Canadian copyright bill on the way
p2p news / p2pnet: New Canadian Heritage Minister Bev Oda says the government plans to introduce copyright reform legislation.
Quoted in Howard Knopf’s Excess Copyright blog, “The copyright legislation that was introduced by the previous government, once it was tabled, it did die on the order paper, but once it was tabled created a lot of dissension,” Oda stated.
“There were different views on many elements of that bill.
“Consequently we are working and we will be introducing a new copyright bill that will expedite meeting our international obligations but also making sure that we have a copyright regime and a copyright framework that’s appropriate.”
Oda didn’t say when the legislation would be introduced, “but since copyright is not one of the government’s much talked-about five priorities, it is not expected to be introduced in the spring session,” says the Hill Times. “The Throne Speech also said that major international treaties would be voted on in Parliament, leading some to wonder whether the ratification of the WIPO Internet treaties would come to a vote.”
However, “while most will take this to mean that a WIPO Copyright bill is on the way, that isn’t quite what Oda says,” points out professor Michael Geist.
Lobbyists and others will be working hard to make sure any new bill puts music, movie and software vested interests above all others.
Also See:
Excess Copyright – Minister Oda – the Transcript, April 10, 2006
Hill Times – Conservative government to introduce copyright bill: Bev Oda, April 10, p2pnet
isn’t quite – Oda Says Copyright Bill Is Coming April 10, 2006
April 11th, 2006 at 12:45 pm
Careful when reading these carefully worded replies.
Bev Oda speaks about our meeting “international obligations”. The reality is that Canada’s copyright act already does this and more. Countries sign and then never ratify treaties all the time, so Canada is under no obligation whatsoever to ratify the 1996 WIPO treaties.
It is possible to take some good ideas from these treaties (such as clarifying our existing “communication to the public by telecommunications” to deal with on-demand), but reject the bad ideas that create uncertainty (IE: legal protection for technical measures, obfuscating/expanding the term of copyright for sound recordings, etc).