Privacy Commissioner Criticizes Canadian DMCA

I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Jennifer Stoddart, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, has criticized the proposed Canadian DMCA in a public letter to Jim Prentice, the Canadian Minister of Industry. Specifically, she's asking them not to protect any DRM from circumvention that gathers and transmits personal data, because that would give abusive DRM makers a legal cudgel to use against anyone who exposes them. The proposed bill, which was recently delayed due to heavy opposition, is thought to contain DMCA-style anti-circumvention provisions that would make it illegal to investigate or remove intrusive DRM, even if that DRM was violating Canadian privacy laws."

Comments

Canadian Libraries also urge consumer protection

[thirty-seven]

In related news, from a December 21st, 2007 CBC News article: Libraries urge Ottawa to consider consumers in drafting copyright law

The CLA [Canadian Library Association] fears the Canadian government, now redrafting copyright legislation, will create a new act closely mirroring U.S. legislation that curtails consumer rights, such as the right to copy material for their own use, Don Butcher, executive director of the Canadian Libraries Association said in a news conference in Ottawa Friday. ...

"This is a battle between Hollywood lobbyists versus the average Canadian," Butcher said. ...

Any changes made to law should protect artists such as musicians and authors, but also allow copying for individual use, he said. ...

"Interest in the legislation isn't just coming from experts and specialists, lawyers and lobbyists. This time, interest is coming from ordinary Canadians," Butcher said.

The Privacy Commissioner of Canada

[thirty-seven]

Political and PolySci junkies might be interested to know that, according the Privacy Commissioner's website:

The Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Jennifer Stoddart, is an Officer of Parliament who reports directly to the House of Commons and the Senate. This means that the federal Privacy Commissioner is not an Officer of the Crown, like, say, the Attorney General of Canada is, and so the Privacy Commissioner is formally independent of the government (a.k.a. the executive branch in the U.S. and other presidential/congressional systems).

Re:Uh oh...

[epine]

Well, we do have a tradition in Canada where our political midges intrude upon the affairs of independent oversight: Lunn defends firing of nuclear watchdog head The man is a pox, duly elected, for the present duration.

Shun Lunn from Vote Splitting for Dummies.

I wouldn't assume the same fate for our privacy commissioner. You need to understand something about national character, which is best expressed in a recent article in the NY Times: Pinker on moral instinct

The notion is that there are five fundamental moral instincts that cut across all human societies: harm, fairness, community (or group loyalty), authority and purity. Where nations differ is relative priority.

Many of the flabbergasting practices in faraway places become more intelligible when you recognize that the same moralizing impulse that Western elites channel toward violations of harm and fairness (our moral obsessions) is channeled elsewhere to violations in the other spheres. Think of the Japanese fear of nonconformity (community), the holy ablutions and dietary restrictions of Hindus and Orthodox Jews (purity), the outrage at insulting the Prophet among Muslims (authority). In the West, we believe that in business and government, fairness should trump community and try to root out nepotism and cronyism. In other parts of the world this is incomprehensible -- what heartless creep would favor a perfect stranger over his own brother? I've long had issues with Pinker's writing style, but he does consistently raise good points (if you don't get hung up on his first introduction of an idea, where he holds back essential refinements out of some misguided notion of rhetorical linearity).

Scratch a Russian, you find a peasant (plus three bottles of Stolichnaya and a Kalashnikov). Scratch a Canadian, you'll find 40 acres of dirt, a dour British deference to civic order, a Mennonite spirit of community and fair play, and the irascibility of Scotsman with the hand of authority up his kilt.

At the end of the day, the American fetish for harm and authority is just a passing chest cold. We just need to expectorate a Gary Lunn or two, and we'll revert right back to our traditional boring selves.

Repost of what you should do - VERY IMPORTANT

[JonMartin]

I originally posted this on Friday to this article on the same subject.

A handful of us met with our MP this very afternoon (Laurie Hawn - Conservative for Edmonton Centre). We talked about our concerns and what happens next for about an hour.

The bill will be introduced sometime in the next month or so. It is now considered, thanks to the efforts of everyone who called and wrote in December, a high profile bill.

A bill goes through 3 readings in the House of Commons. After the third it is passed to the Senate. After the first and second reading the bill may be sent to committee for hearings and modification. Now here is where it gets tricky. After the second reading the committee cannot make major changes to the bill, so if the proposed copyright legislation is really broken (and by all indications it will be) it needs to go to committee after first reading where it can be completely overhauled if need be.

But it is the discretion of the House leaders (each party) whether it goes to committee after the first reading.

So you all need to write (an actual physical letter works best) to the Leader, House Leader, and Industry critic of the opposition parties to tell them this bill must go to committee after the first reading so we have an opportunity for hearings and major revisions. Send copies to Stephen Harper, Jim Prentice (Minister of Industry), Josée Verner (Heritage), Peter Van Loan (Government House Leader), James Rajotte (head of the Industry committee) and your local MP while you are at it.

This might sound like a lot of work, but because of the minority government this is probably the best time for this legislation. Remember, committees are made up proportional to seats in the House, so the Government has to bargain with the opposition there too.