Slashdot Mirror
Canada May Lose Copyright Fair-Use Rights
DotNM writes with an article from the CBC reporting that the Canadian government is considering removing fair-use rights from Canada's copyright law. From the article: "Exacerbating the situation is intense pressure from the United States, where Canada is considered a rogue when it comes to copyright and intellectual property. It still hasn't ratified a 1997 World Intellectual Property Organization copyright treaty... Two of the most controversial issues are [DRM] and the closely related technological protection measures."
No, it's Levy paid to CRIA for blank CD's and audio tapes (not HDDs or DVDs), but you can't be sued for downloading music or videos.
Sadly, the biggest lie circulating is that these changes will somehow better promote "Quebec culture".
Seriously? I mean, no offense, but if there's one culture that needs protection, it's the rest of the Canadian culture. The music and movie industry in Quebec is going great (not as great this year as last year tough). Quebecers actually go and see movies from Quebec. It's not the majority, but it's a non negligible portion. The rest of Canada don't watch a lot of movies from Quebec, but then, they hardly watch their own either.
http://www.gc.ca/ is your friend.
BERNIER, Maxime
Parliamentary Address
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Telephone: (613) 992-8053
Fax: (613) 995-0687
E-Mail: Bernier.M@parl.gc.ca
Constituency Address
11535 1st Avenue, Suite 430
Saint-Georges, Quebec
G5Y 7H5
Telephone: (418) 227-2171
Fax: (418) 227-3093
1083 Vachon Boulevard North, Suite 201
Sainte-Marie, Quebec
G6E 1M8
Telephone: (418) 387-4224
Fax: (418) 387-8124
And
ODA, Beverley J. (Bev) (Conservative)
Parliamentary Address
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Telephone: (613) 992-2792
Fax: (613) 992-2794
E-Mail: Oda.B@parl.gc.ca
Constituency Address
68 King Street East, Unit 2
Bowmanville, Ontario
L1C 3X2
Telephone: (905) 697-1699
Fax: (905) 697-1678
Toll Free: 1-866-436-1141
Om, nomnomnom...
It's quite clear that the conservatives don't want to promote what you call "Québec culture" with this law. There's already enough protection for Québec artists and creators, and the conservatives don't want to change this situation. The truth is that the conservative party want to protect a well-established industry, and respond to U.S. pression to change the foggy legislative background of "fair-use" in a more radical way. This change can be linked to many positions in Stephen Harper's governement towards "americanisation" of Canada. However, I'll call my Bloc député, as I'm against this change in the copyright law
Bev Oda's (Canadian Heritage minister) campaign was funded by major record companies such as Universal Records. Basically the record companies are buying these new draconian laws. 'http://bevoda.ca' has recently pulled down the contact info after an obvious flood of hateful email. This has been extensively covered on http://boingboing.net/ and as usual days, weeks and months ahead of slashdot.d s_mp_in.htmly right_c.html_ ministe.htmla nadian_.htmld ents_as.html_ toronto.htmly fight_t.htmli mports_.html_ dissect.htmlw to_stop.html
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/09/11/how_hollywoo
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/11/08/canadian_cop
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/06/08/can_heritage
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/01/04/hollywoods_c
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/05/24/canadian_stu
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/01/15/editorial_in
http://www.boingboing.net/2005/09/29/canadian_cop
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/01/03/canadian_mp_
http://www.boingboing.net/2005/06/21/canadas_dmca
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/09/18/canadians_ho
But one of them will be if fair use rights are removed.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
If you don't have your MP in your address book, then here's the lookup site:
u se/PostalCode.asp?Source=SM
http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/about/people/ho
I already sent my MP a letter, do your part if you're pissed.
Canada does not use Fair-Use in its copyright laws, it uses Fair dealing and the constructs are totally different. The actual debate in Canada is should we move to adopting Fair Use or continue to use the restricted but spelled out uses of Fair Dealing.
-Ghost
As a Quebecer I can't describe how terrible it would feel to know our government used us as an excuse to damage copyright law in Canada. :(
Here's a letter I wrote in 1999 when this issue last came up:
Subject: CPCDI concern
Hello,
I am a Canadian citizen residing in Montreal, QC. I recently learned of your request for comments regarding the implementation of a Canadian version of the controversial American DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act), through provisions of the Consultation Paper on Digital Copyright Issues (CPCDI). I would like to voice my concern.
To anyone who has studied the history of the United States - from the inception of an independent democracy to the frequent creation and repeal of unjust law - the DMCA appears to be a gross perversion of both copyright law (practically, and in spirit) and the American constitution.
It seeks to impose the criminal status on individuals who would otherwise be practicing constitutionally protected freedoms, while having a questionable effect, if any, on those who are already criminals - those who wilfully violate copyright law. It allows for the criminalization of the act of making fair use (media excerpts, backup copies, transfers of ownership, research for the purpose of publishing, use under unsupported or unapproved digital devices, and others) of copyrighted material, because these fair uses can be controlled through the use of encryption.
Where formerly these would have been civil issues (contract violation), they become criminal issues.
This, as we have seen recently in the United States, has already begun to have a chilling effect on scientific research (see the cases regarding Dmitry Sklyrov, Dr. Felten, and Jon Johansen - all of whom were enguaged in previously protected activities for the good of the public). Of course, the frightening commonality in each of these cases is that the requests for prosecution were perpetrated by large media centric, for-profit corporations.
At the end of the day, many criminal acts can be prevented through proactive prosection, criminalization of related activity, and errosion of fundamental privacy.
But as a citizen of Canada, I oppose these excessive measures. To me, living in a free country means being given the choice to use tools for good or bad purposes. It is the trust instilled by the Canadian government and the Canadian people which makes this country great.
I urge the Canadian government to maintain the fair, delicate balance between copyright holders and individuals, and to remove the overbroad, anti-consumer provisions of CPDCI.
Sincerely,
etc.
I'm working on the next one right now. It's a shame we have to keep doing this.A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
It does not get any easier than this for Canadians:
e form_action/
http://www.onlinerights.ca/get_active/copyright_r
Web form that sends a letter to your MP as well as Maxime and Beverley.
STAND UP AND FIGHT!!!
Cheers.
Mark
First, go here to find your representative:
n MPsCompleteList.aspx?TimePeriod=Current&Language=E
y right-canada.html
http://webinfo.parl.gc.ca/MembersOfParliament/Mai
then, email them the following (just a suggestion):
Hi [representative],
This is my first time writing to you, as a new constituent. I am writing concerning an article I read today on CBC.ca. http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2007/01/11/cop
I am fairly concerned about possible changes to Canadian fair-use laws. I consider myself a patron of the arts, and one of the music industry's best customers. As a modern, technology-savy citizen, I primarily listen to the music CDs I purchase on my portable iPod, or on my PC. Changes to fair use laws would make the act of "ripping" these songs to my computer, illegal. I consider myself an ethical consumer, and I don't see how in any way this activity harms the music industry. I suppose one could argue that, should this law come into effect, I could purchase my music online and therefore no "illegal" copying from CD would take place. However, these downloadable files (by way of the iTunes music store, for example) already defeat fair-use by restricting your ability to move them to new devices, new PCs etc.
In short, this law will punish good consumers, like me. Unethical consumers of music are already breaking the law by downloading pirated music, so this law will not affect them. If such legal changes are made, in order to continue listening to music in the manner I have been for years, I will probably opt to simply break the law - as I expect will the majority of iPod-owning Canadians. I will also seriously question whether or not such an industry should be supported financially by my hard-earned paycheques.
Thank you for listening,
[insert name here]
Jeremy
Fight Online -- send a letter asking for a balanced copyright reform: Visit http://www.onlinerights.ca/get_active/copyright_re form_action/
Your letter will read:
I am a constituent who cares about Canada's cultural policy, and I am writing in regard to legislative proposals for "copyright reform." During the last Parliament, Bill C-60 provided some very sensible approaches to this complicated topic, but it also left room for improvement. As you consider the issue of copyright reform, I hope that you will work to ensure that any new legislation is not a regression from the sensible policies set out in Bill C-60.
In particular, I do not believe that "digital rights management" (DRM) technologies should stop the public from making lawful uses of their legitimately acquired media. Publishers using DRM push aside the delicate balance between copyright and the rights of the public - a balance set according to an assessment of the public interest by legislators - and replace it with one-sided rules that reflect publishers' private interests. Even artists disagree with publishers' anti-consumer use of DRM, as evidenced by the recently formed Canadian Music Creators Coalition. Therefore, as in Bill C-60, new copyright reform legislation should not make it illegal to circumvent DRM for lawful purposes.
I am also concerned that the use of DRM can threaten computer security and consumer privacy, as in the recent Sony-BMG "Rootkit" fiasco. When content companies routinely use technological measures to control how people enjoy entertainment in the privacy of their own homes, I think we need protection *from* DRM more than we need protection *for* it.
These concerns are shared by a substantial and growing number of informed Canadian citizens. I hope that you will take them into account when considering any changes to Canadian copyright law. Thanks very much for your time.
They're in Afghanistan ... remember? As for everyone else talking about invading Canada elsewhere in this thread ...
Lets see - you can't use nukes, because we're too close, and you'd end up getting the fallout ... not to mention what it would do to supplies you import from us (oil, electricity, etc).
You can't invade, because we can turn off the electricity, and a third of your electrical grid would immediately collapse, and much of it would stay down ...
You can't use a trade embargo, because we supply you with more petroleum products than any other country in the world ... and the shortages would be immediate (pipelines - within hours), unlike tankers (lead times of months) ... think of a permanent "Hurricane Katrina" shortfall ...
Also, we get along pretty well with Mexico, so they'd probably join us, so think of TWO Hurricane Katrinas ...
Gee, why not just agree to continue to be good neighbours? Threatening us is more like putting a gun to your own head and saying "Stop or I'll shoot!"
For those that have no clue about Canada's current political situation, the governing Conversative party holds minority power, less than 50% of the seats in Parliament, and as such requires the votes of the other parties, the NDP, the Liberals or the Bloq Quebecois, to pass any legislation. The Liberals, which have the largest number of seats after the Conservatives, have also just elected a new, dynamic leader to head their party and he is out for blood. So, regardless of the legislation that is introduced it is going to be amended when the bill heads to committee (second reading), if it even gets that far. Once the bill heads to committee look for it to be sliced and diced by the opposition if for no other reason than to earn some political points with the public. A similar situation occured when the Liberals amended the Conservatives much vaunted crime reform bill and watered down or removed key sections of the legislation.
Stephen Dion, the new Liberal leader, has also indicated that he will not co-operate with the Conservatives on any legislative initiatives and has intimated that he will vote to bring down the government on the next confidence motion and force an election. So we may not even make it that far.
Don't hold your breath on this passing.
No, it's Levy paid to CRIA for blank CD's and audio tapes (not HDDs or DVDs), but you can't be sued for downloading music or videos.
I am not a lawyer!
I'm sorry, but I've been pouring through the Canadian Copyright Act, and I cannot find anything which substantiates your claim. This is the only clause I can find which is relevant to this situation, but please tell me if I've missed something. (Edit: now that I am done writing this comment I am no longer as sure as when I started, so please read to the end)
From http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/info/act-e.html#80: (emphasis mine)
Copying for Private Use
80. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the act of reproducing all or any substantial part of
(a) a musical work embodied in a sound recording,
(b) a performer's performance of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, or
(c) a sound recording in which a musical work, or a performer's performance of a musical work, is embodied
onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer's performance or the sound recording.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the act described in that subsection is done for the purpose of doing any of the following in relation to any of the things referred to in paragraphs (1)(a) to (c):
(a) selling or renting out, or by way of trade exposing or offering for sale or rental;
(b) distributing, whether or not for the purpose of trade;
(c) communicating to the public by telecommunication; or
(d) performing, or causing to be performed, in public.
1997, c. 24, s. 50.
Now, the first thing to notice here is that this only applies to musical works, not videos. Next, this only allows copying onto an "audio recording medium," defined as:
http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/info/act-e.html#79
"audio recording medium" means a recording medium, regardless of its material form, onto which a sound recording may be reproduced and that is of a kind ordinarily used by individual consumers for that purpose, excluding any prescribed kind of recording medium;
The last sentence seems somewhat badly phrased, those of you who know french may agree that it is worded better on the french version of the page: http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/info/act-f.html#79
"support audio" Tout support audio habituellement utilisé par les consommateurs pour reproduire des enregistrements sonores, à l'exception toutefois de ceux exclus par règlement.
Now, I don't know if there are recording mediums which are excluded (or "exclus par règlement"), but disregarding that, my (possibly unqualified) judgement suggests to me that HDDs would count as "ordinarily used by individual consumers for that purpose," especially since many portable music players use them to store music.
Another important insight is that this only covers the case in which you make a copy of a work for your own private use. This leads me to believe that, for example, I could make a copy of my friend's music disk and use it myself, but it would be copyright infringement for him to make the copy and give it to me. Together with paragraphs (2) (b) and (c), this leads me to believe that it is not permitted for you to download music for the purpose of sharing it through the p2p service. Perhaps if the p2p aplication does not permit you to disable uploading you can say it was not your purpose to upload the music? Maybe you can say this in any case? I don't know, I'm not a lawyer. Now that I've looked at it so closely, however,
Mr. Period: Nine is the one that's right by ten!
Nine: One day I will kill him. Then, I will be Ten.
You see it isn't the Copyright Act that dictates fair use & allows us Canadians to
download & upload whatever we want.
The Charter of Rights allows us this privilege!
And not even a government with 100% of the seats in the House of Commons
can change the Charter of rights on their own.
I buy lots of CDs and DVDs. None of it goes to the MPAA or RIAA or the Canadian equivalents. Just about everything I buy is from companies outside those cartels. You might want to look at doing the same and learn of some new artists you've never heard before.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
We have been very fortunate not to have the draconian laws that are totally one sided. We as Canadians pay a levy on all our CDs /etc when we are using said media for legitmate uses.
Listing of Canadian MP's by Postal Code
Take some time and let your MP know that this issue is important and the current buzz over the environment doesn't mean people are going to ignore this. Remember, doing nothing is doing something. That something is allowing the music industry lobby groups walk all over you and say thank you, can I have some more.
The charter of rights and freedoms doesn't say anything about copyright at all. There is no such thing as fair use in Canada, just fair dealing which is in fact in the copyright act.
I've written my MP about copyright at least 3 times last year, and didn't get one response. The Conservative MP for Yorkton-Melville obviously doesn't care about Canadian artists or stopping DRM.
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
A petition exists which has around 2500 signatures already and is sent to parliament as new batches of signatures are received.
Please show us the language in the DMCA that "makes it illegal to exercise fair use rights if there is DRM in place?"
Nevermind, because there is NO language in the DMCA that "makes it illegal to exercise fair use rights if there is DRM in place." In fact the DMCA states exactly the opposite.
"(c) Other Rights, Etc., Not Affected. - (1) Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title." - http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap12.html
Stop believing the FUD of the Corporate Copyright Elite. "Fair Use" is still alive and kicking in the US, in spite of the money and power of the likes of the RIAA, MPAA, and the BSA!
I'm not sure if this has been posted yet, but here's an easy way to email your MP. Just got to this site and follow the steps. http://www.onlinerights.ca/get_active/copyright_re form_action/
If you want to submit your comments as "Concerned Global Citizens", the Canadian Copyright Policy Branch has a Web Form
.I don't know if the Canadian government cares what citizens of other countries think, but I don't believe that we will ever get any real Copyright Reform until we convince our respective governments to stop being so myopically nationalistic.
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mohandas Gandhi
I was sure they'd move from Life+50 to Life+70 before Winnie the Pooh went out of copyright, but no, the works of A. A. Milne (and a hojillion others, including Alfred Kinsey, Jackson Pollock, and H. L. Mencken) are in the public domain in Canada. If they manage to hold out for another year, the public domain will grow to include (for instance) John von Neumann.
At least they've managed to keep their laws reasonable compared to those in the U.S., though that's not saying much. If they keep being an oasis of comparative sanity, I may end up moving there. Here's hoping they'll stay that way for a good long while.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca