If you write to Industry minister Jim Prentice, you receive this formated letter. I took a copy of this letter, forwarded from a friend, and added my own comments, in bold:
----------
The Government of Canada has introduced Bill C-61, An Act to Amend the Copyright Act. The proposed legislation is a made-in-Canada approach that balances the needs of Canadian consumers and copyright owners, promoting culture, innovation and competition in the digital age.
What does Bill C-61 mean to Canadians?
Specifically, it includes measures that would:
" expressly allow you to record TV shows for later viewing; copy legally purchased music onto other devices, such as MP3 players or cell phones; make back-up copies of legally purchased books, newspapers, videocassettes and photographs onto devices you own; and limit the "statutory damages" a court could award for all private use copyright infringements;
Not really. Yes theirs provisions exist in the law, but since we are not allow to circumvent any digital lock, these provision are basically useless: All the distributors would have to do is put the equivalent of the broadcast flag on any content, and those provisions become illegal.
" implement new rights and protections for copyright holders, tailored to the Internet, to encourage participation in the online economy, as well as stronger legal remedies to address Internet piracy;
Yes. But since digital lock circumvention is illegal with this law, this law give even more rights to distributor than to copyright holders. Any restriction put into place by the digital lock become law.
Also, these provisions are not "remedies" to internet "piracy" (copyright infringement, not piracy), these provisions are merely punishments: It does nothing to stop it because it's easy to do and hard to get caught. The DCMA didn't help in the USA and this legislation will probably have the same impact: nil.
Also, these provisions are not "remedies" to internet "piracy" (copyright infringement, not piracy), these provisions are merely punishments: It does nothing to stop it because it's easy to do and hard to get caught. The DCMA didn't help in the USA and this legislation will probably have the same impact: nil.
" clarify the roles and responsibilities of Internet Service Providers related to the copyright content flowing over their network facilities; and
Nothing to say here: I am not a service provider so my expertise is limited in this topic.
" provide photographers with the same rights as other creators.
Again nothing to say here. Again it is not my area of expertise and I won't say anything that might turn out wrong.
What Bill C-61 does not do:
" it would not empower border agents to seize your iPod or laptop at border crossings, contrary to recent public speculation
Irrelevant. This has nothing to do with this bill and everything to do with ACTA, If I remember correctly. But thanks for mentioning.
What this Bill is not:" it is not a mirror image of U.S. copyright laws. Our Bill is made-in-Canada with different exceptions for educators, consumers and others and brings us into line with more than 60 countries including Japan, France, Germany and Australia
It is not a mirror image of US legislation, it's worst. It does not take into account various form of technology which would make a large proportion of the population copyright infringer.
Bill C-61 was introduced in the Commons on June 12, 2008 by Industry Minister Jim Prentice and Heritage Minister Josée Verner.
For more information, please visit the Copyright Reform Process website at www.ic.gc.ca/epic/site/crp
Thank you for sharing your views on this important matter.
The Honourable Jim Prentice, P.C., Q.C., M.P.
Minister of Industry
The Honourable Josée Verner, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women
and Official Languages and Minister for
La Francophonie
--------
The big problem I have with this bill is that it's too broad and that is make illegal any kind of circumvention of digital locks. This means that any type of digital lock will make stuff that was "not the intended use" illegal, instead of simply warranty breaking... The broadcast flag is the perfect exemple because it is simple to implement, yet it would very real legal consequences. It is simply a bit. a 1 or 0. It would be the equivalent of a simple letter in an entire book. A current device will simply disregard it thinking it is noise in the signal, but a broadcast flag enabled device will prevent you from recording it. IF you record such a show, you would be essentially breaking the law... Thus older devices are sort of illegal.
Of course, I am not a lawyer. But I do get the feeling that this Bill outlaws very current and useful technologies... Like backup software, or RAID 1, or even backup services like Amazon S3. Because you are allowed one copy of copyrighted material per device you own, backup software and RAID would make multiple copy of each files, for safe keeping... In the same way that Amazon S3 is a service, not a "device I own"...
Anyway, read the entire thing yourself at: http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=3570473&Language=e&Mode=1
If you are as concerned as I am with this, check Micheal Geist's website:
Michael Geist - 30 things you can do
Blogged with the Flock Browser
No comments:
Post a Comment