[Announce] Conservative Copyright Bill C-61.

[Russell McOrmond]

   In the off chance that anyone on this announce list had not heard 
that the Conservative government tabled a Copyright bill, accept this as 
my late notice.

   There is a URL of http://KillBillC61.ca which directs you to a page 
documenting Bill C-61 information. http://digital-copyright.ca/billc61

   This bill is quite different than the Liberal Bill C-60 from 2005. 
Where the bulk of the Liberal bill focused on implementing policy 
articulated in the 1996 WIPO treaties, the Conservative Bill C-61 
focuses more on policy articulated in the USA's 1995 National 
Information Infrastructure (NII) task force which became their Digital 
Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in 1998.  The WIPO treaties were based 
on the NII policy, but with the additional input from other countries 
offered more balance between legacy copyright holder interests and the 
rights of citizens (including a majority of creators).


   On "technical measure", the WIPO treaties and the Liberal C-60 tied 
the prohibition against circumventing technical measures to activities 
that infringed copyright.   The NII/DMCA policy, along with the 
Conservative C-61, has a prohibition against circumvention of technical 
measures regardless of the reason why the circumvention is being done, 
and provides a prohibition against "devices" which can unlock content 
and devices (regardless of who owns the content or devices).

   There are many other differences, with this example being one among 
many that demonstrate a very different policy direction proposed by the 
Conservatives and Liberals, with the Conservatives taking a much closer 
approach to the most controversial policy in the United States.

   The so-called "Made in Canada" provisions of the Conservative bill 
are minimal.

   Like the Liberal C-60,  the Conservative C-61 chose a "notice and 
notice" regime for ISP liability. This means that ISPs continue to act 
as communications intermediaries rather than forcing them to take on a 
roll that must be left to the police and courts.  This is different than 
the "notice and take-down" (often called the "claim and censor") policy 
adopted by the USA.

   There are additions that claim to allow time and format shifting, but 
these are extremely narrow and do not come anywhere close to what the 
United States has had within their living Fair Use regime for decades. 
While these provisions can be said to be based on US law, it would be 
more proper to say they were "Made Worse In Canada" given current 
Canadian law is far more tilted towards the interests of copyright 
holders than the law in the United States prior to their 1998 DMCA.

   There is an alleged narrowing of statutory damages from a maximum of 
$20,000 to a fixed $500 in a narrow and complex to understand scenario 
involving activities done for private purposes.  These are scenarios 
which many argue were not infringements under the previous act (private 
use suggested as a modern interpretation of private study), or which 
should not be considered infringements of copyright.

   There are provisions that mirror what a subset of the educational 
community has been asking for, but these provisions are highly 
controversial within the educational sector.  While you need to be 
working within an educational institution to receive the benefits of 
these provisions, many believe that these provisions will cause harm to 
everyone outside the walls of these narrow institutions.

   We don't yet  know if the bill will be sent to committee before or 
after second reading, or what committee will study it.

   If the bill is sent before second reading, then the bill can have 
major changes made to it.  That could be good, but historically this has 
been bad for the balance in copyright from the citizens perspective.  If 
the bill goes to committee after second reading the room for amendments 
becomes smaller, with amendments then focused on the specific policy 
areas already discussed in the bill.

   The government is in recess until September 15.  This summer is the 
time for everyone to reach out and talk with their member of parliament. 
  Let them know what you think Canadian Copyright law should look like, 
and why you disagree with the policy direction articulated in B-61.

Thank you.

Russell McOrmond

-- 
  Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
  Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property
  rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition!
  http://www.digital-copyright.ca/petition/ict/

  "The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware
   manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or
   portable media player from my cold dead hands!"