INFRINGEMENT BY ISSUE OF COPIES TO THE PUBLIC (Hansard, 25 July 1988)

§ Mr. Speaker
With this it will be convenient to take Government amendments Nos. 41, 53, 55 to 57, 59 to 62, 68, 69, 82, 86, 87, 96, 97 and 134.

§ Mr. Blair
These amendments deal with the new rental provisions and, in effect, are all based on the deletion of the word "hiring" and the insertion of the word "rental". We had a full debate in Committee when the Government moved a long way towards the position that was being urged on them by hon. Members of all parties. However, it is not right to let the amendment pass without obtaining for the record the Government's explanation of why they are changing the word "hiring" to the word "rental". I shall be grateful if the Minister will reply.

§ Mr. Maude
The answer to the hon. Gentleman's query lies someway through this group of amendments, in amendment No. 96, which sets out the new definition of "rental" and states: 'rental' means any arrangement under which a copy of a work is made available—
(a) for payment (in money or money's worth), or

(b) in the course of a business, as part of services or amenities for which payment is made,
on terms that it will or may be returned; Put simply, that will cover the sort of circumstances as those obtaining in a hotel which keeps a library of videos for the use of its guests. If no additional charge were made for that service, it would fall outside the Bill as it stands and the copyright owner would have no claim for remuneration. The reality is, however, that the hotel is paid for that service in its basic room charge. We do not think that businesses should be able to make copies available to the public and thus avoid copyright liability by including the cost of quasi-rental operation in the charge for the amenities or services that they provide. This group of amendments remedies that.