In the summer of 2009 the Government of Canada held public consultations on copyright and Canadians engaged in those consultations at unprecedented levels. Unfortunately, as I predicted in this article:
it appears that the government of Canada intends to ignore the feedback it received from the citizens of Canada.
You have, at this time, a choice. You can either back the artists who produce the works that the Copyright Act covers, or you can support the distributors of those works. Despite what the distributors claim, they do not represent the artists, in fact their interests are inimical to the interests of the artists. If you choose to support the distributors instead of the artists, you will cause untold damage to Canadian culture.
I argued in my submission that ownership of a copyrighted work should not be salable, with the only legal method of transfer of ownership to be inheritance. If the distributors, such as the record companies, really have the best interest of the artists in mind, they should not hesitate to agree with this. Since they do not have the best interests of the artists in mind, they will not agree.
Also it would be in the best interest of the Canadian people for Digital Rights Management/Technical Protection Measures to be made illegal, as per the arguments made in my blog posting here:
Those who argue for use the Digital Rights Management/Technical Protection Measures show no interest in the damage to our ecology that carbon emissions are causing.
In closing, there is no need for Canada to adopt the WIPO Copyright treaties. Back on December 23rd of 2009 I posted a response to an article written by Doctor Mihaly Ficsor which was posted on Barry Sookman’s website:
In it I asked Doctor Ficsor to explain what advantages adopting the WIPO Copyright Treaties would bring to the citizens of Canada. As of Tuesday May 18, 2010, I still have not received any answer. The obvious conclusion is that there is no reason for Canada to adopt the Treaties, as there are no advantages to the citizens of Canada.
While Doctor Ficsor claims that many countries have adopted the WIPO Copyright Treaties, a reading of the plain language of the Treaties indicates that implementations of the the English speaking countries have all been incorrect. The Treaty language states in Article 11:
Contracting Parties shall provide adequate legal protection and effective legal remedies against the circumvention of effective technological measures that are used by AUTHORS in connection with the exercise of their rights under this Treaty or the Berne Convention and that restrict acts, in respect of their works, which are not authorized by the authors concerned or permitted by law.
Note the word ‘AUTHORS.’ In the United States the Digital Millennium Copyright Act does not retain this measure for Authors alone, as the plain language of the Treaty requires. The language used by the European Union has a similar defect.
All of the above needs to be carefully considered, before any legislation is introduced.
In closing, I am sending this from the website of the Canadian Coalition for Electronic Rights. I am doing this in response to the ridiculous article written by lawyer Richard Owens, which I responded to here:
to make the point that no matter what method a Canadian uses to make his or her opinion known, that the citizen’s opinion must be counted.
Tuesday May 18, 2010
If you wish to use the CCER website to send in your own letter it is here.