"We are talking about an access right to information. Apart from the rather vague expression of such a right in the Universal Declaraion of Human Rights (article 19), this is nowhere embodied in law. There is no such right granted under copyright - the exceptions granted in all national laws and international treaties (for "fair use" in some jurisdictions and "faIr dealing" in others, for citation/quotation, "study", etc.), are small chinks in a fairly forbidding edifice."
"One exception - gained in the Paris Revisions of the Berne Convention in 1971 - was a statutory license allowed for translation of materials into local languages for "educational use". This permission - which allowed (say) Indonesia to translate health information published in Western textbooks or elsewhere into Bahasa Indonesia - was almost never applied in any country. Nor has it been updated into the digital age, unlike most of the rest of Berne. this is a specific permission which I feel should be fought for."
"Among other things, the definition of "educational materials" in the original Paris Revisions provides a clear pointer to a definition of "essential information" (an old hobby horse of mine, which got included in the UNESCO declaration on Multiligualism and Cyberspace) - practical information which is essential for human development, human survival, etc. In short, information which cannot be withheld. Our rather loose definition of "health information" needs to be tightened up. Surely we are not seeking to have confidential health information opened up to public scrutiny; we don't need to know about cosmetic surgery, nanomedicine or DNA research: when we say "health information" we mean "essential health information" - exactly as we (or rather, the World Health Assembly) defined "essential drugs"."
Date of HIFA message:
Tuesday, February 25, 2014
Users of healthcare information:
Name of person(s) who selected this HIFA Quotation: