Following the height of feeling regarding President Trump’s State Visit, it is to be debated in a Westminster Hall debate on 20^th February.

Other Trump news: putting the phone down on the Australian PM over Obama’s previous refugee commitment, appointing Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State, 1,000 US diplomats and Foreign Service officers signed a memo of dissent regarding the travel ban, Mexican President cancelled planned Washington trip over the ongoing wall saga, appointing Steven Mnuchin as head of the Treasury, appointing Tom Price as head of Human Services (for the final two, Democrats boycotted the committee votes with led to Republicans changing the rules to approve candidates without their votes), Jeff Sessions is now Attorney General.

In some good news of the week, the Turing Law contained within the Policing and Crime Bill passed through Parliament. Under the new law, over 50,000 gay men have been posthumously pardoned for homosexual crimes that no longer exist, including Oscar Wilde. As well as the posthumous pardons, the new law will allow 15,000 living men who were found guilty of sexual acts that are no longer illegal to apply to the Home Office for a pardon. The Bill was heavily supported and driven through by the late Alan Turing’s family; Turing was pardoned in 2013.

Baroness Bonham-Carter question on the creative industries in the House of Lords

On Monday, Baroness Bonham-Carter asked the House of Lords “To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to ensure that, following the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union, the creative industries will continue to receive economic benefits from an international workforce.” Lord Ashton confirmed that the Government “wants free movement of all people connected with the arts…we want to make that a priority of the negotiations with the EU”. Lord Ashton also stated that within the Industrial Strategy, Sir Peter Bazalgette will look at growing the talent pipeline in the UK, and that the Government “absolutely gets it and are working hard to make sure that those skills stay in this country”. You can read the full transcript here.

CMS Select Committee

The Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee met this week to discuss “The impact of Brexit on the creative industries, tourism and the Digital Single Market”, with witnesses Sir Peter Bazalgette (Chair, Arts Council England and looking at the creative industries within the Industrial Strategy), John Kampfner (Chief Executive, Creative Industries Federation), and Nicola Mendelsohn (Vice President, Europe, Middle East and Africa, Facebook and Chair of the Creative Industries Council). The committee heard about the potential impact of Brexit upon the creative industries such as the flow of talent and skills to and from Europe as well as the risks to intellectual property.

Brexit negotiations:

• Bazalgette stated that the UK needs to be more open to the rest of the world in light of Brexit, and stated that the creative industries can lead the way in this. He said that the most pressing issues were the flow of talent, as well as the need for a new IP regime (Great Repeal Act, need to reconstruct a load of legislation, IP regime needs to be made better – this is an opportunity). He added that this is now a good opportunity to make the UK’s visa system better; one that was more responsive to accessing talent
• Kampfner explained that the creative industries should be at the centre of all Brexit negotiations, and urged DCMS and DCLG to conduct a better analysis of funds coming from Europe to the creative industries, as it is currently unclear
• Mendlesohn recommended that there needs to be freedom of data in any negotiations

Intellectual property:

• Looking at the risks to IP with the UK not having a seat at the EU table, Bazalgette highlighted original content and the ability to sell territorially. He said he remained concerned on these issues both for television and music purposes. DSM discussions ongoing – particularly concerned about territoriality, original content that we put out is very important. Selling programmes territoriality will get more money, we want to continue to sell this way. Music – you should be able to license territorially
• Mendlesohn stressed the need to retain the core strength of the current regime while building on existing pillars. She emphasised the importance of these issues and noted the digital single market with the freedom of data across territories. IP is crucial, maintaining core strength of current regime crucial going forward. This is a red line – CIC/CIF stressed this, keep this in mind during negotiations. DSM – another big issue, how the small businesses have free flows of data across territories
• Kampfner noted issues around trademarks as well as community unregistered design rights for the fashion sector. We’ve stepped back from DSM negotiations, France strong positions, COO framework, Ofcom licensing channels broadcast across EU

Creative Economy:

• Bazalgette stated that he hoped the production of TV and broadcasting would not be threatened by Brexit, an opinion which was echoed by both Kampfner and Mendlesohn
• Kampfner noted that the opportunities for creative companies were huge but voiced concern about a concentration of successful companies in London. A fiscal stimulus package for those smaller companies based out of London could be very beneficial

https://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/culture-media-and-sport-committee/impact-of-brexit/oral/46553.html

Exiting the EU debate

MPs were also given two opportunities this week to debate Exiting the European Union. Opposition MPs had tabled 85 pages of amendments, and a White Paper was published on Thursday.

We heard some passionate speeches from both sides of the debate, with many Labour MPs defying Corbyn’s three-line whip to vote with the Government, and also Tory Veteran and Europhile Ken Clarke voting against triggering Article 50. However, many MPs spoke during the debates of their desire to vote the Bill through on democratic principle. John Whittingdale reminded the House of how Eurosceptic he had become after it became clear that the EU was becoming a political project going towards an ‘ever closer union’; something that the British public were not consulted on. He also said that whichever way certain demographics or parts of the UK voted, this was a nationwide referendum. Of specific interest to us, John wishes to see data continue to flow across borders of the EU, that he would like the UK to be recognised under Country of Origin, and that it is vitally important that EU countries have access to our markets.

MPs backed the European Union Bill by 498 votes to 114 on Wednesday night, with 47 Labour rebels voting against.  Now all eyes are on which front bench Labour MPs will either resign or be sacked for defying their leader’s Three-Line Whip.

You can read the full proceedings for the debates on Tuesday and Thursday. Committee Stage of the Bill will be heard on Monday.

The Government’s White Paper has now been published. There aren’t any major surprises and is largely the May speech padded out with a lot of analysis. In the trade section they mention the 5 broad sectors they are looking at (including services including create industries and also goods). It also mentions that they are looking at cross-cutting issues including intellectual property. The wording is below:

8.36

A range of cross-cutting regulations underpin the provision and high standards of goods and services, maintaining a positive environment for businesses, investors and consumers. For example, a common competition and consumer protection framework deals with mergers, monopolies and anti-competitive activity and unfair trading within the EU on a consistent basis, and EU-wide systems facilitate the protection of intellectual property.

8.37

As we leave the EU, the Government is committed to making the UK the best place in the world to do business. This will mean fostering a high quality, stable and predictable regulatory environment, whilst also actively taking opportunities to reduce the cost of unnecessary regulation and to support innovative business models.

And the full White Paper can be found here:

Digital Economy Bill: Committee Stage

The Digital Economy Bill was heard in the House of Lords twice this week; on Tuesday and Thursday, as part of Committee Stage.

On Tuesday, the Amendments debated focussed more on the specifications for the universal service obligation, caps for mobile phone tariffs, and the relationship between communication operators and landlords who hosted infrastructure. You can read the full transcript of proceedings for Tuesday here.

Thursday’s debate examined issues including age verification for pornographic websites, the role of the BBFC and abuse on social media as well as crucial IP issues.

Clause 27 (increasing penalties for online copyright infringement) was agreed.

Clause 28 (Registered designs: infringement: marking product with internet link) was also agreed.

On Digital TV Piracy, Baroness Buscombe responded:

The Government are still of the view, as they were then, that illicit streaming and the infrastructure and devices that enable it pose a very serious threat to legitimate copyright owners and service providers. We share the wish of those behind these amendments to ensure that this harmful activity is properly tackled.

That does not mean, however, that we should jump immediately to introduce new criminal provisions to copyright law. As previously discussed in debate in another place, the Government believe that this activity is already covered by existing offences. Relevant provisions include those contained in the Fraud Act 2006, the inchoate offences in the Serious Crime Act 2007, and other provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988…we are working on a range of interventions to tackle this behaviour.

Officials at the Intellectual Property Office are working with the Crown Prosecution Service and the police to develop guidance on how the existing offences may be effectively applied, and we will be running a public call for views over the coming few weeks to ask investigators, ​prosecutors and industry representatives whether they think the existing legislation is providing all the tools that are needed.

IPO officials have also been meeting intermediaries, especially those platforms where these devices are sold, and others whose legitimate businesses facilitate, however unknowingly or unwillingly, this criminal behaviour. We need to work together with a broad coalition to tackle illicit streaming, and everyone in the supply chain has a part to play. This is very much an area where we want to make progress. We believe that we are making progress on a number of fronts. The Minister for Digital and Culture committed in the other place to bring forward legislation if the evidence shows that it is needed—but that case has not been made yet.

With reference to what the noble Lord, Lord Gordon of Strathblane, said, I think it is right to emphasise that the ever-changing nature of how criminals operate means that they will quickly circumvent technology-specific legislation. We have to be careful when we talk about primary legislation. The changing way in which content is consumed means that specific legislation such as that proposed may be rendered obsolete, unprosecutable or both. I hope that with this explanation, the noble Lord will feel able to withdraw the amendment.

Lord Clement-Jones stressed the need for urgency on this issue and cited evidence that he had heard at the APPG IP session on Wednesday that showed the widespread nature of this criminal activity in the UK. Baroness Buscombe responded under a challenge from him to say that a call for view would be within weeks not months.

Lord Stevenson followed:

I welcome the investigation that the noble Baroness mentioned. The timing seems rather rapid for government; I was surprised to hear it but, if that is the case, who are we to say no to it? If the commitment is there and the Government are prepared to bring forward legislation to tackle this issue—I am sure that she said this, as I wrote it down—we could not be more happy.

The Amendment was withdrawn.

On remote e-lending, the amendment had good support from a number of lords, especially Lord Clement Jones and the Earl of Clancarty who have been championing this. They have been acting on this on the basis that, while Government promised action on this, they saw no amendment so took this forward. The situation regarding agreement on the wording of the amendment is noted in both the Govt response from Baroness Buscombe and also this comment from Lord Clement-Jones:

I welcome what the Minister said. In a way she performed a political ju-jitsu on us by thanking us for supporting her government line on this, which I thought was magnificent. I accept that it is in the Conservative manifesto. The Minister in the Commons pledged to come up with a solution to this. All that we have done really is to give the Government a bit of a push today. This wording is not the agreed wording. Agreement was reached, at the final hour—not in time to include in Committee today—between the various parties involved, particularly CILIP. As the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, said, I am delighted that there has been agreement reached between the parties and the wording about which I have been told will perhaps be the wording to which the Minister will return, having performed her ju-jitsu at Report. Perhaps I have her in an armlock now to come back at Report with a suitable amendment. In the meantime, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Both generally touch on the fact that there is an intention to act on this but there was not clear cross sector support in time for a Government amendment, or the amendment put forward by Lord Clement Jones. There now is and DCMS seem happy with this.

On Section 73, there were some strong statements, including by Lord Clement-Jones. Baroness Buscombe stated:

…the repeal of Section 73 will close a loophole used by providers of internet­based live streaming services of broadcast television programmes. These providers are relying on Section 73 to exploit PSB content by retransmitting channels and selling advertising around the service, without any benefit flowing to the PSBs.

The amendment was withdrawn.

Future dates to be aware of:

6^th February 2017 – Digital Economy Bill Committee Stage (HoL)

6^th February 2017 – European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill Committee Stage (HoC)

7^th February 2017 – European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill Committee Stage (HoC)

8^th February 2017 – Digital Economy Bill Committee Stage (HoL)

8^th February 2017 – European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill Committee Stage (HoC)

8^th February 2017 – European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill Report Stage (HoC)

8^th February 2017 – European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill Third Reading (HoC)

Intellectual Property (Unjustified Threats) Bill Report Stage date is yet to be announced