Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Justification For Canadian Copyright Reform Revealed

Posted by Unknown on from the sanity-is-forbidden dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Michael Geist has used the Canadian freedom of information act to obtain a secret ministerial document on Canadian copyright reform that provides the government position on virtually every controversial issue from last year's Bill C-32. The government has no good explanation for its DMCA approach and calls provisions requiring the destruction of course materials part of an 'essential balance.' On the U.S. piracy watch list, it says 'Canada does not recognize the validity of the Special 301 process and considers it to be flawed. The Report does not employ a clear methodology in its country ranking, as it relies on industry allegations rather than empirical evidence and analysis.'"

4 of 96 comments (clear)

  1. Wow, what a unforseeable shocker by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Canada does not recognize the validity of the Special 301 process and considers it to be flawed. The Report does not employ a clear methodology in its country ranking, as it relies on industry allegations rather than empirical evidence and analysis

    They're really surprised that a U.S. government report is based on corporate whoring rather than empirical evidence and analysis? Wow, Canadians really ARE naive.

    As to the question of why Canada is adopting anti-circumvention measures (and other provisions) similar to the DMCA, well that's an easy one. They're signatories of the 1996 WIPO Copyright Treaty. You remember that one, don't you? That's the treaty that a very tiny handful of people (including myself) were decrying fifteen years ago while everyone else was completely fucking ignoring it and its implications. Yeah, that's the same treaty that the vast majority of you probably still don't even know exists (much less that your country quietly signed it right under the press and public's radar). Not that I'm bitter or anything.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Wow, what a unforseeable shocker by brunes69 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      RTFA.

      Bill C-32 goes far beyond what is needed by the WIPO treaty. In fact, C-32 does not even have some exemptions that the DMCA has in it.

    2. Re:Wow, what a unforseeable shocker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "They're really surprised that a U.S. government report is based on corporate whoring rather than empirical evidence and analysis? Wow, Canadians really ARE naive."

      We aren't naive. We are too polite to tell the Americans to PFO.

      Where we were naive was signing the WIPO treaty way back in 1996 without public consultation, and before most people had any idea that copyright issues would become so important to the general public. Huge revisions to copyright for the "digital age" before we really understood what "digital age" meant. Dumb. As people have become more familiar with it, we've been naive enough to think that our government has been negotiating copyright law revisions in good faith, and with an honest attempt at balance between creator and user rights. It's become more and more obvious that isn't the case. They're seriously going to introduce Bill C-32 without modification? Time to write my new MP.

      The single most important part of C-32 that should change is the ridiculous idea that circumventing "digital locks" should be illegal even if the action being taken is otherwise legal. That's crazy. Either we have the rights described in copyright law and can legally exercise them, or we don't actually have them. The "anti-circumvention" rules should not trump the other parts of the act, otherwise the whole thing is a farce. Oh, yay, we have new rights for format shifting, but if someone rot13'd the data to encrypt it we would be breaking the new law anyway? They've been told over and over how silly it is (the previous minister was even asked about the inconsistency in a news conference and stuttered his way through an irrelevant answer), but the provision is still there. Idiots.

  2. Yet Cdn Government offcial asked to be 301 list. by guidryp · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1048993--leaks-show-u-s-swayed-canada-on-copyright-bill?bn=1

    A U.S. Embassy cable written in April 2009 describes a meeting between
    Zoe Addington, director of policy for then industry minister Clement,
    and U.S. officials.

    “In contrast to the messages from other Canadian officials, she said
    that if Canada is elevated to the Special 301 Priority Watch List
    (PWL), it would not hamper — and might even help — the (government of
    Canada's) ability to enact copyright legislation,” the cable says.

    Days later, Canada was elevated on the piracy watch list.