UCBerkeley press release about Article 2B

[Ann Okerson <aokerson@pantheon.yale.edu>]

Of possible interest to readers of liblicense-l.

FROM:
---------------------------
Dan L. Burk
Seton Hall University
burkdanl@shu.edu
---------------------------

*****************************************************************************

7/16/98
File #14802

UC Berkeley experts call for
immediate hold on proposed legislation
to regulate information commerce

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

        Berkeley - A "dangerously ill-conceived law" to regulate all
transactions in information is hurtling toward enactment despite the
enormous legal tangles it will cause, say UC Berkeley experts, who are
calling for another look at the legislation before it is approved. 

        If the proposed Article 2B of the Uniform Commercial Code "is
enacted by state legislatures over the next six months, it would be a
disaster," said Professor Pamela Samuelson of the University of
California, Berkeley.  She said it could affect everything from whether
book publishers take a cue from software developers and start "shrink
wrapping" books to restrict sharing to whether Internet robots can make
legally binding contracts for computer users who unleash them. 

        Despite the awesome breadth of the proposed legislation and the
need to consider its implications, "drafters of this 'model' law intend
to push forward as hard and as fast as they can to get approval so that
states will begin enacting it as soon as this fall," Samuelson said. 

        A key vote on the fate of the proposed law will be held July
24-31 at the meeting of the National Conference of Commissioners of
Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) in Cleveland, Ohio.  They intend to discuss
and vote on the text of 2B section-by-section.  Samuelson and many other
experts hope NCCUSL can be persuaded to slow down and take a hard look
at Article 2B before giving the go ahead to any sections of the law. 

        Article 2B proposes to regulate almost all transactions in
information.  It is a so-called "model law" that each state legislature
can accept or reject.  States usually adopt model laws put forward in
the Uniform Commercial Code so that business transactions across state
lines remain consistent. 

        Among other effects, Article 2B could chill the "fair use"
doctrine that the public and libraries depend on to share information. 
Like computer software, which is often packaged with the admonition that
whoever breaks the seal is bound by the terms of an enclosed
manufacturer's contract, so too books could be wrapped in cellophane and
sold with all types of limitations. 

        The buyer could even be "barred from passing the purchased copy
onto a friend," according to a paper presented at a recent UC Berkeley
conference by David Nimmer, Elliot Brown and Gary Frischling of the Los
Angeles law firm Irell & Manella LLP.  "Nor is there any reason that the
publisher should stop there," the paper went on, pointing out the
ridiculous breadth of the law as currently proposed.  "It could likewise
require the reader not to skip chapters, not to read any paragraph more
than three times, not to reveal the surprise plot twists to family or
acquaintances, and certainly not to quote in a book review the few
paragraphs that the fair use doctrine would otherwise permit."

        People "have no idea how dramatically the relationship to
information is going to change if and when Article 2B passes," said
Professor Peter Lyman, former head of the UC Berkeley library system,
one of the most distinguished research libraries in the country.  "In
fact, I doubt if libraries will continue to exist in their present
form."

        At the recent conference organized by the Berkeley Center for
Law and Technology and the Institute of Management, Innovation and
Organization at UC Berkeley, those expressing doubts about whether
Article 2B is the right set of rules for the sale of information
included representatives from sectors as diverse as Silicon Valley law
firms, major motion picture companies, top accounting firms, computer
technology companies and the World Bank. 

        But despite such intensifying concerns, "proponents of Article
2B want it to be the commercial law of the global information economy,"
said Samuelson, who holds a joint appointment with UC Berkeley's School
of Information Management & Systems and the Boalt Hall School of Law. 

        Others concerned with Article 2B include: 

* James Davis of Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center, who criticized
Article 2B's validation of contracts by electronic agents, for instance
authorizing Internet robots to enter into binding sales.  He felt giving
such contracts the nod was premature since Internet robot technology is
at best only being tested. 

* Rochelle Dreyfuss of the New York University Law School said Article
2B would affect U.S.  innovation - a vital engine driving business
entrepreneurship and economic growth - by discouraging information
sharing. 

* Michelle Kane of Walt Disney Company said Article 2B was
"software-centric" - written from the point of view of the software
industry - and expressed dismay that concerns of the motion picture
industry had been ignored by the drafting committee. 

* Matthew Lynde of Price Waterhouse, a major accounting and consulting
firm whose clients would be greatly affected by Article 2B, was unable
to take a position on Article 2B because the legislation was too
complicated to determine its implications for Price Waterhouse. 

* Copyright scholars such as Jerome Reichman of Vanderbilt Law School
and Charles McManis of Washington University argued forcefully for
continuing "fair use" principles, which Article 2B possibly jeopardizes,
as a way to maintain a balance between information provider and user
interests. 

        At a May 14 meeting in Washington, D.C., the American Law
Institute, one of the two original sponsors of the Article 2B effort,
decided the legislation needs work before it is ready for approval,
raising many of same objections that surfaced at the Berkeley
conference. 

        The other sponsor of the legislation - the National Conference
of Commissioners of Uniform State Laws, which meets this month - is
under pressure to withhold approval, said Samuelson. 

        However the chair of the Article 2B drafting committee, Carlyle
Ring, continues to insist that the U.S.  get on with adopting a model
law on licensing information to ensure that its rules become the
standard for the global information economy, said Samuelson. 

        "What I want to see happen," said Samuelson, "is for Article 2B
to be pared down to the bare minimum necessary to jump-start electronic
commerce and then watch how that commerce develops before we put any
more legislation in place."

        She cites Mark Lemley of the University of Texas Law School, who
called for a moratorium on Article 2B until affected parties can study
the draft, understand its meaning, and suggest revisions.  Article 2B,
Lemley said, should reflect existing commercial practice and not
untested new rules that could prove unworkable.

### Note: 

For further
information, contact Pamela Samuelson at (510) 642-6775 
<pam@sims.berkeley.edu>.  Media contacts: Kathleen Scalise, (510)
643-7741, <kms@uclink.berkeley.edu> or David Irons, (510) 642-2734,
<irons@haas.berkeley.edu>


________________________________________

David Irons
AScribe / The Public Interest Newswire
2680 Bancroft Way, Suite B-300
Berkeley, CA 94704
510-704-0200
510-704-1245 fax