Hong Kong copyright bill debate enters final 48 hours after latest compromise bid fails
Commerce minister Greg So rejects pan-democrat bid to introduce a defence of limited fair use – first proposed by So
Debate on the contentious copyright bill has entered its final 48 hours following failed negotiations between the government and pan-democrats as well as ongoing filibuster attempts on Wednesday.
Commerce minister Greg So Kam-leung turned down what pan-democrats called the “last best chance” to resolve the political impasse two days before a self-imposed deadline on Friday, when the government will drop the bill that was first proposed a decade ago if it is not endorsed.
READ MORE: Hong Kong copyright bill explained: Why are people so concerned about this?
“The proposal of [limited fair use] from pan-democrats is ridiculous,” So said. “It was I who first floated this possibility [months ago] but it was rejected.”
He was speaking after a brief meeting with three pan-democrats, including the Civic Party’s Dennis Kwok and Charles Mok and Kenneth Leung of the Professional Commons.
Kwok, in response, lamented So’s inability to bridge the gap between copyright owners and internet users throughout months of deadlock.
“Isn’t it ridiculous given that even So and the government agreed to the proposal in the first place,” he said.
Mok questioned whether it would be necessary for the government to satisfy copyright owners in every respect, saying it could have its own mind if it deemed the proposal beneficial to society.
“I don’t think So can master the art of politics which is about compromise,” he said.
Last week, So announced that the government would not pursue the copyright amendment bill any more if lawmakers failed to vote on it by Friday.
READ MORE: Hong Kong government’s shelving of controversial copyright bill: what went wrong?
If so, it would be the government’s second failure to update the law in four years, even though pan-democrats recognised that the latest attempt was an improvement.
They would have backed the bill had it not been for fierce opposition from internet users who feared the loss of freedom of expression to such an extent that they called the bill “internet Article 23” in reference to the national security provision in the Basic Law.
Pan-democrats have since then galvanised support from internet users’ concern groups in backing the amendments they proposed, including contract override and fair use.
In the last month they proposed a “limited fair use” provision whereby any non-commercial use of copyrighted material should be exempted from criminal liability. But in the face of opposition from copyright owners – made up of film and music industry insiders – the government has been reluctant to accept it.
