For many years, WIPO, the World Intellectual Property Organization, was (as you would imagine) a strong proponent of expanding copyright in a variety of directions. It was a copyright maximalist's dream organization. Over the last few years, however, there's been a noticeable thawing in this attitude towards copyright. The various developing nations, who have been quite worried about the damaging impact of over-expansive copyright, have certainly made their voices heard at WIPO and, as a result, various groups representing consumer rights and a more sane approach to copyright have been able to participate in WIPO efforts as well. Larry Lessig has even suggested that WIPO can be the key leader in copyright reform. Of course, this is also part of the reason why ACTA was done outside of WIPO. The ACTA nations didn't want to deal with pressure from non-copyright maximalists in crafting the language.

Of course, WIPO certainly hasn't gone too far away from its traditional position, but it has been showing more and more signs of moving away from copyright maximalism. TechnoLlama points us to a recent keynote speech given by Dr. Francis Gurry, the Director General of WIPO, on the issue of "future directions in copyright law."

It's an interesting read. And, to be sure, there is plenty in there that I disagree with strongly. For example, he seems to recognize that all sorts of new business models are springing up around content creation (good!), but then says that we simply can't let the free market work to sort out what business models work, because... Well, actually there is no because. He just seems to take it for granted. Free market = bad.

However, there are many things that he has said that show a clear realization that copyright needs to change, that it can't be anti-consumer, and that it shouldn't be about protecting legacy business models. He does end up in the "balance" camp on copyright reform - which I think is a mistaken view based on the belief that copyright and content creation is a zero sum game. However, focusing on "balance" is certainly a much better position than focusing only on making copyright law stricter.

Perhaps even more surprising is that the speech discusses The Pirate Party - and not just to mock or condemn it - as is typical in the pro-copyright world, but to realize that there are reasons The Pirate Party exists, and it's important to understand its message and why so many people are drawn to it. Dr. Gurry most certainly does not come out as agreeing with the Pirate Party, but he does appear to understand why it exists, and realize that the extremes in the other direction are part of what created the demand.

Despite his apparent dislike for letting markets develop business models around content, he does seem to clearly recognize that this is, at its core, a business model issue - and that copyright can all too often be used to block competition and hold back change - something you'd never have seen a WIPO leader admit in the past.

And, finally, it's nice to see him recognize a key point that we've made over and over again, which is often denied by maximalists: you can't undo what technology allows.

It's an interesting read, and while there are still plenty of issues, it's still amazing to see the shift in WIPO from one end of the spectrum into a more nuanced middle ground.