Canadian DOJ Warned About Unconstitutionality of Copyright Digital Lock Rules

An anonymous reader writes "The Canadian House of Commons may have passed the Canadian DMCA, but the constitutional concerns with the copyright bill and its digital lock rules will likely linger for years. Michael Geist has obtained internal government documents that indicate that the Department of Justice issued a legal opinion warning about the potential for constitutional violations. The DOJ legal opinion warned of the need to link circumvention with copyright infringement and of the particular danger of not providing the blind with an exception. The Canadian law misses the mark on both counts with no link to infringement and an exception that blind groups say is 'nullified' by strict conditions."

Comments

Dear Canada:

[KingSkippus]

Dear Canada: (an open letter)

As an American citizen, I know how bullying our government and corporations can be. Believe me, I am not any more happy about it than you are, and as a citizen with the power to vote, I really am diligently trying to change it from inside.

That having been said, if you want to seriously stop being thought of as the 51st state (but a bit colder), there's going to have to come a time when you simply look the U.S. Department of Justice, the RIAA, and any other organization or company trying to steamroll you into making you more like us in the eye and say, "No." It's okay, really! Those of us who hate certain aspects of our government would actually cheer you on, and it might actually effect some change here when our government and citizens realize how ridiculous some of these demands are.

Wishing you all the best,
King Skippus

Re:Dear Canada:

[davecb]

To get into the trade "club", we have to give things up that we consider inalienable. Rock, meet hard place.

As the government of the day is more concerned with trade and less with issues of care/harm, they chose the rock.

A wise government would chose neither, but instead move the subject sideways to a place where both trade and rights are honoured. For example, they could honour DRM only if the company held a Canadian copyright, and agreed to make excerpts available, for a nominal fee, whenever the use was legal in Canada.

For an example of a seriously wise move, have look at Politicians need courage to dismantle supply management by Martha Hall Findlay

--dave
ps: Martha is my former MP

Re:Dear Canada:

[Beardo the Bearded]

Skippus, the current government we have up here was elected by fraudulent means.

They're actively blocking the investigation into voter oppression with the line "They should have filed the complaint before they found out about the fraud!" The head investigator into the biggest case of voter oppression had his budget cut by seven million dollars and was forced into early retirement last week. A recent court decision found that fraudulent votes for a CPC candidate were greater than the difference, forcing a by-election.

Several senior members of the government are under investigation for election fraud, including the head of the Ethics Committee.

The party has plead guilty to breaking election law in the last three elections, and responded by appointing those that did the fraud into Senate positions. (Our senate is appointed for life!)

The 80% of us that did NOT vote for the current bag of asshats are waiting patiently for the investigations to conclude. Stewie's lucky it's not the US or he'd be leaving Parliament Hill in a custom-fitted pine suit.

I am mad enough to riot and drag people bodily from the Hill.

Re:Dear Canada:

[steelfood]

Unfortunately, what you're not seeing is that there's a huge "content" industry in Canada. American production companies like to go to Canada to make their films. Said production companies would threaten to leave if they didn't get their way.

What the Canadian government doesn't see is that these companies don't really have anywhere else to go.

Re:Ministry of Justice

[Livius]

Wrong. Department of Justice is the correct legal name (and they should know!). (Though it is Ministère de la Justice in French.) The head of the department is the Minister of Justice.

Canada Got it Backwards

[Bob9113]

the Department of Justice issued a legal opinion warning about the potential for constitutional violations.

Quick pro-tip, Canada: You're supposed to stuff your DoJ with ex-RIAA lawyers, then you won't have that problem.

Re:Constitution?

[dadragon]

Canada has its own constitution.

Re:I confess! And I'd like to turn myself in...

[canajin56]

Nothing, because the bill doesn't make it a criminal case, it grants civil remedies to the harmed party. So unless the police owned the copyright they couldn't take action. And if they did, they would sue you, not arrest you.

Re:I confess! And I'd like to turn myself in...

[mark-t]

Ah... you do not understand law in Canada.

First of all, copyright infringement actually is a criminal offense in Canada.

In matters of criminal cases in Canada, the crown (police) can press charges against an individual even if the injured party does not express any interest.

That said, however, the police in Canada have long since stated that they will not pursue cases of "private copyright infringement".

Canadian DMCA?

[6Yankee]

Would that be the DMC, eh?