Saturday, October 25, 2014
2

Let the Blind Read

TORONTO – This is a decisive moment for sight-impaired people like me: men and women who are seeking to expand our minds and to contribute to the societies in which we live. We still cannot enjoy a book or a periodical unless it has been produced in braille or a large-print edition, or transferred to an audible format by a human or artificial reader. But our lives may be about to change for the better.

It is difficult for me and many other sight-impaired people to grasp that, in this age of personal computing, digital information transfer, 3D printers, and narration software, our access to publications that we can read remains unnecessarily restricted.

In India, for example, about 100,000 new book titles were published during 2009; but only around 500, or 0.5%, were made accessible to the country’s millions of sight-impaired people. In francophone Africa, some of the places worst ravaged by river blindness and other diseases that attack the eyes, the share of accessible publications for people like me is less than 1%. In the United States, Australia, and the European Union, accessible braille, large-print, and audio titles account, at best, for 7% of the total number of publications.

But the problem is worse than these numbers suggest. Under existing copyright restrictions, titles accessible in the richest countries remain inaccessible to readers in the poorest. In too many cases, a copyright-protected audio book produced in France or Canada, for example, cannot legally be shared with a college library in francophone Africa for use by blind students. Argentina and Spain cannot legally share their 165,000 accessible titles with libraries for Spanish-speaking blind people in Chile, Columbia, Mexico, Nicaragua, and Uruguay, which together have only 8,517 titles.

This restriction is absurd, and it causes unnecessary hardship. In India, sight-impaired doctoral candidates have abandoned their work only because they lack sufficient access to the necessary texts. At state universities in Africa, libraries have nothing to offer blind undergraduates, or any other blind people. Noah Kabbakeh, one of my vision-impaired colleagues in Freetown, Sierra Leone, needed four years to complete a two-year master’s program in the social sciences, not because he is unable to grasp the material quickly enough, but because he had to earn money to hire someone to read aloud textbooks and other class materials that any seeing graduate student could have obtained from the university library.

Given the obvious need, and the availability of technologies to meet it cost-effectively, one would think that publishers and officials charged with the protection of intellectual property would quickly embrace an agreement that would give sight-impaired people broader access. One would think that college and public libraries, and other open depositories, would have books already being produced and made accessible elsewhere.

Over the past four years, in a United Nations-sponsored process, teams of negotiators specializing in intellectual property have been struggling to draft an agreement that would allow, for example, blind people, organizations for the blind, and other institutions to share books for the blind across borders. The General Assembly of the World Intellectual Property Organization is tentatively slated to conclude this agreement next June.

But the key moment has already arrived. On December 17-18, negotiators are scheduled to meet in Geneva to decide whether this agreement will take the form of a simple, workable treaty or some kind of non-binding “soft law.”

Sight-impaired people around the world desperately need a lucid, workable treaty, and not a “soft law” encumbered by caveats and riddled with loopholes that favor copyright holders rather than balancing publishers’ rights with the needs and rights of the visually impaired. The European Union, after years of refusal, finally agreed in November to support a treaty; it should now press for clear, implementable language that will allow organizations to share braille, large-print, and audio books with each other and with people whose disabilities make them unable to read.

The negotiators from the US, whose backing is crucial, have yet even to pronounce the word “treaty” during the drafting process. It is time for President Barack Obama’s administration to see what we see and allow its negotiators to press for adoption of a legally binding treaty.

Hide Comments Hide Comments Read Comments (2)

Please login or register to post a comment

  1. CommentedU mustbejoking

    WIPO is the problem, not the source of your solution. Anything that could give you relief would blow up the business model that WIPO was created to maintain.

    The US (and by extension Canada) is the least-likely source of help. You'd have better odds of (legally) reading (or hearing) something by founding a chapter of the Pirate Party and changing the government.

    As the EU spokesperson said after the decision to hold a conference next June [The EU, for one], “considers that it is necessary to find an agreement on some remaining key issues before a successful diplomatic conference takes place.”

    The EU specifically highlighted the lack of consensus on provisions concerning technological protection measures and cross border exchange of accessible format copies as topics that should be resolved ahead of the June conference"

    Good luck with that. The DMCA in the US will put paid to any ability to circumvent those "technological protection measures". And we all know how willing the US is to sign on to anything that could possibly weaken their ability to project their laws onto other countries (never mind enforcing their laws in their own territory). Those laws were long-ago bought and paid for, and the people who paid for them will not stand for them being weakened.

  2. CommentedCarlos Lange

    Speaking of cost effective technologies, it is worth pointing out the efforts of the Accessible Computing Foundation: http://accessiblecomputingfoundation.org/

Featured