The European Commission is threatening legal action against Ireland for improperly implementing a directive on authors' lending rights, writes Anthony P. Quinn
A public lending right(PLR) legally recognises and financially compensates authors for multiple free lending of their books by public libraries. If 1,000 people read a public library's copy of a book, the author's entitlement to royalties was traditionally based on only that one copy. PLR is intended to provide extra payments for such authors.
The main basis for PLR in the EU is the Directive on Rental and Lending Rights, 1992. Ireland purported to implement the terms of that directive in the Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000. The Act and related regulations recognised PLR in principle but then exempted all public lending libraries. Despite submissions from writers and other interest groups, the net effect was that there is no Irish PLR system. And neither is the alternative of equitable remuneration paid to Irish authors.
And yet authors do benefit from PLR in Britain for their books borrowed there. Annual payments of €150,000 are distributed through the Irish Copyright Licensing Agency.
There is no single PLR model. Throughout the world, there are diverse systems, based mainly on books borrowed or on stocks maintained in public libraries. Entitlements are calculated by statistical sampling.
Some systems have minimum and maximum payments for individual authors, and sometimes illustrators and publishers also benefit. Educational libraries are usually excluded.
Authors seeking payment usually have to register with a central office, distinct from public libraries. There may also be nationality, residence or language restrictions. PLR is part of wider intellectual property law but is not necessarily based on copyright and is sometimes regarded as a cultural right.
Governments usually fund PLR payments directly and special agencies, rather than libraries, administer PLR systems. The British PLR system was introduced in 1979 after a long campaign by writers, including A.P.Herbert, Brigid Brophy, Lady Antonia Fraser and Michael Foot, supported by TV personalities.
"Authors' coin and librarians' burden" was the dismissive phrase used to describe the PLR concept in Britain. Now, over €12 million of exchequer funding is distributed annually by the PLR Registrar to about 20,000 registered authors throughout the EU and associated countries. While many writers receive small payments some, including authors of best-sellers, are paid the annual maximum of £6,000 each.
It is necessary to balance the rights and interests of various groups, especially authors, the reading public, and librarians. Funding could cause problems. Irish librarians are not against PLR in principle but are concerned about costs, fearing that libraries' budgets would be reduced, especially in the current climate of financial cutbacks.
Libraries purchase large quantities of books and sponsor authors' public readings. The Dublin-based prestigious Impac international award is organised through public libraries.
"Libraries were always good to readers but before PLR, libraries were not quite so good to authors," says Maggie Gee, a British novelist and Impac award nominee. She points out that a frequently-borrowed book is also a book that has lost potential buyers.
The European Commission is getting tough on member-states which have infringed the directive by not introducing PLR which is being applied inconsistently across the Union. It considers that the directive of 1992 was improperly implemented in some member states, Ireland included, through the over-broad interpretation of derogations in article 5 (3) to exempt all public libraries, rather than just some categories.
The Commission is planning infringement proceedings in the European Court of Justice against Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Luxembourg. It will take a few years, but, meanwhile, legal action would increase the pressure to introduce PLR systems.
The Nordic countries were the pioneers of PLR and it was apt, therefore, that the Norwegian Non-Fiction Writers Union, with support from the British Registrar, Dr James Parker, sponsored a recent conference in London on the issue involving representatives of authors' unions from 23 European countries including the 10 new EU acceding states. The purpose was to exchange views and plan action for achieving PLR in all EU states, as required by the directive, and it passed a resolution urging all non-complying governments to take immediate steps to establish them.
Flexible approaches are acceptable, provided that authors receive equitable remuneration.
The resolution was forwarded to the Tánaiste, Ms Harney, who, as Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, is responsible for intellectual property.
At international conferences, delegates wonder why there is no PLR system in Ireland despite its economic advances and literary tradition. Irish writers may benefit from Arts Council schemes and some authors qualify for artists' tax relief. Substantial funds are spent acquiring manuscripts of dead writers.
Because of the absence of PLR, however, living authors are indirectly subsidising public libraries where the people can borrow books without payment. As books in the English language by Irish authors are read worldwide, the Irish economy could gain from reciprocal agreements with countries which have PLR.
The cost of an Irish PLR system is difficult to quantify and would depend on the model chosen. Based on the British precedent, annual costs could be a few million euro.
And, despite the financial constraints and other obstacles, we may be on the threshold of a major advance in the battle for an Irish PLR system. To quote the novelist Fay Weldon, PLR is a right, not a privilege.