Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Canada's New DMCA Considered Worst Copyright Law

Posted by kdawson on from the outdoing-the-southern-neighbours dept.

loconet writes "The government of Canada is preparing to attempt to bring a new DMCA-modeled copyright law in Canada in order to comply with the WIPO treaties the country signed in 1997. (These treaties were also the base of the American DMCA.) The new Canadian law will be even more restrictive in nature than the American version and worse than the last Canadian copyright proposal, the defeated Bill C-60. Among the many restrictive clauses in this new law, as Michael Geist explains, is the total abolishment of the concept of fair use: 'No parody exception. No time shifting exception. No device shifting exception. No expanded backup provision. Nothing.' Geist provides a list of 30 things that can be done to address the issues."

10 of 234 comments (clear)

  1. Wait a minute... by palegray.net · · Score: 5, Funny

    A you saying it's entirely possible that in the very near future Canadians might start envying American digital rights liberties? I think my head is going to explode...

    --
    512 MB RAM, 20 GB disk, 200 GB transfer, five datacenters. $19.95/month.
    1. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is a non-issue. The bill will never pass.

      The US complains about Canada's IP laws all the time. So every so often we introduce a new bill so we can point and say "see US, we're trying!". However the bill is purposely written to be so restrictive as to never, ever make it through 3 readings in the House of Commons. A bit wasteful, sure, but for the most part it keeps the americans off our backs.

  2. Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is hardly surprising. The current Canadian government is more interested in mirroring American political issues than doing the bidding of it's own people.
    Most of us here are embarrassed. Sorry, we'll vote better next time.

    1. Re:Not news by Presto+Vivace · · Score: 5, Funny

      Most of us here are embarrassed. Sorry, we'll vote better next time. hey, that's our excuse!

    2. Re:Not news by MrAndrews · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, it's not so much American politics as it is the will of American corporations... the government apparently got the entire text of the bill from the MPAA...

      --
      The world's only surviving livewriter.
    3. Re:Not news by kebes · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Canada has its own laws, and its own legislature. It can choose to withdraw from the treaties (very unlikely since there a major downsides to leaving WIPO). Yes, this is largely about complying with international treaties which Canada has already agreed to. So, to a large extent, the complaint is that said treaties should never have been signed in the first place. The WIPO provisions for DMCA-like legislation greatly over-reaches. So, even though this treaty has been signed, it should not be followed. Signatories should "do the right thing" and repeal their support for said treaties. (Wishful thinking, I know.) Just because a treaty has been signed does not, of course, make it proper and correct.

      This is not about bending to the will of America, it is about complying with international treaties. Well, actually Michael Geist explains the situation as:

      The new Canadian legislation will likely mirror the DMCA with strong anti-circumvention legislation - far beyond what is needed to comply with the WIPO Internet treaties - and address none of the issues that concern millions of Canadians. The Conservatives promise to eliminate the private copying levy will likely be abandoned. There will be no flexible fair dealing. No parody exception. No time shifting exception. No device shifting exception. No expanded backup provision. Nothing.
      (Emphasis added.)

      In fact, there is a concern that while legislation is being proposed to conform to treaties, the opportunity will be seized to extend the laws beyond what is strictly required. In particular, it was found that some members of Canadian government are being influenced (financially, etc.) by U.S. lobbies. So, there is a real danger that overly restrictive laws get put in place in order to appease U.S. corporations (or the U.S. government, depending on how you want to look at it).

      It's not as simple as saying that Canada must comply with the treaties it has signed. As you say, the law can be implemented in various ways, and we must all do our best to insure that they are implemented in sane, democratic, and freedom-preserving ways. (Which may mean not implementing them at all.)
  3. Geist's list of 30 things by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Informative

    Geist's list of 30 things you can do, linked to in TFS, is pretty good, actually, no matter where you live. Even if your country already has a DMCA-like law, you can still fight for it or certain provisions of it to be repealed. Just replace the Canadian-sepcific info with the equivalents in your country.

    Furthermore, some of it just plain good advice -- only buy DRM-free music and videos, release stuff under the Creative Commons licenses. And so forth.

    Most of you are gonna be like, yeah, yeah, but no one cares. That's not true anymore. Now that the MAFIAA have become a nuisance and even public enemy #1 as far as some are concerned, the public will push for change. Like it or not, most politicians eventually cave to public opinion. After all, they need the public's support in order to get elected.

    --
    My blog
  4. Finally! by pushing-robot · · Score: 5, Funny

    After that whole dollar thing, I thought we'd never be able to make fun of Canada again.

    Blame Canada! Woohoo!

    --
    How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  5. The last straw by ngunton · · Score: 5, Funny

    That does it! I'm moving to... oh wait

  6. A law without enforcement by courteaudotbiz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The parliament can vote whatever-the-law they want, but they still have to apply it. And the RCMP (our equivalent of the US FBI) explicitly said that they won't go after any individual for copyright infringement...

    So what's the use of a law if you're not to enforce it?