’ and owners’ proprietary content in order to protect the livelihoods of creators and rightsholders.

2) Publishers are entitled to negotiate for and receive adequate remuneration for use of their IP. AI system developers, operators, and deployers should not be crawling, ingesting, or using our proprietary creative content without express authorisation. Use of intellectual property by AI systems for training, surfacing, or synthesising is usually expressly prohibited in online terms and conditions of the rightsholders, and not covered by pre-existing licensing agreements. Where developers have been permitted to crawl content for one purpose (for example, indexing for search), they must seek express authorisation for use of the IP for other purposes, such as inclusion within LLMs. These agreements should also account for harms that AI systems may cause, or have already caused, to creators, owners, and the public.

3) Copyright and ancillary rights protect content creators and owners from the unlicensed use of their content. Like all other uses of protected works, use of protected works in AI systems is subject to compliance with the relevant laws concerning copyrights, ancillary rights, and permissions within protocols. To ensure that access to content for use in AI systems is lawful, including through appropriate licenses and permissions obtained from relevant rightsholders, it is essential that rightsholders are able effectively to enforce their rights, and where applicable, require attribution and remuneration.

4) Existing markets for licensing creators’ and rightsholders’ content should be recognised. Valuing publishers’ legitimate IP interests need not impede AI innovation because frameworks already exist to permit use in return for payment, including through licensing. We encourage efficient licensing models that can facilitate training of trustworthy and high-quality AI systems

Transparency

5) AI systems should provide granular transparency to creators, rightsholders, and users. It is essential that strong regulations are put in place to require developers of AI systems to keep detailed records of publisher works and associated metadata, alongside the legal basis on which they were accessed, and to make this information available to the extent necessary for publishers to enforce their rights where their content is included in training datasets. The obligation to keep accurate records should go back to the start of the AI development to provide a full chain of use regardless of the jurisdiction in which the training or testing may have taken place. Failure to keep detailed records should give rise to a presumption of use of the data in question. When datasets or applications developed by non-profit, research, or educational third parties are used to power commercial AI systems, this must be clearly disclosed so that publishers can enforce their rights. Where developers use AI tools as a component into the process of generating knowledge from knowledge, there should be transparency on the application of these tools, including appropriate and clear accountability and provenance mechanisms, as well as clear attribution where appropriate in accordance with the terms and conditions of the publishers of the original content. Without limiting and subject to paragraphs 6 and 9, AI developers should work with publishers to develop mutually acceptable attribution and navigation standards and formats. Users should also be provided with comprehensible information about how such systems operate to make judgments about system and output quality and trustworthiness.

Accountability

6) Providers and deployers of AI systems should cooperate to ensure accountability for system outputs. AI systems pose risks for competition and public trust in the quality and accuracy of informational and scientific content. This can be compounded by AI systems generating content that improperly attributes false information to publishers. Deployers of AI systems providing informational or scientific content should provide all essential and relevant information to ensure accountability and should not be shielded from liability for their outputs, including through limited liability regimes and safe harbours.

Quality and Integrity

7) Ensuring quality and integrity is fundamental to establishing trust in the application of AI tools and services. These values should be at the heart of the AI lifecycle, from the design and building of algorithms, to inputs used to train AI tools and services, to those used in the  practical application of AI. A fundamental principle of computing is that a process can only be as good or unbiased as the input used to teach the system (rubbish-in-rubbish-out). AI developers and deployers should recognise that publishers are an invaluable part of their supply chain, generating high-quality content for training, and also for surfacing and synthesising. Use of high-quality content upstream will contribute to high-quality outputs for downstream users.

Fairness

8) AI systems should not create, or risk creating, unfair market or competition outcomes. AI systems should be designed, trained, deployed, and used in a way that is compliant with the law, including competition laws and principles. Developers and deployers should also be required to ensure that AI models are not used for anti-competitive purposes. The deployment of AI systems by very large online platforms must not be used to entrench their market power, facilitate abuses of dominance, or exclude rivals from the marketplace. Platforms must adhere to the concept of non-discrimination when it comes to publishers exercising their right to choose how their content is used.

Safety

9) AI systems should be trustworthy. AI systems and models should be designed to promote trusted and reliable sources of information produced according to the same professional standards that apply to publishers and media companies. AI developers and deployers must use best efforts to ensure that AI generated content is accurate, correct and complete. Importantly, AI systems must ensure that original works are not misrepresented. This is necessary to preserve the value and integrity of original works, and to maintain public trust.

10) AI systems should be safe and address privacy risks. AI systems and models in particular should be designed to respect the privacy of users who interact with them. Collection and use of personal data in AI system design, training, and use should be lawful with full disclosure to users in an easily understandable manner. Systems should not reinforce biases or facilitate discrimination.

By Design

11) These principles should be incorporated by design into all AI systems, including general purpose AI systems, foundation models, and GAI systems. They should be significant elements of the design, and not considered as an afterthought or a minor concern to be addressed when convenient or when a third party brings a claim.

Sustainable Development

12) The multi-disciplinary nature of AI systems ideally positions them to address areas of global concern. AI systems bear the promise to benefit all humans, including future generations, but only to the extent they are aligned to human values and operate in accordance with global laws. Long-term funding and other incentives for suppliers of high-quality input data can help to align systems with societal aims and extract the most important, up-to-date, and actionable knowledge.

Endorsing Organizations*

(Click image to expand)

*Additional organizations to endorse the Principles following publication include: AMI – Asociación de Medios de Información (Spanish News Media Association); APImprensa, the Portuguese Press Editors and Publishers Association; Association of Online Publishers (AOP) (UK); ARI, Asociación de Revistas (Spanish Magazine Media Association); TU – Swedish Media Publishers Association

Full list of organizations signing onto the Global AI Principles:

• AMI – Colombian News Media Association
• AMI – Asociación de Medios de Información (Spanish News Media Association)
• APImprensa, the Portuguese Press Editors and Publishers Association
• Asociación de Entidades Periodísticas Argentinas (Adepa)
• Association of Learned & Professional Society Publishers
• Association of Online Publishers (AOP) (UK)
• Associação Nacional de Jornais (Brazilian Newspaper Association) (ANJ)
• Czech Publishers’ Association
• Danish Media Association
• Digital Content Next
• European Magazine Media Association
• European Newspaper Publishers’ Association
• European Publishers Council
• FIPP
• Grupo de Diarios América
• Inter American Press Association
• Korean Association of Newspapers
• Magyar Lapkiadók Egyesülete (Hungarian Publishers’ Association)
• NDP Nieuwsmedia
• News/Media Alliance
• News Media Association
• News Media Canada
• News Media Europe
• News Media Finland
• News Publishers’ Association
• Nihon Shinbun Kyokai (The Japan Newspaper Publishers & Editors Association)
• Professional Publishers Association
• ARI, Asociación de Revistas (Spanish Magazine Media Association)
• STM
• TU – Swedish Media Publishers Association
• World Association of News Publishers (WAN-IFRA)

Related resources:

Joint G7 letter on development of global AI principles (News/Media Alliance, European Publishers Council, and Digital Content Next)

Back to top

The post Global Principles on Artificial Intelligence (AI) appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

The briefing discusses why these provisions are not applicable to the Online News Act in the first place and how, even if they were applicable, the bill would not be in violation of the relevant prohibitions. It also emphasizes the vital public welfare rationale behind the Act – and others, including the News Media Bargaining Code and the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act in the United States – and how this aligns with the Biden Administration’s all-of-government competition initiative. The briefing calls for the USTR to restrain from expressing reservations on the Act, noting that doing so would undermine similar efforts in the United States. Read the full briefing here.

The post News/Media Alliance Rebuts Arguments That Canada’s Online News Act Violates Treaty Obligations appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

Today is the 30th anniversary of World Press Freedom Day, a day to recognize and appreciate the journalists and reporters who strive to keep us informed and connected to the world. To show gratitude, let’s make sure to support our local news industry and the reporters who risk their lives to report the truth.

Learn more about the day, including this year’s theme, “Shaping a Future of Rights: Freedom of expression as a driver for all other human rights” on the UNESCO site.

Follow us on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and LinkedIn and join the conversation – #WorldPressFreedomDay  #supportlocalnews

The post Celebrating World Press Freedom Day appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

###

The post Statement: Arrest of Wall Street Journal Reporter in Russia appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

“Google and Meta have repeatedly attempted to avoid paying news publishers for the high-quality, local journalism that publishers invest significant resources into producing, while the platforms enjoy a steady stream of users and ad revenue and news publishers struggle,” stated Danielle Coffey, Executive Vice President and General Counsel of the News/Media Alliance. “First in Australia, then in the U.S., and now in Canada, Meta and Google have threatened to remove news from their platforms and risk harming the public rather than pay for content they did not create. We cannot continue to allow Big Tech to exert their dominance any longer. The stakes – the survival of local journalism – are too great.”

When Australia was considering its News Media Bargaining Code, Meta ‘deliberately caused havoc’ amid the COVID-19 pandemic to influence the law. Their threats didn’t work, and the News Media Bargaining Code has helped news publishers there reach deals with the platforms. Meta made similar threats when the Canadian legislature introduced the Online News Act (C-18) last year and fought similar bipartisan efforts in Congress to pass the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (JCPA) in December. In addition, Google has been testing removing news from its platform in Canada in the event C-18 becomes law.

The Alliance deeply appreciates the President’s efforts to promote competition across the American economy and calls on every corner of the Administration to stand strong against Big Tech’s efforts to resist fair payment that will help keep newsrooms open across the United States and the world.

The Alliance encourages Congress to pass the JCPA in the United States, which would establish fair terms of engagement between news publishers and platforms such as Facebook and Google. America’s publishers continue to support the global efforts in Canada, the UK, India, and Taiwan to promote fairness between the companies who employ hardworking journalists and the dominant online platforms that seek to exploit news content and divert advertising dollars to their own bottom line.

###

The post Statement: News Publishers Call on President Biden to Defend Local Journalism in Canada Visit appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

Particularly notable is the support from Australia where nearly 18 months ago, its parliament adopted legislation creating the News Media Bargaining Code, a code of conduct to address bargaining power imbalances between Australian publishers and Big Tech.

A new analysis from the News/Media Alliance states, “Like the JCPA… the Australian Code does not attempt to solve all the problems faced by news publishers in the online ecosystem. Instead, the sole purpose of both measures is to balance the playing field between publishers and online platforms, creating a more sustainable foundation for the preservation of high-quality journalism.”

The Australian media endorses U.S. efforts to pass the JCPA because they’ve seen the success of their own legislation firsthand. Thanks to the code, Facebook and Google have now paid over $140 million to qualifying publishers – publishers which employ an estimated 90-plus percent of Australian journalists. In a recent report, former Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) Chair Rod Sims confirmed the success of the News Media Bargaining Code, estimating that the compensation accrued to date amounts to approximately 20 percent of Australian journalists’ salaries and likely more than 20 percent of eligible publishers’ combined earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization.

In response to the recent progress on the JCPA, Sims stated, “I am delighted to see the JCPA advancing through the US Congress.  It will benefit US media significantly, and so will greatly strengthen the USA in so many ways.”

Similar legislation is also in the works in Canada, Europe and the United Kingdom. Canada’s Online News Act, a bill which aims to ensure fair compensation for news media, was introduced in April 2022 and, following the adoption of new laws in the European Union, publishers have had successful negotiations with Google, which signed deals to pay more than 300 publishers in May 2022. The UK is also likely to introduce new legislation in the coming months to combat Big Tech’s influence on local media by granting statutory powers to the Digital Markets Unit (DMU), its tech watchdog organization. We applaud their efforts to hold Big Tech accountable and make local news more sustainable.

As the JCPA moves forward in the U.S. Congress – the Senate text of the bill was released Monday and is on the agenda for Senate Judiciary Committee markup in September – we thank our international supporters for urging passage of the JCPA in both the Senate and House of Representatives.

###

Media Contact:
Lindsey Loving
Director, Communications
lindsey@newsmediaalliance.org

The post Statement: International Organizations Support the JCPA appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

Image credit: baona / iStock/Getty Images Plus via Getty Images

One and a half years ago, the Australian parliament adopted legislation creating the News Media Bargaining Code, a revolutionary measure aimed at protecting news publishers from the dominance of a few big online platforms.

Online platforms like Facebook and Google control the digital advertising ecosystem, collect the vast majority of ad revenues and data, and make important decisions on how and what information users see at any given time. They rely on news content to keep users on their platforms but have no incentives to pay for it – they have little regard for any single publisher, while the realities of the current digital marketplace mean that all publishers, small and large, depend on Google and Facebook to reach readers. Consequently, as the platforms are unavoidable trading partners for publishers, they hold all the leverage when it comes to defining the terms of their partnerships.

Like the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (JCPA) – a competition-based solution introduced in the U.S. Congress – the Australian Code does not attempt to solve all the problems faced by news publishers in the online ecosystem. Instead, the sole purpose of both measures is to balance the playing field between publishers and online platforms, creating a more sustainable foundation for the preservation of high-quality journalism.

Now, as the JCPA is making progress in Congress, it is a good time to evaluate the success of Australia’s Code.

How the Australian Bargaining Code Works

The News Media Bargaining Code is based on the simple idea that, in order to level the playing field between news publishers and online platforms, news publishers must be allowed to negotiate effectively – and collectively if necessary – with the platforms, backed by a binding arbitration process in case a settlement is not found. To do so, the Code allows eligible publishers that publish so-called “core” news to engage in good faith negotiations with designated online platforms – with any designation decision informed by whether the platform has made a “significant contribution to the sustainability of the Australian news industry through agreements relating to news content of Australian news businesses.”

If no settlement is reached within a set time period, news publishers are allowed to seek “final offer” arbitration where the arbitrator must select one of the two offers made by the parties. Even if arbitration is never used, its existence may force meaningful negotiations.

Prior to the Code, the platforms routinely claimed that they provide more to publishers than they get in return and refused to negotiate for fairer terms or compensation. The Code therefore lays out the basis for negotiations that would have been unimaginable without it. This in itself makes the Code a significant development that should be emulated around the world. But the real-life results provide even more compelling reasons.

The Australian Code Has Been an Overwhelming Success

Despite the numerous scare tactics employed by Google and Meta during the drafting of the News Media Bargaining Code, the evidence from the past 1.5 years shows that the Code has been an overwhelming success. Based on an estimate by the former Chair of the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission Rod Sims, the Code has resulted in over AU$200 million payments from Google and Meta to news publishers, despite neither company having yet been designated under the Code – the mere threat of designation has led both companies to engage in meaningful negotiations with publishers. Sims estimates that the compensation amounts to approximately 20 percent of Australian journalists’ salaries and likely more than 20 percent of eligible publishers’ combined earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EDITBA).

These deals have been reached with publishers large and small, despite critics arguing that only large publishers would be likely to benefit. However, this has not proved to be the case.  For example, Country Press Australia – representing approximately 180 publications and 60 news publishers –  reached a deal with both Google and Meta, and more recently, Minderoo Foundation reached a deal with Google on behalf of 24 small media outlets. As a result, Google has reached a deal with almost all qualifying news publishers, while Facebook has reached far fewer deals and even refused to negotiate with some. Some estimate that Facebook is under threat of being designated under the Code due to these refusals.

The Bargaining Code Has Been Great for Journalists

Notwithstanding arguments to the contrary, there is also evidence that the Code has led to considerable improvements for journalists, instead of enriching large publishers. Not only has The Guardian increased its newsroom employment from 70 to roughly 150 journalists, in large part due to revenue received under the Code, the Australian Broadcasting Company announced in December 2021 that it was creating more than 50 journalist positions in regional locations as a result of the Code. Overall, this is a good time to be a journalist in Australia with journalism lecturers noting increased employment for their students and an oversupply of available of positions.

It is estimated that the Australian Code has forced Google and Meta to reach deals with publishers that employ over 90 percent of Australian journalists and brought in more money than most publishers expected. As Rod Sims noted, the Code has met almost all of its objectives quicker than almost anyone expected – a policy instrument that reaches most of its objectives sooner than expected and benefits over 90 percent of its expected beneficiaries simply cannot be called a failure.

Australia has demonstrated that change is possible and that the bargaining imbalances between news publishers and the dominant online platforms can be corrected. Despite the scaremongering during the drafting process, the Code did not fundamentally alter the functioning of the free and open web or reduce media diversity. Instead, it has created a more sustainable future for high-quality journalism in Australia with significant additional resources available to newsrooms.

Congress Must Act and Pass the JCPA

It is now time for the United States to follow suit. News deserts are spreading across the United States at an alarming pace, leaving far too many communities without local newspapers. Inaction is not an option if we want to preserve these vital public institutions. The Journalism Competition and Preservation Act would likely lead to substantial payments to small, local newsrooms across America proportionally equal to what we have witnessed in Australia, providing a lifeline for publishers who most need the help. The Australian experience shows this can be done.

The post Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code Is a Major Success That the U.S. Can Emulate appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

October 26, 2021

October 25, 2021

CFPB Orders Tech Firms to Hand Over Information on Digital Payment Systems

On October 21, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ordered various big tech companies operating digital payment systems – including Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Google, PayPal, and Square – to provide information on how they handle data regarding user payments. The agency indicated that it plans to use the data to evaluate whether existing consumer protections are adequate. The types of data requested by the CFPB include information on data harvesting and monetization, access restrictions and user choice, as well as other consumer protections such as compliance under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act. The series of orders is the first major move by the agency since the confirmation of its new director, Rohit Chopra. Read the agency’s full statement here.

Back to top

October 19, 2021

Judge Orders the Unsealing of Information in State AG Case Against Google; Details Google’s Anti-Competitive Actions

On October 15, Judge P. Kevin Castel of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ordered the release of a partially unsealed version of the State Attorneys General complaint against Google. The second amended complaint, filed by the state AGs in early September, included redacted parts related to Google’s advertising business, Google’s deal with Facebook, and certain names and email addresses. These redactions were done according to Google’s confidentiality designations. The court found that while some of the redactions were appropriate, many were not. In September, the Alliance joined an amicus brief by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press urging the court to unseal the information contained in the complaint. According to the court, certain details about the engineering of Google’s “predictive modeling” process as well as the names and emails of individual employees were appropriately redacted. The unsealed complaint, released on October 22, included disconcerting details about Google’s anticompetitive conduct. In addition to charging more than twice as much as its rivals in ad deals, the complaint argues that Google engages in strategies to “lock in” publishers and help Google’s ad-buying services win more than 80 percent of auctions. The complaint also details Google’s alleged efforts to undermine publisher header bidding as well as the company’s deal with Facebook, codenamed “Jedi Blue.” The suit led by Texas focuses on Google’s anticompetitive behavior in the ad tech ecosystem. Read more about the revelations here and the case in general here.

Back to top

October 18, 2021

Federal, State Agencies File an Amicus Brief Opposing a Sweeping Interpretation of Section 230

On October 14, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and North Carolina Department of Justice filed a joint amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of Henderson v. The Source for Public Data, L.P. The case concerns a background check company which allegedly violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by including inaccurate criminal information in background check reports compiled from public sources. In response, the defendant argued that it was an “interactive computer service” and since the information was gathered from public sources, it was immune from all liability under the FCRA due to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Section 230 provides online platforms with broad immunities for third-party content they publish. The District Court found for the defendant and the case is currently on appeal with the Fourth Circuit. The amicus brief supports the plaintiffs, arguing that the court’s decision “misconstrues Section 230 by extending immunity to claims that do not seek to treat the defendant as the publisher or speaker of any third-party information.” In a statement, FTC Chair Lina M. Khan and CFPB Director Rohit Chopra expressed concerns over efforts undermine fair competition by circumventing consumer and banking laws by using Section 230. Read more here and the amicus brief here.

Senate Leaders to Introduce an Antitrust Bill to Rein in Online Platforms

On October 14, a bipartisan group of Senators, led by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Chair of the Senate Antitrust Subcommittee, and Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, announced that they would be introducing the American Innovation and Choice Online Act next week to rein in the anticompetitive behavior of the dominant online platforms. The bill, similar to the bill introduced in the House by Reps. David Cicilline (D-RI) and Ken Buck (R-CO) and marked up by the House Judiciary Committee in June, aims to prevent the online platforms from self-preferencing their own products and services while discriminating against others in the digital ecosystem. The bill would prohibit platforms from abusing their gatekeeper status “in a manner that would material harm competition on the platform,” in addition to prohibiting other specific harmful behaviors, and providing antitrust enforcers strong tools to combat violations. In addition to Senators Klobuchar and Grassley, the bill’s original co-sponsors will include Sens. Dick Durbin (D-IL), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), John Kennedy (R-LA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Mark Warner (D-VA), and Josh Hawley (R-MO). Read more about the bill here.

Copyright Office Publishers an Ancillary Copyright Study NOI

On October 12, the United States Copyright Office published a Notice of Inquiry regarding its long-awaited study on ancillary copyright protections for publishers. The study will focus on the effectiveness of existing protections for news content online, including under the Copyright Act, as well as whether the United States should create additional protections for news content and what the scope of any such new protections should be. It follows a request from Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) in response to international developments in the European Union and Australia. The European Union adopted an ancillary copyright for news publishers in 2019, allowing news publishers to better protect their content online and negotiate for payments with the online platforms, while Australia introduced its media bargaining code earlier this year. The notice sets out multiple questions of particular interest to the Office and requests comments from interested stakeholders by November 26. The Office is also planning to conduct a public roundtable on December 9, with the requests to participate due by November 12. Read more about the study here.

Back to top

October 15, 2021

Alliance joins letter supporting journalists’ access

On October 11, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) sent a letter to the Mayor and City Attorney of Medford Oregon, demanding they drop  charges against journalist April Ehrlich. While local police officers were disbanding a homeless encampment on public land, a police officer arrested Ms. Ehrlich after she wouldn’t stay in a designated media area.  The designated media area was so far away from the encampment that Ms. Ehrlich couldn’t properly report on it. The Alliance joined RCFP’s brief supporting Ms. Ehrlich’s right to report on matters of public concern and demanding that any charges against her be dropped. “The City has an affirmative obligation to afford opportunities to document police operations even when access to the land is otherwise restricted… And a constitutionally adequate opportunity to observe the work entails both sight and sound access for reporters working in different media.” On October 21, the city attorneys responded to the letter, declining to comment on a defendant in an ongoing criminal case.

Back to top

October 14, 2021

California passes tax exemption for newspapers

AB 1506—a California Bill that would extend a tax emption for newspapers until 2025—passed both houses of the California legislature. The Bill has been sent to Governor Newsom to sign. The Bill has certain reporting requirements for those claiming the exemption, like providing specific information about their workforce every year. Passing AB 1506 is a great step towards protecting the future of print journalism and preserving quality reporting.

Back to top

October 11, 2021

California Law gives journalists better access to police records

October 7, 2021

Alliance joins in Amicus Brief Advocating for Access to Police Misconduct Investigation

On September 24, The Alliance joined the Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press in an amicus brief seeking records from the Seattle Police Department. The Seattle Police Department is investigating six police officers for their potential involvement in the January 6th Capitol riot. The officers, whose identities are currently concealed, moved to seal the records because there is no legitimate public interest in the investigation unless the allegations are substantiated. The brief argues that the records “will enable the news media to meaningfully report on the results of the OPA’s investigation, thus allowing the public to evaluate the effectiveness of the investigatory process, the evidence collected, and the reasoning behind the OPA’s conclusions.” The Alliance continues to advocate for journalists’ access to public records in order to foster government accountability and transparency.

Back to top

September 20, 2021

Alliance Joins Letter Advocating for Afghan Refugees P-2 Status

On September 20, the Alliance signed onto a letter with other US news organizations urging President Biden, Secretary Blinken, and Secretary Mayorkas to expedite processing P-2 applications for Afghan evacuees. This process is crucial for Afghan families and individuals to find work and rebuild their lives. The letter explains that the P-2 program is best suited for Afghan refugees—not the asylum claim and filing process that the State Department told the New York Times they would begin using for Afghans currently in the United States. The government should clarify the application process, support the ongoing evacuation process, and prioritize the safety and long term stability of Afghan evacuees.

Back to top

August 26, 2021

Russia Further Restricts Free Press

On August 20, Russia labeled two more news agencies as “foreign agents.” This requires them to label all stories and social media posts as foreign agent and subjects them to increased audits. It is speculated that Russia’s recent crackdown on the free press is an effort to restrict and control the news ahead of parliamentary elections next month. Read more.

Taliban Continues Oppressing Press

As the Taliban has taken over Afghanistan, citizens have faced increasing danger amid the chaos. Journalists have been particularly at risk. The Taliban has removed two female journalists from their positions at a broadcasting station and beaten at least two other journalists. In an interview with the International Center for Journalists, Afghan journalist Sami Mahdi said the Taliban has not changed, only gotten better at PR and technology as he faces the stifling of expression. U.N. human rights chief Michelle Bachelet is to report back to the U.N. about the Taliban’s actions in the September-October session. Read more.

Back to top

August 18, 2021

DOJ Formally Adopts Policy to Protect Press

On July 19, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that it formally adopted a new policy restricting the use of a compulsory process to obtain information from or records of journalists acting within the scope of their work. Attorney General Merrick Garland expressed that he wants these changes to be durable and directed the Deputy Attorney General to begin the process necessary to codify the policy into DOJ regulations. Read more.

Taliban Allows Media, if they Promote Taliban’s Values

On August 17, the Taliban hosted a press conference addressing citizens’ concerns. In addressing the role of the media, they said the media is important and they welcome the media to critique their work. However, they emphasized that the media should not go against Islamic values, should not promote bad values, and should work only for the unity of Afghanistan. They also said they are committed to the rights of women, but only so far as Sharia rules allow.

Back to top

August 16, 2021

Afghan Journalists in Danger, Need Short and Long Term Solutions

On August 16, freelancers, stringers, and other comparable arrangements were added to the “employee” definition to qualify for Priority-2 U.S. Refugee Admission from Afghanistan, following a letter from over 20 news organizations, including the Alliance. This expansion is a pivotal response to the chaos in Afghanistan, as the Taliban takes over Kabul and specifically targets journalists with particular aggression towards female journalists. The safety of these journalists, as well as their ability to operate without danger in neighboring countries is the immediate concern. As for a long term solution, the Special Immigrant Visas should contain a specific media carveout in order to protect foreign journalists and allow them to relocate to the United States. While the timing and costs of these solutions remain at issue, ensuring the safety of the many endangered journalists is the predominant priority. Read more.

Nicaraguan Police Arrest Journalist

On August 14, Nicaraguan officials arrested the manager of La Presna—a newspaper that was critical of the Nicaraguan government, calling the president a “dictator” among other criticisms. This arrest came after the police raided La Presna’s office and charged its directors with fraud. This isn’t the first time the newspaper has faced backlash, as the government had impounded its ink and paper, forcing it to only publish digitally. The Police claimed these arrests were only related to claims of fraud and money laundering. Read more.

Back to top

August 11, 2021

NSA Launches Internal Investigation into Claims it Monitored the Press

On August 10, the NSA’s internal watchdog said it will investigate allegations that they were targeting and improperly surveilling a member of the press. Tucker Carlson accused the NSA of spying on him after he was allegedly contacted by a whistleblower, in an effort to force him off the air. The NSA denied those allegations, but still launched an internal investigation to ensure no found play. Read more.

The post Policy Updates appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

Alliance Executive Vice President & General Counsel Danielle Coffey said, “The Alliance applauds the principle of ‘what is illegal offline, should be illegal online.’ The European Union is leading the way in protecting consumers and holding big tech companies to the same standard as everyone else. Taken together, the DSA and the Digital Markets Act go a long way in rebalancing the online ecosystem and leveling the playing field between news publishers and the dominant online platforms. Healthy democracies rely on high-quality news and information, and we hope that special attention is paid to European publishers’ ability to produce and monetize their journalism throughout the implementation and enforcement of both the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act.”

The regulation, first proposed by the European Commission in 2020, must now be finalized and formally approved by the Council and the Parliament. The DSA will become directly applicable across the European Union 15 months following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

###

The post Statement: News Media Alliance Commends European Union for Reaching Agreement on Digital Services Act appeared first on News/Media Alliance.