[d at DCC] Question to local MP Randy Kamp and other candidates in Maple Ridge, BC
russell at flora.ca
Sat Sep 27 17:52:29 EDT 2008
Richard Pitt wrote:
> Here's my question - drawing on the comments to include background, keep
> to a single point, and keep it (relatively) short. (I've broken it up to
> emphasize how it is to be read as these will be read to the candidates)
I'm going to offer a different perspective than Joe who suggested
extended to other technology law issues, but to instead narrow the
question. I know I'm a bad person to suggest using less words *smile*,
but you probably want to focus the question in order to get the type of
answer you would like to hear.
Is the question about a living Fair Use regime in Canada?
Is the question about the USA DMCA, and whether Canada wants to adopt
similar legislation (Note: C-61 was worse than the DMCA given the DMCA
specifically said it did not erode fair use which C-61 specifically had
a TM exception to the insignificant additions to fair dealings)
Is the question about the difference between signing and ratifying a
treaty? It could even be the difference between debating a treaty
before or after passing enabling legislation, given a debate after
passing legislation is relatively useless.
Is the question about statutory damages?
Is the question about anti-circumvention?
Is the question a generic one about the candidates views on Copyright?
If I was a candidate asked this question, and only given a short time
to answer (as happens in these debates), I would take it as a generic
question about the needed balance in Copyright. In my case I would
obviously include opposition to anti-circumvention and support of a
living Fair Use, but I'm someone who lives-and-breaths this stuff which
is very different than most candidates.
> "In light of Heritage Canada's proposals (Bills C60 and C61 in the
> previous two parliamentary sessions respectively)
Bill C-60 was tabled by the then Liberal Heritage Minister, and Bill
C-61 was tabled by the current Industry Minister. There are creators
who suggest that Bill C-61 is as focused on technical measures as it is
because it was lead by Industry rather than Heritage. I may not agree,
but don't be surprised by that view.
I'd just say "Conservative Bill C-61 in the previous parliament, and
Liberal Bill C-60 in the parliament previous to that"
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!
"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!"
More information about the Discuss