[Announce] Over 1800 Canadians rejected changes to copyright,
even before bill was introduced.
Russell McOrmond
russell at flora.ca
Wed Jun 22 12:55:16 EDT 2005
http://www.digital-copyright.ca/petition/press20050622.shtml
Over 1800 Canadians rejected changes to copyright, even before bill was
introduced.
OTTAWA, June 22 - On Monday, June 20 Parliament introduced Bill C-60,
"An Act to amend the Copyright Act", which proposes many radical
changes to copyright law. Before the introduction of this bill,
approximately 1800 Canadians had already signed the Petition for
Users' Rights. This petition calls on Parliament to reject the
majority of what was later included in Bill C-60. Some signatures have
been introduced in Parliament by NDP MP Peter Julian (Burnaby--New
Westminster, BC) and Liberal MP David McGuinty (Ottawa-South,
Ontario).
Those signing the petition came from all walks of life including
software authors and users, engineers, teachers, librarians, other
literary and music authors, musicians, performers and their fans. In
the petition, they ask Parliament to protect their creative, cultural
and communications rights; to preserve the ability to create new
business models using new communications technology; and to oppose
legislation giving new, special rights to certain media, content and
"software manufacturing" businesses solely to preserve their previous
ways of doing business.
"This legislation lets down individual Canadians by placing the
interests of the media industry ahead of the interests of individual
citizens", wrote Jem Berkes, an Electrical and Computer Engineer, in a
letter to his member of parliament. "I am concerned about rights and
freedoms of citizens in the modern age, and have closely followed the
background to this legislation from its origins in US lobbies through
to the WIPO Treaty at the United Nations. As a politically involved
citizen and voter, I can tell you that I would hesitate to support any
political party that passes this legislation."
Where the bill calls for legal protection for technological measures
that claim to protect copyright, the petition calls on Parliament "to
recognize the right of citizens to personally control their own
communication devices." Legally-enforced technological protection
measures could mean, for instance, that even music on legally
purchased CDs could not be listened to on a user's MP3 player, that
backup copies could not be made of failing DVDs, and that it would
effectively be illegal for a user to make a `mix tape' even for their
own use of their favorite songs or movie scenes.
"Protection for technological measures has no place in copyright law",
stated software author, and Internet/security consultant Russell
McOrmond. "What the old media companies are asking for is legal
protection for technological measures used to circumvent our privacy,
property and competition laws. The bill does not recognize the fact
that technological measures are used to control access, similar to
digital versions of locks on a door. Copyright is a set of legal
limits to what people who already have access can do, similar to rules
for what people already in your home are allowed to do."
The indirect ways in which technological measures are abused to stop
copying do so by limiting consumer choice and free markets through
granting legal protection to the ways that copyright holders will
dictate the brand of tools audiences must use to access works. The
chosen brands of tools would be those where control over the
technology has been revoked from the owner.
Where the bill did not provide limits to protection of technological
measures to protect users rights, the petition called on parliament
"to ensure in particular that any changes at least preserve all
existing users' rights"
Where the bill increased the term of copyright for many types of
copyright holders, including creating entirely new rights, the
petition called on parliament "not to extend the term of copyright"
which was already too long for many types of works. Canada follows the
largest international standard of life of the author plus 50 years,
while works such as software are long-obsolete in less than 20 years.
All creativity builds on the past, and any extension of the term of
copyright drastically harms culture and creativity by keeping past
works out of the public domain where they are available to built upon.
Where the bill added further limitations to private copying, the
petition called on parliament to preserve "the right to make private
copies of audio recordings."
Where the bill clearly protects the interests of incumbent media,
content and "software manufacturing" industry association members,
ignoring the interests of other participants in past consultations,
the petition called up on parliament "to ensure generally that users
are recognized as interested parties". In the most recent
consultations that lead towards an Interim report on Copyright
introduced by the Heritage Committee in parliament, the groups they
consulted with were almost exclusively those of the incumbent
interests and institutional user intermediaries such as libraries and
educational institutions.
In order for Canada to move into the new millennium parliament must
reject this bill, and start again recognizing that protecting Canadian
creativity involves protecting the interests of Canadian creators and
their audiences, not protecting the intermediaries from the old media
and old economy from any modernizing change.
The petition, which also was issued and signed in French, aimed to
draw the following facts to the attention of Parliament:
* the Copyright Act is properly recognized as being a careful
balance between the rights of creators and the rights of the
public (including viewers, readers and listeners);
* the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously affirmed this view in CCH
Canadian Ltd v Law Society of Upper Canada;
* digital technologies have recently given copyright holders the
ability to upset the balance in the Copyright Act by preventing
Canadians from accessing works for purposes that have been legally
granted to them;
* the creation of original works is nourished by wide accessibility
of earlier works, including a vibrant public domain;
* dissemination of cultural ideas requires that they be preserved in
a form that is accessible to future generations; and
* historically consultations regarding changes to the Copyright Act
have mostly taken place with creators, intermediaries and only
some special users (such as educators and librarians)
-- 30 --
More information about the Petition for Users' Rights can be found at
http://digital-copyright.ca/petition/
Contacts:
Russell McOrmond
FLORA Community Consulting, http://flora.ca/
Co-founder of Getting Open Source Logic INto Governments,
http://goslingcommunity.org
Host for Digital Copyright Canada forum, http://digital-copyright.ca
305 Southcrest Private,
Ottawa, ON
K1V 2B7
Phone: (613) 733-5836
Jem Berkes
SysDesign , http://www.sysdesign.ca/
Phone: (416) 837-8808
--
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
http://www.digital-copyright.ca/blog/2 (My BLOG)
Sign the Petition Users' Rights! http://digital-copyright.ca/petition/
To protect Internet age creativity we must reform WIPO, not copyright!
More information about the Announce
mailing list