‘Everybody downloads’ — Canada copyright bill
p2pnet news view Politics| Freedom:- The proposed change to Canada’s copyright law could alter the way Canadians share media, says Queens University English professor Laura Murray (right) in Ontario.
“It could also have a negative impact on the education system,” writes Queens University Journal assistant news editor Emily Davies in Bill C-61 goes beyond downloading, published yesterday.
She goes on »»»
Bill C-61, first read to the House of Commons by Federal Industry Minister Jim Prentice on June 12, outlines the provisions for copying media and fills in the grey areas not covered by existing copyright laws.
Under current copyrighting laws, Canadians aren’t allowed to copy newspapers, books, periodicals, photographs, videocassettes and music. Under Bill C-61, users would be allowed one copy of each item per individual media device such as an iPod and would also be permitted to record television and radio programs for later use.
An anti-circumvention clause in the bill would make it illegal to break digital locks on copyrighted material, nullifying the new allowances for most digital media.
Murray, also the author of the book Copyright: A Citizens Guide said, If passed, the bill could have a serious effect on Canadian universities.
“Decoding is being criminalized when there are a lot of legitimate purposes for it, especially regarding education,” she said.
But, Murray said the bill would make it illegal to get around digital locks, which are designed to prevent the reformatting and copying of contents found on DVDs, cell phones and other digital devices.
“The bill, if passed, would give the owner the ability to lock up material many different ways.”
Murray said Bill C-61 would also eliminate the university’s ability to take advantage of fair dealing, which allows students to download online journal articles and broadcast journalists the right to show clips from movies and newsreels without the permission of the copyright owner. The determination of what is considered “fair” is left to courts on a case by case basis.
“Everyone needs to understand fair dealing so that they know what they’re losing. This whole idea that users have rights is foreign to many people,” she said. “Fair dealing will be virtually impossible if the owners decide to block it out. To me, they’re giving up on the principle, `some things are free.’ That’s wrong, and we shouldn’t have to apologize for it.”
Under the current Copyright Act, the public is able to legally quote from digital sources for the purposes of private study, research criticism, review and news reporting.
“We [the University] certainly hope it doesn’t pass the public should be as familiar with the concept of fair dealing as they are familiar with the term copyright,” Murray said. “At a university we need fair dealing in order to do research, it will mean less audio visual material will be used in the classroom and will provide barriers to students who want to use digital materials in the classroom.”
Film studies professor Blaine Allan said he’s been educating himself about the effect Bill C-61 could have on the film department.
“We regularly, for the sake of convenience, make copies of digital materials to show clips from movies and other film mediums,” he said.
Allan said if Bill C-61 is passed, he might have to bend the law in order to continue to teach his courses effectively and efficiently.
“What we may have to do strictly, legally speaking is use the actual item which would be technically cumbersome and distracting,” he said. “If we were adhering to the letter of the law we would not have the ability to use the materials that we would normally.”
Should the bill pass, Allan said his teaching would be severely restricted.
“It is preventing us from doing what we do in a way that we see as being productive and beneficial enacting an unfair constraint,” he said. “We have a lot of great tools in our hands, it would be a same for us to not be able to use them.”
The Film Studies Association of Canada (FSAC) has issued its own statement regarding the new proposed copyright reform legislation. In it, FSAC expresses its concerns about Bill C-61 limiting their rights as scholars and educators. In the document, the FSAC calls out for “a truly balanced copyright act, which would protect the rights of creator and copyright holders and the legitimate rights of users of copyright material.”
Outside the classroom, Bill C-61 could have serious implications for those who upload or download files from peer-to-peer networks.
People caught downloading material such as mp3s or videos will be subjected to fines of $500 per incident. But, if a defendant testifies they were unaware they infringed on copyright the fine could be reduced to $200.
Current Canadian copyright law allows for the legal downloading of sound recordings while the downloading of movies is deemed copyright infringement and is criminalized.
Uploading a file onto a network like YouTube could result in a lawsuit of $20,000 per file.
In her first year at Queen’s, Ayan Ga’al, ArtSci ‘11, discovered DC++, a free peer-to-peer file sharing network popular among students living in residence.
“Everyday I downloaded something whether it be a movie or a song. It’s good because it makes downloading easy,” she said. “DC is an amazing tool because it allows you to download movies, music and lecture notes all in one place.”
Ga’al said she was shocked to hear her money-saving activity could potentially have legal implications but said she won’t change her downloading habits anytime soon.
“I’d probably take my chances although I would probably try to incorporate iTunes into my everyday life,” he said.
Ga’al said downloading music and movies is so ingrained into the fabric of Canadian society, it would be difficult for people to stop the practice altogether, despite the government’s efforts to impose a financial deterrent.
“It’s so much a part of what we do,” she said. “It’s not about, `did you get this new CD?’ It’s `did you download this new song?’ Everybody downloads.”
[Photo by Lindsay Duncan]
.
.Stumble It!
New York Times – New worm transcodes MP3s to try to infect PCs, July xx, 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
July 31st, 2008 at 9:24 am
So am i right in thinking consumers no longer have the right to back-up there dvds, the reason i ask is i have kids and anyone knows how easy it is for dvds to get scratched to the point they wont play!
July 31st, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Jim Prentice and his cronies should be expelled from canada. Then the copyright reforms section of government should be dismantled All they seem to do is restrict rights and punish citizens; who do they work for again? the people or record companies?
July 31st, 2008 at 3:02 pm
They work for themselves. We are nothing but PEE-ONS. And anyone who is reading mainstream news DOESN”T EVEN KNOW IT. So tell them whenever you get the chance please. We’ve got to speed up the process of getting rid of them.
July 31st, 2008 at 7:31 pm
“Current Canadian copyright law allows for the legal downloading of sound recordings while the downloading of movies is deemed copyright infringement and is criminalized.”
I’ve been under the assumption for some time now (due in part to this site) that downloading any content was deemed legal in Canada, not just music. When did this change come about and how? Does it apply to television shows as well?
August 1st, 2008 at 5:38 am
I can only speak for britain, but approx 10-15 % of the population file shares. So if they want to criminalise 6-9 million people, let them go ahead. There aren’t enough prisons for real criminals, so I’d like to see them try and put us all in jail…
August 1st, 2008 at 6:58 am
I doubt they will put us in jail for any of this.
They will however use it against you if they have any other reason to want you put away.
They will use this law as leverage to gain access to your private records – like the contents of your computer.
August 3rd, 2008 at 6:34 am
Not only almost everyone downloads, but everybody uses the “save as” and “save image as” options found in all operating systems and in most of the more commonly used applications.
Surely and technically every time someone saves an image seen on a web pager the person is “infringing” according to some law and some lawyers and judges that refuse to understand the difference between the Internet and the obsolete legal paradigms and a simple fact:
laws legislated without a referendum of the people cannot go against the way people are and want to be.