Although photocopying copyrighted materials without authorisations from the copyright owners has always been regarded as infringement of copyright, and might attract both civil and criminal liabilities under the existing Copyright Ordinance, it was not until in 2004 that the government introduced a specific offence to specifically deter such activities.
The copyshop offence took effect on 1st September, 2004 under S.119A of the Copyright Ordinance, which targets the profit-making copyshops with regard to their business in photocopying copyrighted materials, such as textbooks.
According to the Intellectual Property Department, “a person would be criminally liable if, for the purpose of or in the course of a copying service business, he possesses an infringing reprographic copy of a copyright work as published in a book, magazine or periodical.”
The Department also states that the offence is introduced to facilitate prosecution against illegal reproduction of copyrighted materials, since the old version requires the prosecution “to prove the making of an infringing copy by a copyshop”.
The maximum penalty of the conviction of copyshop offence is HK$50,000 fine per infringing copy and 4 years imprisonment.
Photocopying textbooks is a common practice in the universities in Hong Kong. There are a number of copyshops around the University of Hong Kong. Before the introduction of the copyshop offence, many students would ask the copyshops to photocopy the whole textbooks. After the offence has taken effect, the copyshops have become more cautious about their business activities.
One of the many copyshops near the HKU.
The copyshop offence reinforces the copyright protection for the authors and publishers. However, some think that it leans too much towards the copyright owners. An owner of a copyshop near the University of Hong Kong, who does not want to be identified, admits that officers from the Customs and Exercise Department have searched the shop several times. They are now more careful in ensuring the customers are indeed students and only photocopy a portion of the books at a time.
Some of the students also do not welcome the offence. Vivien Wong, a student from the University of Hong Kong, said, “the offence causes a lot of inconveniences. Wheｎ I want to photocopy the whole book, I have to secretly do it myself.” She also thinks that with so many textbooks the students have to buy for the courses, the financial burden on the students could be very heavy if they are not allowed to photocopy some of the books. “I think the publishers should lower the prices”.
Den, an assistant of the University Bookstore at the University of Hong Kong, understands the heavy financial burden on the students. She said, “I don’t think photocopying the whole textbooks is acceptable, however, I do believe that professors should not require the students to buy so many books.”
To ease the financial burden on students, teachers and professors might consider photocopying some of the materials for the students. Most of the educational institutions in Hong Kong have entered into licence agreements with licensing bodies such as the Hong Kong Reprographic Rights Licensing Society (HKRRLS) for making multiple copies of copyrighted materials for teaching purposes. The Intellectual Property Department has issued “Guidelines on Photocopying of Printed Works by Not-for-Profit Educational Establishments”. According to the guidelines,
- “2% of the number of pages can be copied for one course in a calendar month.”
- “5% of the number of pages can be copied for one course in an academic year.”
If the law is to balance the interests of different parties, the questions to ask are, “does the current Copyright Ordinance favours the copyright owners too much?” “Or does it help encourage publishing innovative ideas and knowledge?”
