Thanks for replying to my email. You seem to have missed the points I was trying to make, so I’m going to lay them out carefully. This will be a long email.
Bill C-11 is not WIPO compliant. Of course this isn’t surprising, since none of the supposedly WIPO compliant legislation like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that the United States adopted is WIPO compliant either.
Both C-11 and the DMCA (as well as C-32) allow technologies like BluRay which are non-compliant with Article 11, Obligations concerning Technical Protection Measures of the WIPO Internet Treaties. The exact wording is:
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.
This means if an author changes their mind about the use of a TPM, and decides it should no longer be used, that the manufacturer of the media must be able to REMOVE THE TPM FROM EXISTING COPIES OF THE WORK. I suggest that you ask the Blu Ray Disc Association or the DVD Forum, or game system manufacturers such as Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, and Apple if their current systems are compliant with Article 11.
As a Canadian Publisher of Music, Literature, and Video works, I have studied this area carefully. Bill C-11 does nothing for me or my artists. It does nothing for anyone as far as I can tell. The American equivalent, the DMCA has had no positive effect on anything. It has however added significant costs to the publishers, and significant costs to the Internet Service Providers.
The next time you are in the riding, I would be happy to meet with you, and discuss what would be useful to Canadian publishers and artists.
As to the consultation, it would have been useful if the legislation had followed the suggestions of the consultation. Since it didn’t, I think we can ignore it.
I’m going to suggest that you read the following. Some of it is mine, some of it is from other writers. It covers a large chunk of the background of how we ended up with C-11, and why it is flawed:
Three articles about the lack of rigor used in investigating Copyright:
- The Conference Board of Canada – Insights You Can’t Count On
- Another post on The Conference Board
- Why the “Copycats?” Report has a Copycat Problem
Barry Sookman, a lobbyist for Music Canada (which used to be the Canadian Recording Industry Association) invited Doctor Mihaly Ficsor to write a post about why Canada should adopt the WIPO Internet Copyright Treaties. I wrote several articles about this. Links to the original articles are included in my articles of course.
- An invitation to Doctor Ficsor to explain the value to the citizens of Canada in ratifying the WIPO Internet Treaties
- Dr. Ficsor is wrong about many things – why should we believe him?
- Doctor Ficsor is wrong again
Just after that I caught Barry Sookman in some inaccuracies, and challenged him on it. He wasn’t too happy with me:
- Barry the Inaccurate
- Barry Sookman – I stand by my post
- Sookman found liable for worldwide article inaccuracies
- DoubleSpeak from Sookman
- John Doyle, do you know what you are talking about?
- Sookman Deflates Pending Lists Claim to Vilify Artists
- Graduated Response and Copyright – a Practical Solution for Copyright Infringement
An article I wrote after the new U.S. Ambassador was appointed, and interviewed by MacLean’s magazine. Just after this the U.S. Embassy started to follow me on Twitter.
James Gannon is a lawyer who works with Barry Sookman. James often writes about copyright in his personal blog. He claims these are his personal opinions. The only problem is that they match his employer’s opinion 100% of the time. I’ll admit that my opinions match my company’s opinions 100% of the time, but that is because I am my company… James can’t make that claim.
- James Gannon Presentation – Copyright Viewed By A Lawyer – Correct Legally But Wrong – Part 1
- James Gannon Presentation – Copyright Viewed By A Lawyer – Correct Legally But Wrong – Part 2
- James Gannon Presentation – Copyright Viewed By A Lawyer – Correct Legally But Wrong – Part 3
Three articles about two cases which involved misuse of the Police by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry.
- Oink.CD – Oink’s Pink Palace Part One
- Oink.CD – Oink’s Pink Palace Part Two
- IFPI and BPI goons get brought up short
A series of articles calling on the involved individuals to admit their connections publicly when speaking on the copyright issue. If you check with Tony Clement or the staff at the Industry Ministry, they probably still have copies of these emails.
- A Call For Disclosure – Who Do The Professionals Represent And Why Are They Hiding The Connection?
- This Ain’t No Popularity Contest – It’s Politics
- The Cover Letter I Used For My Request For Disclosure – Copies Were Sent To The Government
- The Follow Up Letter I Used For ‘This Ain’t No Popularity Contest – It’s Politics’, Copies Were Sent To The Government
- Barry Sookman Works For The Canadian Recording Industry Association
- Lies Of Omission – James Gannon Doesn’t Tell You All The Details
- James Gannon Lies By Omission Yet Again – Star Article Doesn’t Disclose His CRIA Connections
- James Gannon – Is He Responding To His Master’s Voice?
Articles about the Copyright Consultation:
- What Did The Three Amigos Tender To The Canadian Copyright Consultation?
- Foreign Submissions To The Canadian Copyright Consultation – Richard Owens Is Right, We Should Weed Them Out
- Canadian Copyright Consultation Opposed By A Little Known Canadian Lawyer Richard Owens
- Canadian Politics, Copyright Law, Lawyers, WIPO, Etc.
- Canadian Copyright Reform Anno Domini 2010
Articles about Technical Protection Measures:
- Why Is Michael Geist In Favour Of Digital Rights Management/Technical Protection Measures?
- Digital Right Management and/or Technical Protection Measures Cause Climate Change
- Technical Protection Measures – When They Work And When They Are A Disaster
- The TPM Provisions in Bill C-32 Are Not In Compliance With The WIPO Internet Treaties
- Is There Some Reason That Barry Sookman Refuses To Quote The WIPO Treaty?
General Copyright Articles:
- Copyright is a Complex Issue
- The Beautiful And Talented Janis Ian – The Internet Debacle:An Alternative View
- The Beautiful And Talented Janis Ian – Fallout: A Follow Up To The Internet Debacle
- Evidence Based Legislation – Why The CRIA Doesn’t Want To Consider It
- An Explanation Of My Views On Copyright Part One
- An Explanation Of My Views On Copyright Part Two
- An Explanation Of My Views On Copyright Part Three
- An Explanation Of My Views On Copyright Part Four – The Sky Is Falling
- Response to Janis Nixon re the Hamilton Spectator interview
- Canada: online piracy a problem hurting artists, creators and the economy?
- Copyright Wars – Starving The Enemy
Bill C-32 (and Bill C-11)
- James Moore Has Just Made Himself A Big Target
- Canadian Copyright Reform Anno Domini 2010
- What Are The Fiduciary Duties Of Heritage Minister James Moore?
- Copyright News Update – Monday May 31st, 2010 – Links And Comments
- Bill C-32 – The New Canadian Copyright Act
- The Real ‘Copyright Radical Extremist’ – Hello James Moore, This Is Your Life
- MP James Moore Has Blocked Me From Following Him On Twitter – I Wonder Why?
- Canadian Content War Games
- Capitalism Under Attack – Bill C-32 And The Digital Millennium Copyright Act
There is about 100,000 words in those articles. Tony Clement, who used to be Industry Minister has copies of these. You might want to sit down and discuss this with him.
I’m posting a copy of this on my blog. I draw a lot of people who are interested in the Canadian Copyright situation.
Wednesday November 9, 2011