Googling May Break Copyright in Canada

twray writes "From The Globe&Mail: Could it be possible that Canada will make Google or any other Internet search and archiving engines illegal? Bill C-60, which amends the Copyright Act and received its first reading in the House of Commons on June 20, suggests it could be illegal for anyone to provide copyrighted information through "information-location tools," which includes search engines."

Comments

Lawmaking and The Internet

[LowbrowDeluxe]

It seems to me, that lawmakers are having to rush to catch up with the internet in much the same way the automobile revolution caught them with their pants down. Early on their were laws restricting cars to 4 miles per hour in some cities and townships, and at least one place where a person had to walk in front of the car with a lantern to warn people. Traffic law went through a lot of permutations as society tried to deal with the sudden ability for people and goods to be moved from place to place with ease. I think that's a pretty fair analogy of where we are at now with intellectual property.
Except the analogy breaks down when confronted with the fact that there are companies in position to achieve, or at least maintain, obscene profit levels by preventing the expansion of intellectual traffic flow.

Re:This doens't really make any sense

[HCIdivision17]

Yes. It's odd how a medium that millions use to find sites of interest could be harmed by a search engine. Indeed, while looking for some hard to find parts for a lab I'm working in, Google's cache ability directed me to the names of some companies that make old or hard to find parts. The cache showed previous sellers, which led to a trail to other vendors who still have items in stock. That should be a good thing.

Meta Tags

[kyndig]

Any information can be copyrighted. Simply placing your name and year next to an original work provides copyright protection. Countries have different methods and laws governing copyright works, so I would wonder how feasible it is to place this type of regulation on information that is gained through public access.

Recently I looked into META tags, and saw a copyright META TAG. I found it odd, but this _could_ provide a solution for indivuals. But in further looking, I see the robots: NOINDEX rule, which would prevent a search engine from cacheing a page at all.
The "good" search engines adhere to the NOINDEX rule, while the other "less than forward" engines will ignore it. This can be used as a cross-hair for the copyright lawyers to focus on.

The problem of authors being concerned over copyrighten work can not be solved by making it illegal to cache a page; you then open up a can of worms in regards to search engines, web browsers, and software programs which all cache data in one form or other. By using an already emplaced acceptable standard such as NOINDEX, a webmaster can ensure their copyrighten work is accessible only by direct visitation.

Mr. Knopf

[L3on]

Does anyone else find it funny that the copywrite lawyer looking over the bill shares the same last name as Alfred A. Knopf the famous publisher? The Knopf name is still used to this day as a book publisher even though Random House purchased the company from Knopf in 1960 and he is long since dead.

Just goes to show...

[l0ungeb0y]

That Pols inserting their heads up their ass whenever it comes to technology is not a USA only thing.

But with a recent NYTimes piece making a case for the death penalty for script kiddies... and the pervasive atmosphere of ignorance driven hysteria towards IT, my question is how long before we actually start seeing the witch hunts begin in an earnest attempt to gain strong governement control of the internet?

And if a programer floats like a duck, what then?

Let's not go to Canada. 'Tis a silly place.

[yellowstone]

• Any company that wants to put copyright material on their web site, but doesn't want it indexed, should learn about the robots.txt file.

• As stated in TFA, the law would make any search engine illegal. Given that hiding your site from all search engines makes it pretty much invisible to the rest of the internet, why bother to have a public web site anyway?

If they want to do something real, make ignoring robots.txt actionalbe.

Re:Take that, Canucks

[uberdave]

How 'bout this: if you publish it on the web, it is public domain.

Re:Does it matter?

[greenhybrid]

Well, a key difference is that Google only provides information freely available over the Internet! It doesn't store pages that would require a subscription :)

Re:Take that, Canucks

[typical]

I think Stallman might get a bit irritable about that.

I *do* think that if you provide something via the regular, non-authenticated Web, you should be prepared to allow people to mirror that item, and not to have control over when that item *stops* being offered. Because that's just how the Web *works*, and trying to apply meatspace rules to the Web, where costs of replication and distribution are vastly different from meatspace, just doesn't make sense.

Great.

[Dun Malg]

This is just great. Making it illegal to look for anything. You may only watch/hear/read what you're given by your corporate masters. The internet essentially turned into television, where only those with big money for advertising will be heard. Now what do we say to those that call Canada "America Junior"?

Ummmmm

[Allnighterking]

Doesn't this make the card catalog, the Dewey Decimal System et al, illegal as well. .... wait a second.... this also makes tests in school illegal. Since your memory is a system for the retreval of copyrighted information, aka a search and archiving engine ( The text book is copyrighted ) it would then be illegal for you to use your memory to recall anything. Since it's also illegal to force someone to break the law this would mean a teacher is in jepoardy as well. Since they are aiding and abetting in the creation of a crime.

My god.... Canada just might succeed in making every 12 year olds dream come true.... no more school.