p2pnet.net News:- The entertainment and software cartels are having considerable success with their public and behind-closed-doors lobbying efforts to have Canadian copyright laws changed to bring them more in line with corporate business plans.

However, they might also have a less than desirable effect on the Googles of the world, large and small.

Canada’s Bill C-60 would amend the Copyright Act by implementing parts of the 1996 World Intellectual Property Organization treaty, “the treaty that led to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in the U.S.,” as CNET News points out, going on:

“Set for debate and an initial vote in the House of Commons after Parliament’s summer break, C-60 addresses things such as file-sharing, anticopying devices and the liability of Internet service providers and would tighten the Copyright Act in ways favorable to record labels and movie studios”.

In a recent column, the Globe & Mail’s Jack Kapica has Canadian copyright lawyer Howard Knopf saying he was startled to discover Bill C-60’s potentially negative effect on “information location tools.”

The phrasing is difficult, Kapica quotes Knopf as saying, “because at first glance it seems to be a helpful provision in that it limits the liability of companies such as Google to no more than an injunction when they have not received actual notice of infringement. But then the language of the bill works on the assumption that the search engine itself is capable of infringing copyright by having archived copyright material on it.”

Another Canadian expert, law professor Michael Geist, says search engine provisions, “effectively create a notice and takedown system for search engines that could result in the removal of content from the search engine index based solely on an allegation of copyright infringement. The system contains no checks and balances or deterrence against false claims. It would therefore be ripe for abuse with the possibility that competitors will use it to decrease traffic to competitor sites, while creating significant new costs for search engines.

“As recent reports in the Globe and Mail and CNET indicate, the potential problems with the provisions do not stop there. The provision seemingly rests on the assumption that caching content is an infringement that necessitates a limited liability provision. That is open to question, however, and Bill C-60 could be improved by clarifying that it does not purport to definitively decide the infringement issue and that it does not apply to mere indexing of content. I suspect we will hear much more about the search engine question as surely everyone involved in copyright policy recognizes the importance of getting this issue right.”

Copyright issues remain a hot topic in the US, “where search engines have found themselves subjected to a litany of infringement complaints, particularly as they expand the types of content they make searchable on the Web,” says CNET.

“Google has pulled links to Web sites that the controversial and litigious Church of Scientology claimed infringed copyright. The search giant was also forced recently to remove copyright video content users had uploaded and has also come under fire for its plan to digitize library collections. Amazon.com was recently sued by an adult magazine over photos in its images database, and Google was warned by the same company.”

The report goes on, “Knopf said he believed the intent of the search engine provisions was to provide a partial safe harbor, but he said that due to “drafting issues”- in other words, careless language – he’s concerned the effect may be the opposite, muddling one of the Web’s prime paradigms.”

Hopefully, “corrections or clarification can be made before the bill becomes law,” says CNET, but, “It could be a problem if it goes into law in a vague way and causes search engines to think there is a risk (and)…to cut back on their activities,” it has the EFF’s (Electronic Frontier Foundation) Wendy Seltzer saying.

“The public as a whole loses if we lose the ability to see what’s being made available online.”

Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net

See:-
CNET News – In Canada: Cache a page, go to jail?, July 19, 2005
startled to discover – Cdn copyright bill vs Google, p2pnet, July 14, 2005
copyright infringement – Bill C-60 and Search Engines, July 19, 2005

This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 19th, 2005 at 4:17 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

HOME

Viewed 2459 times