But it's funny. Did anyone actually bring up actual copyright reform? When the research libraries and universities left Licenses for Europe, a program set up by the Commission this spring, they did so with explicit mentioning of the fact that the Commission and publishers seemed unwilling to discuss a reform of the actual legislation.

This approach also undermines the considerable work that has been done in Europe to increase the amount of Open Access content available and encourage its exploitation. We are concerned, therefore, that our participation in a discussion that focuses primarily on proprietary licenses could be used to imply that our sectors accept the notion of double licensing of as a solution. It is not. We firmly believe that “the right to read is the right to mine”

So if I understood this problem the right way, it is that the Commission workgroup was unable to explore any other option forward than more licensing and different licensing deals, whereas in fact what everyone was interested in was a reform of the law itself. Was that reflected in the meeting or was it a publisher dominated meeting?