The government reintroduced amendments to the Copyright Act last September after its previous attempt at updating Canada’s intellectual property regime died on the order paper when the May 2 federal election was called.
Bill C-11, the Copyright Modernization Act, which is still at second reading in the House, seeks to update Canadian copyright laws to protect creators from copyright infringement in the digital economy. Minister Paradis (Mégantic-L’Érable, Que.) emphasized that Canadian copyright law had not kept pace with the “breakneck speed” of technological change over the past decade. Canada’s Copyright Act has not seen significant amendments since 1997.
Canada signed the World Intellectual Property Organization’s internet treaties in 1997, but successive governments have failed to ratify the agreement in the subsequent 15 years. The agreement commits members to provide legal measures for copyright holders to protect their works from infringement that uses internet and digital technologies.
In a recent email interview with The Hill Times, Mr. Paradis said that the legislation would foster innovation and create jobs, while striking a balance between the rights of producers and consumers.
“The bill represents a key pillar in the government’s continued support of the digital economy. It will provide a framework that is both forward-looking and flexible, and which gives creators and users the confidence they require to fully engage in the global digital economy,” Mr. Paradis said.
The bill’s sweeping changes have been praised for enhancing consumer rights through fair dealing and user-generated content provisions. Bill C-11 allows for copyrighted materials to be used for purposes of education, parody and satire. The legislation also gives consumers the freedom to sample media for artistic purposes, provided their work is non-commercial.
Bill C-11 also clarifies laws related to reproducing media, allowing consumers to record, duplicate, and change the format of content for personal use.
But while the legislation appears to greatly enhance consumers’ freedom to do what they want with the media they purchase, these freedoms are moot if the content is protected by a digital lock—an encryption typically found on software and movies that is meant to prevent copyright infringement and piracy. Section 38.1 of the bill allows copyright holders to sue consumers for between $100 and $5,000 for hacking digital locks for non-commercial purposes.
With the exception of music, the majority of commercial digital content, including movies, e-books and software is protected by digital locks. The bill’s consumer freedoms and digital lock protections create a catch-22. Consumers can make as many personal copies as they like, unless the content is digitally locked.
As Mr. Paradis points out, however, the legislation includes certain exceptions that allow users to break digital locks for non-commercial reasons, particularly when it comes to security issues and software research and development. But on the issue of consumers doing what they want with the content they purchase, he was less compromising.
“The bill protects the use of digital locks, however, copyright owners have the option of whether to use a digital lock, and consumers have the choice of whether to buy the product,” said Mr. Paradis, who defended the protections as integral to the business models of software producers and movie distributors.
But the legislation’s rigid digital lock provisions have led to a “two-tiered set of rights,” said NDP MP Charlie Angus (Timmins-James Bay, Ont.), his party’s copyright and digital issues critic, who criticized the bill’s prioritization of copyright holders over consumers in his op-ed for this week’s Hill Times media and copyright policy briefing. “Don’t like it, the Conservatives say? Then be treated as a criminal or don’t buy the product,” Mr. Angus writes of the provisions.
University of Ottawa law professor Michael Geist, who holds the Canadian research chair in internet and e-commerce law, told The Hill Times that Bill C-11’s balanced approach to producer and consumer rights is undermined by the digital lock provisions.
“Once you get past the digital locks and look at the legislation, I think there’s a whole lot in there that’s good for consumers,” Prof. Geist observed. “Whether we’re talking about time-shifting, format-shifting, back-up copies, or user-generated content provisions, there is a lot in this legislation that is more consumer-focused, and I think that represents a significant change from where the government was at several years ago.”
However, Prof. Geist added that many of the legislation’s provision that enhance consumer rights are “undermined by one of the strictest digital lock provisions in the world.”
Even the usually conservative National Post has been critical of the legislation’s strict treatment of hacking digital locks for personal use, with columnist Jesse Kline lambasting the provisions as an “egregious violation of private property rights.”
Liberal MP Geoff Regan (Halifax West, N.S.) said that Bill C-11’s legal protection of digital locks is particularly favourable to the U.S. media industry at the cost of Canadian consumer freedoms.
“It seems to us that they’ve drafted parts of their plan to satisfy U.S. industry, and the digital locks appear to be driven completely by U.S. interests,” said Mr. Regan, who serves as his party’s industry and consumer affairs critic. “They’re saying that they’re modernizing the legislation, but not when it comes to [digital locks].”
Bill C-11 is expected to pass second reading soon after the winter session begins on Jan. 30, at which point it will be sent for review by a legislative committee chaired by NDP MP Glenn Thibeault (Sudbury, Ont.).
The committee’s membership includes Mr. Angus, and fellow MPs Tyrone Benskin (Jeanne-Le Ber, Que.), Andrew Cash (Davenport, Ont.), Pierre Nantel (Longueuil-Pierre-Boucher, Que.); Conservative MPs Scott Armstrong (Cumberland-Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley, N.S.), Peter Braid (Kitchener-Waterloo, Ont.), Paul Calandra (Oak Ridges-Markham, Ont.), Dean Del Mastro (Peterborough, Ont.), Mike Lake (Edmonton-Mill Woods-Beaumont, Alta.), Phil McColeman (Brant, Ont.), Rob Moore (Fundy Royal, N.B.); and Mr. Regan.
Despite the criticism of Bill C-11’s digital lock provisions, it’s unlikely that the government will ease restrictions on consumers breaking the locks for personal use. Bill C-11 is almost identical to last Parliament’s Bill-32, and more than 140 witnesses testified throughout that legislation’s committee review.
Mr. Paradis said that the government is open to “technical amendments” to the legislation, provided they “protect right owners and promote creativity, innovation and legitimate business models for the benefit of the consumers.”
Original Article
Source: Hill Times
No comments:
Post a Comment