p2pnet - rss feed: Is Canada’s new Copyright bill dishonest?
The conservatives may be trying to deliberately mislead you about the contents of their new Copyright bill, something that some might suggest is a form of counterfeiting. You can see this in some of the new provisions which the government is using to claim that the new copyright bill “that balances the interests of Canadians who use digital technology and those who create content” (Quote from Jim Prentice, Minister of Industry).
The heading in the current section 29 of the Canadian Copyright Act is “Fair Dealings”, and it lists a number of limits to copyright where a copyright holder cannot require permission in order for citizens to do these activities. These limits to Copyright are necessary to allow for any balance between the rights of existing copyright holders and the rights of new creators and the public at large.
Bill C-61 has a number of new additions that have numbers such as 29.21 (Reproduction onto another medium or device), 29.22 (Reproduction of music), and 29.23 (Reproduction for later listening or viewing). Contrary to what the numbering suggests, none of these additions are “fair dealings” limits to copyright. They are simply a change in the default situation when the specific activity is not mention in the license agreement from the copyright holder.
Each of these sections includes text such as the following:
Contract prevails in case of inconsistency
(2) If the individual has downloaded the work or other subject-matter from the Internet and is bound by a contract that governs the extent to which the individual may reproduce the work or other subject-matter, the contract prevails over subsection (1) to the extent of any inconsistency between them.
This means that in the past when these specific activities are not mentioned that the default was that they were infringements, while now the default is that they aren’t infringements. They are still activities which are under the control of the copyright holder in their license/contract, are part of the permissions required (or able to be denied) by copyright, and thus do not qualify as limits or exceptions to Copyright.
The Conservative government is claiming that their bill is balanced based on a few key things
One is their reduction of statutory damages to $500 which will only have the effect of increasing the likelihood of lawsuits (copyright holders already had the ability to sue, but didn’t for lobbying and public relations reasons).
The other would be these additions to section 29 of the act which are being mislabeled as “fair dealings”. My hope is that Canadians will notice this dishonest fine print and recognize that this bill has no balance at all. While it offers quite a bit to a tiny number of old-media/old-economy copyright holders who see new media and the new economy as a threat, it is a very bad bill for pretty much every other part of the economy and Canadian society.
Note: This is my first direct posting to p2pnet. Please feel free to contact me (Russell McOrmond) if there are specific things you wish me to be writing about.
Russell McOrmond - p2pnet contributing editor
[McOrmond is an independent author (software and non-software) who uses modern business models and licensing (Free/Libre and Open Source Software, Creative Commons). He’s also the CLUE policy coordinator and p2pnet contributing editor.]
June 13th, 2008 at 10:32 am
In my opinion the worst thing about the bill is the protection of DRM software. As demonstrated by the Sony rootkit fiasco (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Sony_BMG_CD_copy_protection_scandal), such software is harmful to computers and can expose computers to attack by hackers. Not only that, but the Sony DRM software would also “phone home” to Sony, violating the user’s privacy.
DRM is bad for consumers; it violates their privacy and, as evidence by Sony, puts their computers in danger of being hacked. Why has the Conservative government sacrificed consumer safety and privacy to satisfy the American Media cartels?
June 13th, 2008 at 10:59 am
RE: RJ
-Why has the Conservative government sacrificed consumer safety and privacy to satisfy the American Media cartels?-
Its really simple. The conservative agenda has been solely based on increasing the potential for big business to increase profits. Everything from the GST rebate which provides big business with astronomical tax breaks, to the slow privatization of health care, to laws like this that open up ordinary people to lawsuits by big business. BTW did u hear that in Alberta the conservatives increased their pay by 35% while they wont pay decent wages to its top health care providers which has resulted in 4 of the top doctors to resign. they will starve the health care until it collapses at which point they will introduce our savior the private health care which will most certainly start to drain the blood from our veins as soon as we tap into it. Every single policy they adopt is centered on providing benefits to large corporations and AMERICANIZATION. Wouldn’t be surprised if this guy eventually starts splitting up Canada into small pieces that the US can later inhale. Or perhaps his plans with bush to establish a north American union which will really be the integration of north America into the US in essence. Oh ya dont forget this is still the face of the conservative party on their best behavior. if they got majority in the government i mean god save us. Never trust the serpent who tries to deceive you.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:46 am
Can’t resist the old joke
Q: “How can you tell if a polition is being dishonest?”
A: “Their lips are moving”
June 13th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
really though
what have the Progressive Communists been honest about?
they are a third rate party that is bent on destroying the canada the world has come to love and enjoy.
maybe its time we kick harper and his party out of canada and deport them to the usa.
they want to destroy our health care, our schools and now our digital rights.
June 14th, 2008 at 11:37 am
Well PC, Liberal, NDP are all self serving and are all identical and either way they will screw the public for their own benefit. They keep telling people to vote but is a vote really worth giving if you hate them all and are just trying to select the least worst every time? Not much us Canadians can do, other than all of us just not vote do to no good options. I am sure if not a single Canadian voted we would see some changes. Other than that we will all just sit around and bitch type our complaints in forums. When we voted we were not voting for a party that actually thought about the people but which party could possible be thinking about the people based on their lies.
American or Canadian it all just don’t matter. The dick head who screwed over millions of people and got rich from it will always be the true leader of both our Countries.
June 14th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
35. Copyright Legislation
i) The Conservative Party believes that the objectives of copyright legislation
should be:
a) to create opportunities for Canadian creators to enjoy the fruits of their labour to the greatest possible extent;
b) to ensure that the rights of Canadian creators are adequately protected by law;
c) that these rights are balanced with the opportunity for the public to use copyrighted works for teaching, researching and lifelong learning;
d) to continue to allow an individual to make copies of sound recordings of musical works for that person’s personal and individual use; and
e) that enforcement is applied fairly and in accordance with international standards.
ii) The Conservative Party believes that reasonable access to copyright works is a critical necessity for learning and teaching for Canadian students and teachers, and that access to copyrighted materials enriches life long learning and is an essential component of an innovative economy.
iii) A Conservative Government will give consideration to educational public policy goals within the copyright framework. A Conservative Government will work with industry to increase awareness and develop a public education campaign to better inform users and creators on the copyright laws in Canada.
iv) A Conservative Government will eliminate the levy on blank recording materials.
June 14th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
also every movie on this site becomes illegal due to cicumvention of dvdr’s
also a 1933 movie that has no copyright in canada will still get you a fine if its an xvid ripped from a dvdr
( 20000 fine plus hte software use 20000 and a 500-10000 fine for downloading it )
June 14th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Unfortunately, to the Conservative haters, this is very similiar in scope and substance to the Bill C-60 of 2005 that the Liberals had introduced. Fortunately, they were kicked out of power before they had the opportunity to enact the legislation. Before you start asking for an election though, do you want to elect a party that has shown that it does not care for the country by not participating in the voting process that is so important in our democracy? Given the number of seats they hold, 30-35% of all Canadians have note been fairly represented because of the Liberal abstentions?
That aside, this is a bad bill. Repealing sections 10 and 13(2) of the current act I believe are unreasonable. A commissioned work should be copyright by the party who commissioned the work given the absence of any other agreement, such as a contract. Essentially, the creator is under the employ of the commissioning party and in the case of employment, work is owned by the employer. Copyright should protect the creators, the public, and the public interest, not the technologies the limit access to content. Circumvention of such protection for the use of legally aquired goods for it’s fair use should not be illegal.
June 14th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
I have a few questions how and what party has shown they care for this country? I know we assume they do but in reality once elected they prove to us time and time again that it is only to benefit themselves. Seats of 30 to 35% is only a percentage of the number of people who voted so not a real accurate way of saying 35% of Canadians. How is voting so important to our democracy? Nice theory and if it worked I would agree, however the truth is once elected they will do what ever they please and our democratic vote is now rendered useless. We Canadians live under a democracy myth and this bill is a good example of it. Even if every Canadian disagreed with this bill and thought it was unfair, we would not be asked (like we haven’t) and no matter what party it was, it would be passed under our noses. So I guess everyone who did vote Conservative or Liberal really did want this bill? If it was a true democracy they would be asking Canadians.
Just for the record and you can probably tell, I am not a supporter of any party, the day they stop lying and actually give a crap about what Canadians want is when I will start believing in democracy.
It does not matter what party is in office any of them would be doing the same thing. If you truly believe your (meaning anyone reading this) party of choice could or would never consider this, then I need to get what ever you are on because it must be a good trip!
June 14th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Progressive Communists? You might want to pull out a dictionary and look up communist again because those things you are afraid of them taking away are very socialist.
June 14th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
I have a good legal collection of music on CD and not I have to pay to download legal copies of the same music for my computer & IPOD??
Get stuffed!!
The best thing we as consumers can do is:
1. write our MP’s indicating our displeasure
2. STOP BUTING OVERPRICED CD’s, DVD’s ETC, ESPECIALLY ONLINE, FOR 1 MONTH AND EMAIL THE RETAILERS, SUPPLIERS AND TELL THEM WHY!!
We are the customer, without us they die, express our displeasure the best way we can.
Collectively we can destroy them (not my objective), so lets let them know we are not happy about this.
-Zoxman
June 15th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
This is one of those bills they try to pass during the summer, an anti consumer bill for special interests. The Liberals tried to pass similar bill at one time. Canadians should follow Natives’ playbook and block a bridge or ten for a day, it’s the only thing that gets media and government attention in this country.
June 16th, 2008 at 7:26 am
This new proposed law and the american one too s so dumb that it will not answer the simplest of questions:
What if I have on my web site many links (over 50) to YouTube videos with songs. Some videos are television productions that have multiple songs from different songwriters (each who presumably originally authorized the song use). I have no idea if the songwriter or their publishers have authorized the placing of their songs on YouTube or if any takedown notices have been filed with YouTube.
The questions are:
Can I be sued for illegally distributing songs?
20,000 dollars per song, or 20,000 x 50 (one million dollars)?
For multiple song videos, what if one author doesn’t mind and the other does, is the whole video unusable?
Is the liable party (the infringer) the original person who posted the video on YouTube?
What if the original is from a foreign countru and cannot be found, will I then carry the burden of the infringement?
Can Canada enforce its laws in american territory to make Youtube and others like it pay for infringement?
Until someone produces a copyright law that answers every possble scenario in the Internet age, no law is worth the paper it is written on. If the idea is that the courts will decide, that is rewrite the law, then the country is being taken for a ride by corrupt and ncopetent politicians. Anyway that is the case.
June 17th, 2008 at 4:22 am
To Thinker
Get it straigh. You are like me, an ordinary guy. The problems you may have in setting up a web page are not the concern of lawmakers. We ordinary people do not count at all. We are cast adrift in the confusing world we cannot understand, the world of the laws and the courts, where we ordinary guys have no chance at all, except for loosing our shirts. My advise to you is do as I do, don’t do any web page or remove the one you have. Also do nothing related to movies or music. Who knows, one day you may go to a an all Bach concert where unauthorized of Bach “arrangements” were played. You may then be arrested for patronizing or financing the ilegal use of music. I no longer have a computer, go to movies or to concerts, listen to the radio or watch television. I live in a remote Island with no electricity, to make sure I cannot break the laws I never heard of. I cannot be arrested. At last, safe.