Canadian Copyright Reform Takes Effect

An anonymous reader writes "This morning, the majority of Bill C-11, Canada's copyright reform bill, took effect, marking the most significant changes to Canadian copyright law in decades. Michael Geist summarizes the changes, which include expanded fair dealing, new protection for creators of user generated content, consumer exceptions such as time shifting, format shifting, and backup copies, and a cap on liability for non-commercial infringement."

Comments

Over all, this was good.

[Lieutenant_Dan]

I had actually e-mailed my MP directly (a Liberal) and the Minister of Industry Affairs (a Conservative), making it pretty clear about how consumer's rights must be protected.

Looks like the levy on media is there; I guess music downloading will continue being legal in Canada. I'm fine with that.

The digital locks piece is what bothers me, and it's good that a process exists to have the governement re-visit this. So on top of my list will be to copy DVDs so that I can use it my devices. Since format-shifting is permitted then this should be fine on principle.

Michael Geist himself should be commended because he was a solid (constructive) critic and I remember seeing him on CSPAN doing an awesome job explaining the issues to the committee members. He played a BIG part in my opinion to get this bill the way it is.

Re:Over all, this was good.

[Bradmont]

I am so thankful for Michael Geist's work in our country. He's like a less whiny, more effective version of Cory Doctorow.

Re:Over all, this was good.

[Em Adespoton]

You clearly do not understand the bill.

You CANNOT copy DVDs, despite paying to be able to on blank media. They are protected by a digital lock and digital locks trump *every* other right you have. You CANNOT format shift when a digital lock is applied. Wanna hold your breath on waiting for digital locks to be applied preventing you from doing that? You can. I guarantee you will not suffocate.

While true, and worrying, exemptions can be created, and unlike the US, things like that actually happen in Canada. I expect the exemption list to get pretty big over time. Secondly, actual damages for breaking a digital lock for personal use are restricted to actual damages, not punitive damages. Good luck proving (in Canadian court) that some megacorp is damaged by me breaking a digital lock to watch my DVD on my iPad. They may try to push the "We provide an iPad version and lost that sale" argument, at which point I have the choice of paying them $14.95 or replying that if I had known I could not do this when I purchased the DVD in the first place, I would not have bought ANY copy, so they actually come out ahead. Unlike the US, this is actually considered a reasonable argument in (some) Canadian courts. When the money at stake is less than $15, good luck getting someone to actually pursue a case.

Now, if someone is provably breaking DRM on a significant amount of digital media (cracked versions of expensive software that can be proved to be cracked and not received DRM-free), the digital locks issue could begin to be a problem.

The way it's set up though, the DRM statute is really only an issue for businesses or people engaging in black market profiteering. This in itself could be a serious issue for small businesses who deal with format-shifting digital content, but everyone else is pretty safe. Of course, any modifications to the bill as it stands now could have a number of unforeseen negative consequences.

Re:A wolf in sheep's clothing

[Anonymous Coward]

Canadians have even been counselled to break the law by the government. In particular Conservative MP Lee Richardson said:

If a digital lock is broken for personal use, it is not realistic that the creator would choose to file a law suit against the consumer, due to legal fees and time involved.

See http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6089/125/ for the full write-up about it.

So the situation in Canada now is that the government passes laws Canadians don't want/like but not to worry, just ignore them.

Re:Some good, but adds restrictive digital lock ru

[Beardo the Bearded]

Under Canadian law, it is not an infringement to possess digital locks and liability is limited to actual damages in non-commercial cases.

But this is the important part. If you're ripping something for personal purposes, the most they can possibly sue you for is what they can prove they lost. This means that you aren't going to get ten-thousand dollar fines for ripping your BR of Cars so the kids' fingerprints don't get all over the disc. My lawyer has told me to "just eat" a fairly easy $2500 wrong. That means unless you're a commercial offender (i.e. selling for profit) you're going to be just fine.

And even if you own handbrake + a lot of other ripping tools, that in itself is not a crime and it couldn't be used for getting a warrant.

Re:NOW I'm moving to Canada

[m.ducharme]

From the article:

"At the moment, Canada is arguably more restrictive than even the U.S., though the digital lock rules do not carry significant penalties for individuals. Under Canadian law, it is not an infringement to possess tools or software that can be used to circumvent digital locks and liability is limited to actual damages in non-commercial cases."

The liability limitation will likely take some of the sting out of the lock provision, as will the $5000 cap on damages for non-commercial infringement. Looks like a bit of a legislative hack, but I suspect that if you're ripping your dvds to stream them around your house you won't have much to worry about (no damages to speak of), and even if you're torrenting your rip, the damages would be pretty low (less than $5000), which is not going to make a big inviting target for the CRIA to attack. Of course, YMMV, I am not your lawyer, etc etc.