News

The Canadian DMCA: A Betrayal

Having had a few more hours to think about Industry Minister Jim Prentice's Canadian DMCA, I am left with one dominant feeling – betrayal.  I have already highlighted the key provisions and coverage (and note that it will take some time to fully assess the implications of this bill) but it is immediately apparent that the concerns of thousands of Canadians – now over 45,000 on the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group alone – have been realized.  If enacted, the Canadian DMCA would strongly encourage the use of technological locks and lawsuits. While Prentice has given a handful of new rights to Canadian consumers, each is subject to many limitations and undermined by the digital locks provisions that may effectively render the new rights meaningless. 

So why is it a betrayal?
Because in a country whose Supreme Court of Canada has emphasized the importance of balance between creators rights and user rights, the Canadian DMCA eviscerates user rights in the digital environment by virtually eliminating fair dealing.  Under this bill, the right to copy for the purposes of research, private study, criticism, and news reporting virtually disappears if the underlying content is digitally locked.

Because in a country that rightly promotes the importance of education, the Canadian DMCA erects new barriers for teachers, students, and schools at every level who now face the prospect of infringement claims if they want to teach using digital media.

Because in a country that prioritizes privacy, the Canadian DMCA will render it virtually impossible to protect against the invasion of privacy by digital media companies.  The bill includes an exemption for those that circumvent digital locks to protect their privacy, yet renders the tools needed to circumvent illegal.  In other words, the bill gives Canadians the right to protect their privacy but prohibits the tools needed to do so.

Because in a country that values consumer rights, the Canadian DMCA means that consumers no longer control their own personal property.  That CD or DVD or e-book or cellphone you just bought?  The bill says you now have the right to engage in "private use copying" but not if it contains digital locks.

Because the Conservative Party of Canada promised to Stand Up for Canada, yet the Canadian DMCA is quite clearly U.S.-inspired legislation, the result of intense pressure from U.S. officials and lobby groups.

Because the government pledged to table treaties for House of Commons debate before introducing implementing legislation and failed to do so.  Claims that this legislation does not ratify the treaties violates the spirit of that commitment.

Because ratification of the World Intellectual Property Organization's Internet Treaties can be accomplished in a far more balanced manner.

Because countries such as New Zealand and Israel have demonstrated that there is no need to blindly follow U.S. demands on the copyright file.

Because the interests of individual Canadians – including those calling for more flexible fair dealing – is completely ignored.

Because the Canadian DMCA was introduced without consulting consumer groups, education groups, civil society groups, or the Canadian public.

Because Jim Prentice knows better.  He saw first-hand the passion of Canadians calling for balanced copyright and has received thousands of calls and letters on the issue.  Yet rather than genuinely working to craft a balanced solution, he opted to release a fatally flawed bill.

Despite all that, I still also harbour some optimism. The events of the past six months have demonstrated conclusively that Canadians care about balanced copyright even if the Industry Minister does not.  Over the coming months, I firmly believe that we will see the fair copyright movement expand well beyond what has been just built.  We will see Canadian musicians, songwriters, artists, and filmmakers speak out against this legislation.  We will see companies of all sizes and all sectors speak out against this legislation.  We will see the privacy groups, education groups, and consumer rights groups speak out against this legislation.  We will see the NDP speak out against this legislation.  We will see the Liberals – who are already focusing on the lack of consultation and the prospect of a police state – ultimately identify their Bill C-60 as a better approach and speak out against this legislation.  We will see Conservative MPs from coast to coast (including the Conservative candidate from the forthcoming Guelph by-election) wonder why their party has introduced a bill that runs counter to their own policies and (quietly) speak out against this legislation.

We will see thousands of Canadians speak out against this legislation again and again and again until it is changed.

The Canadian DMCA is a kick in the gut to Canadians everywhere.  But I believe we will get back up and demand better.  Start now.

  1. Write to your MP, the Industry Minister, the Canadian Heritage Minister, and the Prime Minister.  If you send an email, be sure to print it out and drop a copy in the mail.  If you are looking for a sample letter, visit Copyright for Canadians.
  2. Take 30 minutes from your summer to meet directly with your MP.  From late June through much of the summer, your MP will be back in your community attending local events and making themselves available to meet with constituents.  Give them a call and ask for a meeting.  Every MP in the country should return to Ottawa in the fall having heard from their constituents on this issue.
  3. If you are not a member of the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group, join.  If you are, consider joining or starting a local chapter and be sure to educate your friends and colleagues about the issue.

108 Comments

  1. Riley August says:

    Well Said
    Well, I will be speaking out against this as much and as long as I can, but given the situation here I may well just pack up and leave. There’s probably as much or more demand for automated navigation systems in New Zealand, and it’s nice there.

  2. Prentice said of the issue: “It touches each and every one of us, and it is no surprise to find so many different points of view with respect to copyright.”

    Gee, Mr, Prentice, it’s funny how something that touches “each and every one of us” doesn’t need to be consulted with those of us with “so many different points of view with respect to copyright”.

    As long as your friends at CRIA, ACTRA, AFM Canada, CIRPA, CMPA, MIAC, MMF, RIAA and MPAA are happy, right Mr. Prentice?

    The next election can’t come soon enough!

  3. Anonymous says:

    This is such juvenile, self-promoting nonsense. Of course there was consultation, and it’s not as if the government was unaware of the anti-copyright lobby. They looked at what was being said, and disagreed. That simple. Maybe a better approach might have been true compromise, a willingness to understand the concerns of the copyright owner side, and not going for highly personalized and offensive criticism of the Minister.

  4. Gee, the post that starts with “This is such juvenile, self-promoting nonsense”…

    What planet does the writer of that post live on?!? The planet where there was consultation, of course!

  5. The Tories are wannabe Neocons. This is legistlation for foreign corporations. The Tories care more about what foreign politicians think of them then they do CANADIAN CITIZENS.

    The danger of these amendments is in how broad they are. The real battle is ACTA however. That’s coming up at next month’s G8 meeting.

  6. I can’t thank you enough Prof. Geist for all the work you have put into reading/analyzing the bill for those who are unfamiliar with legal jargon and also for the suggestions you have presented to us to make sure our voices are heard. If we get as much of a response from consumer and education groups and from the general public throughout the summer as we did on the first day of the bill’s introduction, I feel it may just be enough to influence the MPs to vote against this atrocious bill. In part, we’ll have you to thank for it… so let’s keep it up!

  7. “Because in a country that values consumer rights, the Canadian DMCA means that consumers no longer control their own personal property. That CD or DVD or e-book or cellphone you just bought? The bill says you now have the right to engage in “private use copying” but not if it contains digital locks.”

    I haven’t, nor intend to, read through the entire bill, but if the fact sheets at the Industry Canada website are correct then there is NO exception that would allow for the backup of a DVD (specifically referenced in format shifting fact sheet). Since every CD since 2002 comes with some form of rudimentary (or more invasive) copy protection and every e-book comes with an EULA, which this legislation says must be honoured, there is technically no exception for copying music and e-literature either. The fact sheet does emphasize that you can format shift newspapers and periodicals, though. Finally! I can digitize my Globe and Mail collection without fear of reproach!

    With the overwhelming praise on the net from the content owners and the equally overwhelming dismay from the public rights group, how can Prentice still insist this is a bill that balances rights?

  8. Re: blank
    “This is such juvenile, self-promoting nonsense. Of course there was consultation…”

    Consultation with who? Foreign lobby groups?

    Sure, there was some sort of consultation…maybe Mr. Prentice asked his fellow minister.
    There was no public consultation though anonymous poster.

    “…and it’s not as if the government was unaware of the anti-copyright lobby.”

    This site is not about anti-copyright. Its about supporting fair usage. I work for a start-up company that would be in trouble if there was no such thing as copyright. I am not against copyright. I am against the backwards notion of total “copy-control”.

    “They looked at what was being said, and disagreed. That simple. ”

    Now this is a government elected by the people of CANADA, not the corporations of the world. A government who doesn’t listen to its citizens (especially a minority government) is out of touch then with who it elected.

    Sure, they can disagree BUT…to not take any of the concerns seriously is just plain arrogance. That simple!

  9. I’m not anti-Copyright. I’m anti-Corporate-lawsuit-shakedown, anti-Nanny-state, anti-WIPO, anti-Prentice.

    I’m a copyright holder. I generate an income from my copyrights. I’m Canadian. I’m now (potentially) screwed.

    Thanks Jimmy boy.

  10. Canadian DCMA
    This legislation is so broad and made with so little understanding of the technology involved it should be a CRIME.
    The more I look at this the more I think that this legislation is intended to fail as written and form a starting point for a compromise that will end up looking good to most people as they will have regained some ground, but in actual fact still be a huge rights grab.

    Go to the local convenience store and rent a DVD. $2.00

    Bring it home and play it on my Linux based computer bypassing the copy protection. $20,000.00

    Having the DVDCSS program on my computer $ 20,000.00

    The thought that went into this legislation. Priceless

  11. The thought that went into this legislation. Worthless

    – there fixed it for ya.

  12. Consultation
    When we asked for consultation, we were told we hadn’t seen the bill so we shouldn’t speculate. Now that we have the bill, we are told that we have been consulted.

  13. CONTROL Pleeeeese!?
    Mr. Prentice and Ms. Verner and Corporate Hollywood legal musclemen can bask in this proposed framework with the Canadian summer’s sun, but push-to-shove the reality of the Internet AND Technology is not about THEM any longer – no matter what legal legislative tactics they conjure up. The REALITY IS about a world force of over 1 billion connected folks who ultimately determine what happens, and what will be, at any given moment.

    The issue is now, and forever will be, about CONTROL. That control transferred away from governments and lawyers more than 10 years ago. Bills like 60, 61 are nothing more than meager attempts to grasp raindrops of control in a monsoon.

    Maybe government should spend taxpayer bucks drafting rules on OTHER things it CAN in fact influence – like the environment, Canada’s children that live in poverty, cancer cures…

  14. Tories Untrustworthy
    In what other areas is this government also betraying the Canadian people and their values? My guess is pretty much everywhere they have been told to by big business and foreign powers.

    Reflect for a moment on the fact that, had this government been in charge when Iraq was invaded, we would deep in the mire of an illegal, immoral, unjust and unending war in Iraq, participation in which Steven Harper vehemently advocated at the time.

    This government works for foreign powers. It is a government dangerous to Canadian sovereignty and the interests people. It is a government that cannot be trusted. Its ignominious reign must end as soon as possible. We need to bring back a government that stands for CANADA first and foremost.

  15. Voice it
    onlinerights.ca put up a site that has pre-made text for you to send (via email) to your MP (it finds your MP).

    Check it out at:
    [ link ]

    Or you can copy/paste the text and mail it. Or you can modify the text to your liking.

  16. Curious?
    I don’t understand how purchasing a DVD from another region (legally purchased, paid for, everybody gets their cut) is not allowed. Who is that hurting? Who is losing money? If the video is not made available here then no Canadian artist or recording company is being stolen from. And if I record a program from the TV but I’m not allowed to keep it indefinitely, who is going to come to my house and search my DVD library?

  17. Todd Sieling says:

    > The next election can’t come soon enough!

    Oh, don’t worry, the Calgary money-licking public will vote him back in tout de suite, hoping for a majority that will cut Alberta free from the albatross of Canada and into a libertarian future where the streets are paved with gold and everyone drinks oil.

  18. Great article. I submitted it to digg*.
    [ link ]
    If you’re a member of that community, digg it up. The more press this gets, the better.

    *Not a digg whore. Just check my profile if you dont believe me :p I really believe this is an incredibly important issue though, so i felt obligated to get it on that network as soon as possible.

  19. I voted for the Conservatives because the Liberals were stealing my money. In hindsight that was a mistake. I can always make more money, but when my freedoms are taken away, those are much harder to get back. :(

  20. Seeing Red
    Where and when will the first protest start? I want to be out there protesting, I feel any less of a reaction will be overlooked in favour of the bill. I will not stand by and let my rights be trampled by “honorary” a**holes who are too busy sucking lobbyist c*ck to think of the rights of the PEOPLE. A country is made up of its people, turning those people into criminals will turn this country into a police state.

    On a less blunt note, I am heading to my facebook now to see if there are any protest events yet. If not I will make a discussion on the Fair Copyright for Canada group to arrange one for Toronto or Ottawa ASAP.

  21. How far reaching it could be…
    So let’s see…there’s 15 comments so far (at the time of this writing) and all of them have used some sort of capital letter or punctuation that uses the shift key…let’s say that there are 2 users here using Linux, and 2 using Mac’s…that still leaves 11 people who have the tools necessary to circumvent the copy protection on a lot of CD’s…and are actively using them…they are called the shift key.

    Holding the shift key disables auto-run on a CD when it’s inserted…thus bypassing some of the DRM software on some CD’s. I have actually read this bill, IANAL, but understood for myself that having a shift key on a Windows computer would be illegal under this bill because it is a tool used to bypass some of the “technological measures” that are implemented in CD’s to prevent copying…

    To quote another poster in the comments on the initial posting by Mr Geist…”Thank you Mr Prentice for turning me into an activist”

    Zro

  22. >Written by Todd Sieling on 2008-06-13 10:53:51> The next election >can’t come soon enough!

    >Oh, don’t worry, the Calgary money-licking public will vote him >back in tout de suite, hoping for a majority that will cut Alberta >free from the albatross of Canada and into a libertarian future >where the streets are paved with gold and everyone drinks oil.

    Whatever… I was born and raised in Calgary. This is just BS. There a many people here that believe in fair and balanced copyright and in Canada!

  23. Canadian people need to write to there MP too stop this nightmare of a bill. Watch theses Videos for more information about the bill.

    [ link ]

    Canadians Must Not let This Bill Past Write Too Your Mp and Spread The Word.

    [ link ]

    Made in Canada? More like Made in the USA

    [ link ]

    Bill c61 is a NIGHTMARE that needs to die Canadians must not let this bill pass at all. Bill c61 is total GARBAGE and needs stay in the Trash Bin.

    ! Canadians Have a choice Stand for it!

  24. what is juvenile
    I think that what is juvenile is not listening to legitimate consumers concerns and instead of trying to find a real “balance” promoting a new business models which try to take advantage and monetize on 15 years of consumers undisturbed digital habits, it tries to enforce a police-state based on the hope to revert a “bad” habit (being an ex smoker I know how it is difficult to stop an harmful habit). This “rupture” established between creator and consumer eventually is not going to benefit anyone. The former has now the law and the police at its side but the latter is the one that ultimately feeds the former. The assumption that consumers will start buying entertainment using the old fashion way because of this new legislation, well “this is such juvenile”.

  25. Phones?
    I’m unclear if this bill makes my unlocked cell phone illegal. Can anyone clear this up for me?

  26. Yes, Nate H. I don’t think bill provides exception for stuff that is already circumvented.

    Here [[ link ]] is another reason why balanced copyright is needed.

  27. shrewd politicians
    It kills me to make the suggestion that the Conservatives are this politically savvy, but could it be they took this extreme route in order to elicit massive public outcry so they can go to the US lobby and say, “See? our citizens, our constituents, are demanding more balance.” And then maybe they’ll produce something that isn’t, you know, batsh*t crazy?

    I’m deluded and hopeful enough to convince myself that this is the case.

  28. Unbalance copyright, unbalance coverage
    If I had only heard of this from CBC, CTV, and Vancouver Sun, I would applaud Prentice for fighting those damn internet pirates. In every article I read, their coverage only goes as far as saying that the bill puts a $500 fine per infringement, and makes it legal to record TV shows and to copy CDs to your iPod.

    Where is the discussion of the digital locks that prevent you from copying your CDs to your iPod, or the broadcast flag to prevent you from using your DVR? Where is the discussion of the levy on blank media? Nowhere do they mention that legitimate use of paid-for material will be blocked.

    Thanks, Vancouver Sun, CTV, etc, for keeping consumers in the dark on this one!

  29. A new Law is all we need
    Hello

    If it could be a criminal offense, with very severe penalties to be guilty of:

    “Possession of illegally copied copyrighted material for the purpose
    of trafficking”

    it would solve many of the problems that the RIAA CIAA claim that they are having.

    Tough fines for those who knowingly purchase such material would help too.

    No DRM measures would be necessary, just make an example of some people.

  30. @Cubey
    I actually posted a comment on the CBC site mentioning that their reports on the bill were not thorough enough and that they only mention the illegal file-sharing aspect of the bill. And that reports only mentioning this info would likely receive more support than those who would supply the whole truth about the bill….

    My post has yet to appear on the CBC site. CBC –> censorship

  31. Sorry CBC
    My apologies to the CBC my comment has been posted.

  32. “I don’t understand how purchasing a DVD from another region (legally purchased, paid for, everybody gets their cut) is not allowed. Who is that hurting? Who is losing money? ”

    - The answer is no one is getting hurt, as for who is losing money, the “rights holder” who wanted to charge more in your region than in the region where you purchased it. It’s not about not hurting artists, but propting up a tired practice of charging more in regions that will pay more. It’s about circumventing market force by creating false monopolies.

  33. Andrew McInnis-Kucy says:

    My email to Ministers Prentice and Verne
    Ministers,

    From every non-government opinion I have read and heard concerning this legislation, Bill C-61 does NOT provide a balanced answer to copyright issues. In the modern era, an age of instant global communication and shared opinions, reactions from knowledgeable sources have resoundingly decried this bill as being a step backwards on copyright. For example, a Canadian law professor, Michael Geist, wrote yesterday,

    “…it is immediately apparent that the concerns of thousands of Canadians – now over 45,000 on the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group alone – have been realized. If enacted, the Canadian DMCA would strongly encourage the use of technological locks and lawsuits. While Prentice has given a handful of new rights to Canadian consumers, each is subject to many limitations and undermined by the digital locks provisions that may effectively render the new rights meaningless.” [ link ]

    The single most reprehensible portion of the bill is that any circumvention of a digital lock or copy-protection mechanism is explicitly illegal. This means that any copy-protected media, which includes almost every CD and DVD ever produced, cannot be transferred from its original format (physical disks) to an electronic form. Even when copying media in only a manner explicitly allowed by the bill, infringement still occurs because tools that can be used to circumvent copy-protection are illegal. That means even transferring the contents of a legally bought and privately owned CD to an iPod or other MP3 player is illegal.

    As a consumer, this is outrageous. I buy CD’s and DVD movies in order to listen to and watch them, and by making it illegal for me to simply own more than one copy of any file I purchased is completely unacceptable. If I want to burn a copy of a CD I own and put it in my car, I should be allowed to do that. I am not distributing, selling, or in any way infringing on the rights of the copyright holder because I desire to keep my original CD in pristine condition. As another example, importing a collection of CD’s to a program such as iTunes is the only means of playing music on an iPod. However, the simple act of transferring the audio files from the CD to the computer circumvents the CD copy protection, making that act itself illegal. You mention in your email below that ‘legally purchased’ music can be copied to an MP3 player, but this cannot be done with the bill worded as it is.

    As a Canadian, I am ashamed that the elected government of this country did not even have the common sense or decency to consult the public during the formation of this legislation. If any consultation with the public was undertaken before the introduction of this bill, these issues would have immediately been brought to the fore. The irresponsible approach taken does nothing but waste taxpayer money on an obviously flawed bill, and give rise to valid concerns about possible lawsuits. I am a technologically literate consumer, and I believe that this bill, if it becomes law, will cause Canadians to lose significant personal liberties.

    Thank you for taking the time to read this email. I sincerely hope that you, ministers, as representatives of our government elected by the people, for the people, will realize the issues within this legislation and work with an array of groups representing both sides of this issue to revise this bill.

    Sincerely,

    Andrew McInnis-Kucy

  34. GJ Hagenaars says:

    non US/CANADA region DVDs
    Consider that there are DVDs in other regions that are not available in ours (at all). I own a couple of PAL (European) DVDs from region two that I watch on my chinese DVD player (which I purchased because it is the only way in which I can play these DVDs on my non-PAL tv here in Canada). It already urks me that I cannot watch them on my laptop (because of the region setting), but I cannot do a lot about that.

    But now I cannot watch a DVD that I bought and own,, on a DVD player that I bought and own on a TV that I bought and own. And there is no alternative; there is nothing available on the market that allows me to buy something that stops me from infringing, given this new set of rules.

    This is effectively censorship; apparently this government has something against foreign language comedy shows.

    This new bill is insanely stupid.

    –GJ–

  35. Illegal, Therefore I AM~! says:

    Oh Puhleeeease
    It is so very interesting to see how the NeoCons are attempting to enforce such ridiculous measures to bring OUR country, THE PEOPLE’S COUNTRY, into the 21st century. They haven’t a clue as to what is important to social AND political discourse–the NeoCons would rather criminalize everything, constructing criminals out of a bill that is inherently flawed and empowers the policiing and control of every citizen user.

    As a MA student in communications I am in support of Balkin’s “non-exclusive” appropriation for the digital world and its users. We need to stop this multi-tiered sytem of regulatory control over virtual bodies and stop the appropriation of what real choice means by corporate enterprise~! Support your (local) artists and musicians but let’s not give these corporate or government hacks control over technology that is clearly ABOUT the public and public discourse.

  36. DVDs region
    I’m Italian and I have lots of region 2 DVDs. I set my laptop DVD player on region 2 so I can whatch those DVDs. Did I do somenthing wrong? Is it considered circunvention in a country where the “legal” region code should be 1?
    And by the way future shop sell a JVC region free dvd player, is it legal?

  37. Paul
    Just want to add my voice to the chorus of protest against this travesty of a bill. There is no balance here whatsoever. The government should legitimizing common fair dealing behaviours for consumers and artists, not making them illegal. Shame.

    When is the parliament hill protest? I’m in Ottawa, I’ll be there.

  38. Colin McInnes says:

    Prentice either lying or stupid
    Prentice was on CBC Radio 1 last night, and he was either lying through his teeth, or an idiot.

    \”Most CDs don\’t have digital locks, so it won\’t affect anyone.\”

    Fortunately, Scott Brison, who was on immediately after, called him on it, and corrected that most CDs in the US have some form of digital lock, however weak.

    Prentice also dodged the question about copying movies. All DVDs, practically since they were invented, have DeCSS encryption. It\’s childishly easy to break, which is why many shareware apps are available to rip your DVD to your iPod, but in doing so, you would breaking the law under C-61.

    Why is there no exception to breaking digital locks for personal use? Prentice dodged that question too…

  39. Reid Ellis says:

    For whom should we vote?
    It seems like the Liberals are no better than the Conservatives at copyright reform. The NDP are too \”left\” for many people. Makes me wish we had a \”Freedom Party\” or something that was otherwise issue-neutral.

  40. right and left
    For whom should we vote?
    For the lesser of two evils. Roughly speaking the right side will always represent a threat for your freedom and the left side will always represent a threat for your money. Money has a price freedom is priceless. Your choice…

  41. Clayton Robertson. says:

    Re: Reid Ellis
    There is always the Green Party and the Progressive Canadians! :)

  42. Concerned Canadian says:

    Will the government refund my iPods?
    I have used iTunes to rip “copy-protected” CDs. The proposed bill would make it illegal to have iTunes installed on our computer.

    Without iTunes my iPods are just paper weights. Unless I hack them…

    The irony is that those “copy-protected” CDs would not play on any of my players, forcing me to rip them to MP3.

  43. right, left and green
    Vote Green. Just went through websites of parties. Only greens have something to say about it: [ link ].

    Liberals don’t really know who they are anymore. NDP is too busy blasting left and right.

    I do think that greens are a bit idealistic and sometimes extreme on environment issues, being green and all, but at lots of issues they are the most straight thinking party in Canada.

  44. An Honest Opinion says:

    My thoughts …
    I would highly recommend people read this basic summary on the CBC\’s website, as it provides an easy to understand breakdown.
    [ link ]

    I think it is important that people realize that it is not acceptable to distribute copyrighted material on the internet without appropriate consent or as allowed by the law.

    While such activities may not have been explicitly stated as illegal in Canada, it was certainly morally questionable as I am sure any reasonable person would agree. I personally find it appalling to read how some individuals believe content, such as music and movies, should be free, with total disregard to compensating the efforts of all the individuals involved in the creation of such content. Without any sort of compensation, there would be no incentive to produce any content to begin with.

    That said, reading over the proposed changes, I have many concerns about them.

    There are legitimate reasons for breaking digital locks, such as university research into the security (or lack thereof) of a form of digital rights management (DRM), for example. Under the new law, it would be considered an illegal action and there would be monetary consequences for those involved.

    In terms of fair use interoperability, the new law would formalize many of today\’s practices as legal actions, such as making a backup copy of a CD, ripping a CD to your computer, recording of a TV show on a personal video recorder, etc.

    However, the new law prohibits such practices with respect content protected by DRM. As such, consumers could potentially be unable to recover legitimately purchased content in the event of a problem, as such is the case with customers of the now defunct MSN Music store. In these cases, I believe the government is hindering the process unless corporations and/or standards emerge to fill the void in the near future (such as selling DVDs with their iTunes-compatible equivalent, one unified standard audio/video format on all portable media players, selling or making available recently aired episodes of television series online, etc.) or DRM is eliminated altogether.

    I would strongly urge the Heritage Minister, the Industry Minister, and the Conservative party to consider the opinions of Canadians and table a bill that accurately addresses the concerns of the people they represent.

    Thanks.

  45. Section 27?
    This might a a thin argument, but removing the tools needed for playing foreign region DVDs, seems to run contrary to section 27. of the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms.

    “27. This Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians.”

  46. Is that you Steve?
    Is that you Steve? If so, did you burn your CPC card yet?
    If it’s not Steve, then it’s another TROLLING coward who won’t sign his name! Why is it that all of the Trolls are always so cowardly, that they can’t even be bothered to come up with a name for preople to respond to their comments? Coward!

  47. I’m leaving this country.
    Canada isn’t the home it used to be. Welcome to the police state.

  48. Is that you Steve?
    Woops, forgot my quote!

    “This is such juvenile, self-promoting nonsense. Of course there was consultation, and it\’s not as if the government was unaware of the anti-copyright lobby. They looked at what was being said, and disagreed. That simple. Maybe a better approach might have been true compromise, a willingness to understand the concerns of the copyright owner side, and not going for highly personalized and offensive criticism of the Minister.”

    Is that you Steve? If so, did you burn your CPC card yet?
    If it’s not Steve, then it’s another TROLLING coward who won’t sign his name! Why is it that all of the Trolls are always so cowardly, that they can’t even be bothered to come up with a name for preople to respond to their comments? Coward!

  49. CD-DRM
    Just wondering, if you disable autoplay for CDs in Windows to avoid rootkits getting installed by unscrupulous music distributors, would that be considered illegal under the new rules. If Windows offers that tool to disable autoplay would that not make having Windows as an operating system illegal?

  50. Police state
    I believe that what liberal opposition is saying is that this bill is not taught enough. “In order to fully protect copyright owners you need a police state. With this bill you still cannot freely enter private homes to search for infringing contents”. Am I wrong?

  51. Another question
    I have another question for Michael. I have a RAID-0 setup (mirroring) where I keep my multimedia files. When a file is written to a RAID ([ link ]), the controller writes the file simultaneously on TWO separate hard disks. According from what I’ve read, the private copy exception grants a person the right to make one (1) copy of an unprotected CD for personal use. Am I to understand that my setup would be illegal under C-61?

  52. Oops – RAID 1
    Oops. It’s a RAID 1, not a RAID 0! I need some rest :)

  53. Excellent post, Michael
    Michael,

    Thanks so much for your detailed and thoughtful analysis. As I said on my blog post on this topic it worries me as an educator that students and teachers will be denied access to digital media thanks to a misunderstood notion of copyright.

  54. Does bill C-61 have non-disclosure claus
    Does bill C-61 have non-disclosure clauses the would prevent an individual or group to report or publish how to circumvent DRM. I’m thinking of the Sony root kit fiasco of 2006.

  55. Windows Vista
    So… Windows Vista has protection against Sony’s rootkit. Therefore, anyone who purchases and uses Vista is now in violation of the law.(?)

  56. NDP
    Its a little worrying when people are so quick to cry about this issue, while at the same time flat out dismiss the NDP. News flash people, the NDP have been fighting this issue since day 1. In fact the NDP have been fighting for your rights and freedoms LONG before the liberals or conservatives viewed them as issues.

    Its the one party in canada that should have enough support to make a major impact, but is always denied it when it comes to canadians actually voting.

    as for ClaudeB’s question, yeah… Just about everything that would be convenient to a consumer will now be illegal. Christ, you cant play legally bought foreign movies in your legally bought foreign(non region 1) DVD player. You cant buy a unlocked phone(which most europien phones are). You cant back up your own movies.

    Its beyond ignorant to think this is ‘fair and balanced’. If this law were to come into effect, i would need to buy my movies 3 times over.(PMP, laptop and media centre) As greedy as the MPAA is, even they probably think that is unreasonable.

  57. Hollywood California says:

    You will do our bidding
    We in Hollywood California, will control you in Canada, which is just a protectorate of the USA anyway and Hollywood controls the USA, while Washington D.C. is just a figurehead of our will.

    Quit getting excited, sit down and just take your copyright/DRM medicine and accept the inevitable. Consumer rights? You never had any-we are just making it legally that way.

  58. Colin McInnes says:

    Yes, C-61 forbids fixing Sony rootkit
    Richard: “Does bill C-61 have non-disclosure clauses the would prevent an individual or group to report or publish how to circumvent DRM. I’m thinking of the Sony root kit fiasco of 2006.”

    41.1 (1) No person shall: manufacture, import, provide — including by selling or renting — offer for sale or rental or distribute any technology, device or component if
    (i) the technology, device or component is designed or produced primarily for the purposes of circumventing a technological measure,

    So yes, as I read it, merely telling someone how to solve the Sony root kit fiasco, would be a violation, because you are providing a technology to circumvent a digital lock…

  59. Bob Polley says:

    Angry
    Has the opposition hinted at how they will vote on this bill? I pray to god that it’s defeated.

  60. CDN/USA DMCA side by side
    Has anyone done the previously mentioned comparison yet between the 2?

  61. Terence Cocoran’s NP article
    Since Michael linked to Terence Cocoran’s article on the National Post, I thought I’d give it a read.

    Wow, Terence seems as informed on this issue as a sack of hammers. It’s so easy in his mind. Anyone who doesn’t think they should have to pay for a movie every time they want to watch it on a different device, DVD, iPod, Zune, etc., is a Communist. Plain and simple. Big business should dictate the market place dummy!

    Here Terence, let me make it real simple for you. We’re happy to pay content owners for their works for our own personal use (i.e., NOT share what we buy). But we are only happy to do that ONE TIME. And BTW, the content creators are generally happy with this, it’s the distributors who hate it because they love dipping their hands into our pocket with every format shift. Guess what? We’re not going to let you do that anymore.

  62. I’ve done the shouting…
    … as a businessman, artist and individual, only to be told in not so many words, “We weren’t asking you”.

    Looks like when the ink dries, I am a hardened criminal by them.

    So be it.

    Thank you for your efforts Prof. Geist :-)

  63. Region Locked DVD’s
    I can’t imagine what Universities will do with this Bill. I work at a University in Canada that has a Film department that specializes in World Cinema. We have a massive DVD Library of movies that are not available in North America at all. The only way many of the Professors can teach with these films is to copy them over to a region 1 or region free format. This Bill would in effect shut down half our Film Library, and completely restrict what can be taught in the classroom to region 1 only. Some international titles are region free due to it being easier for small productions to make 1 DVD for the globe, but many are not. Half of our equipment would have to be either trashed (region free DVD players), or software reformatted (region free dvd software).
    What if you have explicit permission to copy a film from the copyright holder? The only way to make a copy would be illegal. Just my one small area alone would be hit massively by this Bill. I can’t imagine what other Universities would have to deal with.

  64. justanexer says:

    This is so very wrong!!
    Wow. Those for this copyright reform really don’t want consumers to have any rights what so ever. How did the consumer become the enemy to these groups, i’ve paid 10′s of thousands of dollars for the legal cd’s,dvd’s,cable,etc that i’ve collected over the years.

    I can’t believe what i read on ACTRA’s website, “…We would be deeply concerned if the Bill allows people to copy artists’ work onto media devices like iPODS without compensation for creators…”

    If i have no rights to the content that i’ve purchased and i’m an ‘infringing pirate’ if i rip a dvd to my ipod…. then so be it, i will move to the pirate side…..atleast there i will feel that i have control over the content. And according to this new bill i’d rather take the $500 fine for downloading over the $20000 fine for ripping a dvd.

  65. Frank Buchan says:

    Stupid Laws
    This is just another stupid law that will likely be brought down by the Supreme Court if challenged against the Charter, largely because it is awkward enough to potentially violate cultural and privacy guarantees.

    Having said that, I’m pretty doubtful this is really about backing up data for personal use. What it is, is a foolish response to the increasingly complex problem of copyright holders proving a violation, which is complex because of complexity of the technology involved. I’m not defending the bill, but I do see how it came about, and I think that understanding is vital to some day addressing the underlying issues.

    We need a bill that clarifies the distribution issues, making file sharing and so forth illegal, without infringing on the rights of the individual to use technology to further their enjoyment of legitimately purchased materials. The only way we’ll get that is to have this bill dashed by the Charter, and some wiser minds apply themselves to the realities.

  66. justanexer says:

    This is more than an attempt to stop pir
    Read ACTRA’s statement and statements from many of the bill’s supporters. This is more than an attempt to stop piracy, it’s about limiting consumer rights.

  67. Bypass Protection
    If I start a copy protected game and it starts with the copy protection it could be consider bypassing it. Even by design, would still be bypassing. Therefore starting any game with copy protection will be illegal.
    (sarcasm) :D

  68. Josh Giesbrecht says:

    “tangible objects”?
    So I just finished reading Bill C-61.

    I have a few questions I couldn’t figure out the answers to. Michael Geist, I’m posting this comment here hoping that eventually you’ll have time to read this far down and maybe could answer these in another blog post?

    1. What is the effect or purpose of the clauses referring to transferring ownership of a “tangible object” copy of a work? I can’t imagine what scenario this is trying to prevent or even apply to.

    2. How extensive is the application of the section on “lessons” going to be? Does the reference to telecommunications limit this to video / audio conferences, or will it apply to the distribution of other lesson materials such as powerpoint notes shared over a course website? From what I can tell this means teachers are not allowed to archive their own lesson materials if a copyrighted work is included – this seems pretty viral.

    3. How likely is it that the Governor in Council would actually revisit and allow for more exceptions to the Technical Measures sections? I see they mention the possibility of acknowledging how TMs restrict educators and librarians – too bad they don’t just do something about it in the bill itself, but how often does a Governor in Council actually follow through on this sort of thing? I’m clueless as to the procedure involved.

  69. Anonymous says:

    justanexer said:
    “i’d rather take the $500 fine for downloading over the $20000 fine for ripping a dvd”

    I think you miss read, $500 is if you download a non DRM protected file. All DVD’s are considered DRM’d (CSS) and therefore fall under the $20,0000 per incident.

    Since the bill sems to indicate a per incident penalty for by passing DRM does that mean $280,000 fine for copying a DRM protected cd of 12 songs to an IPOD??
    Since I have (at least) 20 cd’s with DRM on them and HAVE alreeady ripped them to my IPOD I am on the hook for 4.8 million (guessed at 12 songs per cd).(20 cd X 12 songs x$20,0000 per for passing DRM)

    If you look at it as only one offence per cd then I’m only on the hook for a mere $400,000
    Let’s put this in prosepctive, I have no idea how many of my thousands (several boxes of em in the basement from the last time we moved) have DRM on them, so the 20 cd’s are from the CD’s purchased since the last move (2 yrs ago).

    Wow just what I wanted, to have to purchase my music collection again, so I can use it on my IPOD.

    To Jim, Steve and their corporate friend you put forward this bill, Thanks for maing me a ‘pirate’.

  70. Canada, another USA?
    It looks like that NOW!
    If this time Canada follows USA’s rules, next time, USA will ask for more from Canada.
    It is so sad. We do not want live under monitoring like USA residents. Dirty Politicians!!!

  71. justanexer says:

    ok, so no win…i’m just a pirate
    I tried to calculate what my infringement would be calculated at…. i don’t think my calculator goes that high.

    I have 1000′s of legally purchased cd’s and dvd’s that i have ripped to a media server, some of it copied to portable media player, various mixed cd’s kicking around my car, and 2 complete backups.

    I’ve never pirated anything…software, cd’s, dvd’s… i have no problem paying content creators and actually am very anti-piracy. But, this law will make me a pirate and my former misgivings on actually ‘pirating’ content will disappear.

  72. More Madness
    I upload a video to YouTube of myself talking, but I\’m wearing a Nike t-shirt. I\’m now violating copyright.

  73. Thank you!
    Thank you Michael for taking the time to educate me and others on this proposed legislation. I will follow your direction and go through the steps you outlined – as best I can.

    I support enforcing the copyright law but this is ludicrous. Who still owns a VCR? This is 2008 not 1988. This government is so out of touch with reality and common sense.

    This is going to turn into 1984 and Conspiracy Theory. Will we have to watch our backs for the black vans and circling helicopters? OK, I took it a bit far there but you get the idea.

    Stoneman
    [ link ]

  74. Another Serious Worry
    Another Issue I am just thinking about is if someone is unhappy with his instructor,and in case his instructor does something wrong, such as this teacher’s handout containing information by copying and pasting information from the copyrighted books. Or this teacher has shown students some copyrighted DVD (not original copy)in the class.

    This student can call the police to say that the teacher has broken the copyright law and should be charged for up to $20,000 fine. What the hell?

    And it will cause people distrust each other in the future.
    Anyone could let you involved in high pay fine, you are watched all the time. And you could go for bankrupcy so easily. Freedom NO Way! Not any more!!

    People should think about if it is necessary to live in Canada!!

  75. rights?
    always have enjoyed Michael Geist\’s perspective but as I read these posts (and other critical ones) it strikes me that we (consumers) are a bit too entitled. Realistically is it not the right of an artist/producer to define the conditions for which he sells his product? If you don\’t agree to the conditions (ie please don\’t copy it) – the you don\’t have to buy it.
    Also I think the marketplace will solve the consumer concerns mostly. The first CD I buy that I can\’t load into iTunes and my iPod will be the last CD I buy. period. And I HAVE to think the music industry knows this. The marketplace will sort this one out.

    I doubt any copyright law amendment would make pro-p2p file sharing \’consumer groups\’ very happy. But the Conspiracy Theory and other rhetoric is just bitterness. Artists and producers deserved one – and i think they got it right (mostly) in Bill C-61

  76. Universities
    This has not been vetted with Universities properly:

    see: [ link ]

    “We are very pleased that the bill contains an exception for educational use of Internet materials and a ‘notice and notice’ regime for Internet service providers, but we do have serious concerns about the implications for higher education institutions of the provisions dealing with circumvention of technological measures and with statutory damages,” said Claire Morris, president and CEO of the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada.

    As a professor, how can I make sure that students destroy all powerpoint presentations and papers after the class is over? The limitations to educational provisions are ludcrious!

  77. artists selling the product
    Scott asks: “Realistically is it not the right of an artist/producer to define the conditions for which he sells his product?”

    Sure it is but that’s not what’s happening.

    Once an musical artist signs a recording contract with any of the big houses the usual procedure is that they surrender ownership of their material to that company. This is not always true for some of the bigger names but it is always true for the up and comers – in other words the momth to month hit makers.

    This is why so many bands are now self recording and releasing – think Coldplay. They retain ownership this way.

    It’s not dissimilar in film if a film gets either made, released or distributed by one the biggies. The film ceases to be the property of the creative people who made it. Partly, this is why the Indie scene has become so vibrant although the distro side of that can get pretty carnivorous too.

    So essentially the creative people don’t lose because they have no stake left in the work. They’ve signed it over – sold it – to Viacom or Time Warner or Sony whoever.

  78. IFeelBetrayed says:

    It gets much worse than bill C61 and ACT
    I’ve been following the news regarding ACTA and C61 since I first heard about them. A bunch of people had commented, about what else the conservatives have been trying to slip past us. We can now add another thing to the list. For anyone that hasn’t written their MP yet, you might want to include bill c51 as well.

    The Conservatives are completely selling us out!

    [ link ]

    For anyone that had doubts about the real intentions for this, I think it should be painfully clear by now.

  79. Does JIm Prentice break the Internet law
    I have posted several issues I am concerned.
    However, does Jim himself or his working partners already break the Internet law?
    Yesterday WIKI closed his online bio because DR MICHAEL FOUND JIM’S WORKING partners airbrushed JIM’S information in the Wiki.

    I am not quite sure if he sent those people modify his personal information or those people volunteerily modified his information? Are they allowed to do that through Internet law?

  80. pootzabuzz says:

    what da ya expect
    We all have that inkling that \”Government\” will put \”Business\” ahead of the \”People\” so why would it be any different for this. Screw the people as much as you can, for the sake of the capitalist en devours until the people uprise.
    The RIAA have continually screwed their \”Artist\’s\” with doling out mere pittances, outrageous contracts in favour of the record companies and yet they say it is taking away money from the \”Artists\”. Screw them!
    Let\’s put the chocolate bar review on hold, I think maybe it\’s time for the Competition Bureau to review the price fixing on music.

  81. IFeelBetrayed says:

    Bill C51 link again
    the link about bill C51 didn\’t work, I\’m trying again.

    community.freespeech.org/canada%2523039s_police_state_bill_c51_camouflaged_as_a_health_bill

  82. Another Mike says:

    Embarrassed to be a Canadian
    It is clear that the minority Canadian conservative government is out of touch with the realities of digital technology as well as Canadian consumers and Business interests. I see this as a step backwards and somewhat embarrassing. What were they thinking?

  83. Effective Measures
    Here’s a question.

    What constitutes an “Effective technological measure”?

    Here: [ link ]
    , in section 41, is the circumvention clause.
    I’ve copied it below. It references “effective technology”.
    I’ve seen some really stupid DRM schemes which were proven quite ineffective.
    Who decides?

    Warning. If all the speculation is true, reading this copied text may be illegal some day.

    41. The following definitions apply in this section and in sections 41.1 to 41.2.
    “circumvent”

    “circumvent” means,

    (a) in respect of a technological measure within the meaning of paragraph (a) of the definition “technological measure”, to descramble a scrambled work or decrypt an encrypted work or to otherwise avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate or impair the technological measure, unless done with the authority of the copyright owner; and

    (b) in respect of a technological measure within the meaning of paragraph (b) of the definition “technological measure”, to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate or impair the technological measure.
    “technological measure”

    “technological measure” means any effective technology, device or component that, in the ordinary course of its operation,

    (a) controls access to a work, to a perform- er’s performance fixed in a sound recording or to a sound recording and whose use is authorized by the copyright owner; or

    (b) restricts the doing — with respect to a work, to a perform- er’s performance fixed in a sound recording or to a sound recording — of any act referred to in section 3, 15 or 18 and any act for which remuneration is payable under section 19.

  84. This won’t attract freethinking individ
    If this bill is passed, I might as well move back to Europe, so that I can continue developing my video editing software. I can’t allow my mind to be limited by laws that tell me what I can and can not do with digital content. It’s time for the Government to realize that old copyright laws doesn’t apply to the new era that lies ahead.

  85. “always have enjoyed Michael Geist\’s perspective but as I read these posts (and other critical ones) it strikes me that we (consumers) are a bit too entitled.”

    Maybe yes, maybe no, but the current legislation treats consumers at thieves. When it’s actually worse than the DMCA — we’ve got a problem!!!

    ” Realistically is it not the right of an artist/producer to define the conditions for which he sells his product? If you don\’t agree to the conditions (ie please don\’t copy it) – the you don\’t have to buy it.”

    Why should this _realistically_ be the right of an artist or producer? Why should they have a 100% say here??? You’re not getting the content for free – you are BUYING it. Why should they be able to tell you that the only thing you can do with this DVD, for example, is watch it on your DVD player (if it dies after the warranty period – well, too bad)? Why should they retain 100% control for something you paid good money for? What exactly are you PAYING for otherwise, in fact?

    If you go to a fishmonger and buy salmon, would you find it reasonable if the fishmonger told you that you can only make salmon chowder with the fish, and that all the other uses are strictly forbidden?

    “Also I think the marketplace will solve the consumer concerns mostly. The first CD I buy that I can\’t load into iTunes and my iPod will be the last CD I buy. period. And I HAVE to think the music industry knows this. The marketplace will sort this one out.”

    DMCA is alive and well in the US, and while it’s less harsh than the current bill, it has similar problems; so far, the market place hasn’t responded.

    “I doubt any copyright law amendment would make pro-p2p file sharing \’consumer groups\’ very happy. But the Conspiracy Theory and other rhetoric is just bitterness. Artists and producers deserved one – and i think they got it right (mostly) in Bill C-61″

    Once again, the issue of P2P is a complete red herring here and unrelated to anything; I don’t file share – I have zero concerns with the bill about that. Although, the CD levy better disappear; otherwise, this is a clear case of double dipping that should be taken to court.

    The anti-circumvention provision means that trying to use secure ripping software in order to attempt to save a damaged CD or DVD which is DRMd is illegal. Absurd. There is zero balance in this bill.

  86. R. Bassett Jr. says:

    Pardon my furry
    Quote:
    “I have used iTunes to rip “copy-protected” CDs. The proposed bill would make it illegal to have iTunes installed on our computer.

    Without iTunes my iPods are just paper weights. Unless I hack them…

    The irony is that those “copy-protected” CDs would not play on any of my players, forcing me to rip them to MP3.”
    ——

    This is EXACTLY what I have been saying, but the MPs don’t seem to “get it”.

    You CAN NOT BUY Xvid movies or MP3 music anywhere LEGALLY ANYWHERE, so how in the hell are we supposed to actually use our digital devices to play digital content? Until this legislation, we could at least buy a hard copy and waste our own time and electricity by “format shifting” the original media, because the movie/music indrustry is TOO BLOODY LAZY TO GET WITH THE TIMES!

    I am furious. As I proposed months ago, as a matter of protest I will be smashing all of my media and media devices that is no longer of use to me and burning the mess on the steps of Parliment Hill if this legislation passes. They can either arrest me at that time or they can pull their fucking heads out of their asses and correct the situtation before we’re all left with a pile of smoldering, useless technology, and far, far behind the rest of the techniclogical word.

    Oh wow, way to set Canada back in your bold move forward. Sorry, but what a God damned joke this Government has proven to be! And a minority one, no less!

    Way to Defenbaker, Prentice!

  87. Private Copying
    I think you can privately copy, but it might be subject to circumvention questions about “effective measures.” See below.
    Also, what moron in webspace designed that “parl.gc.ca” publications page? In all my years in web accessibility and usability, I’ve not seen something so bloody wrong in so many ways for simple text!

    29.22 (1) It is not an infringement of copyright for an individual to reproduce onto a medium or device a musical work embodied in a sound recording, a performer’s performance of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, or a sound recording in which a musical work or a performer’s performance of a musical work is embodied, or any substantial part of such a work or other subject-matter, if the following conditions are met:

    (a) the sound recording is not an infringing copy;

    (b) the individual legally obtained the sound recording, otherwise than by borrowing it or renting it, and owns the medium or device on which it is reproduced;

    (c) the individual, in order to make the reproduction, did not circumvent a technolog- ical measure or cause one to be circumvented, within the meanings of the definitions “circumvent” and “technological measure” in section 41;

    (d) the individual reproduces the sound recording no more than once for each device that the individual owns, whether the reproduction is made directly onto the device or is made onto a medium that is to be used with the device;

    (e) the individual does not give the reproduction away; and

    (f) the reproduction is used only for private purposes.

  88. R. Bassett Jr. says:

    “(c) the individual, in order to make the reproduction, did not circumvent a technolog- ical measure or cause one to be circumvented, ”

    Most CDs and ALL DVDs come with encryption. It is impossible to make a usable copy of the media without breaking the encryption. Therefore, there IS NO PRIVATE USE COPY PROTECTION IN THIS LEGISLATION. Peroid.

    You may as well take out ALL of the other provisions listed, as the above quoted section completely nulifies them.

    And don’t fool yourself: Media producers WILL NOT remove DRM – they will make damned sure every bit of media from now on has it, so that we have to buy the same media every single time we want to use on a different device…

  89. What about second-hand purchases of digi
    So what happens to me if I buy (as I have done recently) a used copy of a DVD Movie in a garage sale or on e-Bay? Would this be “legally obtained” as per 29.22(1)(b) above? Am I breaking the law?

  90. second-hand purchase
    @ Worried.
    From my reading of the proposed bill, the responsibility of resale compliance lays with the person who is selling the item in that they have destroyed all copies they have installed, used, backed up.
    If not, “they” would be the infringers.
    There is a statement about resale but it seems a bit archaic with the reference to “videocassette”:

    29.21 (3)
    Limitation — destruction of reproductions

    Subsection (1) does not apply if the individual gives away, rents or sells the photograph, book, newspaper, periodical or videocassette without first destroying all reproductions of the work or other subject-matter that the individual has made under that subsection.

    Please keep in mind, IANMG (I Am Not Michael Geist) and the amendment bill references the existing Copyright Act. I’m toggling between the two, the current Act and the proposed bill.

    Brain hurts, need beer.

  91. Let The MP3 Player Live
    So here’s my theory.

    1. Apple will be rather perturbed at a law that says their users will no longer be able to copy their purchased music onto their ipods, in any case where distributors expressly specify. What will this do to Apple’s business in Canada? What will be the fate of itunes Canada? Not to mention the fact that they want substantial percentages of online music service revenues. So that’s just one.

    2. People will simply stop buying music at the current rate (which, as it is, is not satisfactory according to the music industry) and sales/revenues will diminish. It may even exacerbate the piracy issue by forcing consumers to turn to peer-to-peer and torrents.

    3. One thing I know for certain; when you have draconian legislation that attacks consumer convenience, you can be certain that they will boycott your products and services. It is the ONE thing that the masses will stand for, but it is ONE thing, nevertheless.

    4. The bill will be altered to fit within a more consumer-friendly perimeter. They will have to specify very carefully that users are allowed to copy, in all cases, files onto their external devices; regardless of industry preferences.

    One last point I would like to make is that, between 2006 and 2007, I spent $800 at record stores and various other retail outlets; because I like buying my music. I have no real interest in keeping “piracy” alive, but I do have an interest in my right to copy at least once onto every device I own. Therefore, as a consumer paying artificially inflated prices for CDs($14-$25 in my case) I look forward to seeing this proposed legislation altered, and brought up to a standard befitting a free and democratic society.

    Thank you for your time.

  92. technological measure
    @ R. Bassett Jr.

    I might be a bit fixated, but I find that the definition of “technological measure” to be a loophole in the form of the word “effective”.
    That which can be broken by normal course of operation, be it a simple matter of disabling “autorun”, using an open OS, or accessing systems via a CLI. All of which are in the “ordinary course of its operation” for me.
    I’ll probably one of the first few put against the wall and shot for infringing this bill.

    My reference is this:

    “technological measure” means any effective technology, device or component that, in the ordinary course of its operation, …

  93. join the underground
    well it seems that this will force all of us underground since there are always innovative ways to circumvent any dumb law; franklly, in a way, i am actually waiting for someone confscate something i own, so i can make big case about it; or even worse, imagining myself and others in handcuffs for this reasons will certanly “make my day”. do not fear anything but fear itself. remember THAT ANY OF THIS LEGISLATION CAN NOT POSIBLY BE CRIMINAL BECOUSE IT DOES NOT INFRINGE—ANYONES— PHYSICAL WELL BEEING! THAT WOULD SIMPLY GO AGAINST THE CHARTER AND I WANT TO SEE ANY IDIOT CONSERVATIVE POLITICIAN FORCING ME THAT WAY!

    IF GET A FINE SIMPLLY IGNORE IT! remember that all you have to do is to not ACCEPT any terms that have been IMPOSED with you under no contract!
    some issues are very simple , just BLACK AND WHITE, and the coorporation always wins if you WILLING to compromise! whatever you own is yours, so if you have “infringed” files on your hard drive, confiscating the hard drive itself will be higlly illigal in itself as long as you OWN it. not even dictatorship countries can do that openly, hard to imagine this happening in canada!

    my bet is that the bill WILL BE ADJUSTED. they just made a dumb effort right now with extra laws they KNOW they will be ditched.

    as long as you not sharing to public by p2p connection , it is ILLIGAL for anyone to force you do anything beside what you want to do, downloading IS LEGAL, WHATEVER THAT MIGHT BE! if the industry wants to increase its revenues from illigaly “milking” artists by means of contracts, then they should make BETTER QUALITY MUSIC AND MOVIES! all those artistic standards have been in decline for a long time becouse all they care is about bottom line and not content!

    ah, and this person that wrote this: “Written by on 2008-06-13 09:19:00This is such juvenile, self-promoting nonsense. Of course there was consultation, and it’s not as if the government was unaware of the anti-copyright lobby. They looked at what was being said, and disagreed. That simple. Maybe a better approach might have been true compromise, a willingness to understand the concerns of the copyright owner side, and not going for highly personalized and offensive criticism of the Minister.”

    -go live on planet mars or better yet go FU.. yourself))) i am saying this as a citizen that has the right to disagree with your IGNORANT AND ARROGANT NON-SENSE, IN MY OPINION!
    and do not attempt to use language as a “bad” standard; beeing civilized INCLUDES listening to concerns wich you clearlly are not willing to do so by what you express in your post. and if you re one of those conservative POLITICIAN in disguise, u should be kicked out of the office for treason against the canadian CITIZEN and sent to jail!

  94. ok. So it’s ok for me to rip a cd I bought to my IPOD (asumming it has no DRM), but since I bought it, can my wife also have a copy on her IPOD… how about my daughter (you lives at home)

    If not, them why the hell not? Why should I purchase 3 copies for us to ba able o listen to it? We all live in the same house? What the hell are the chances that all 3 of us would be listening to it at the same time?

  95. R. Bassett Jr. says:

    TheSteve,

    As a long time GNU/Linux user, I had the same thought and I wondered where the line between an alternative to Windows/Mac OS/Unix and a “technological measure…” is drawn. One could argue that the whole purpose one thing is to circumvent the use of another thing.

    Heck, 711 could sue Mack’s for having a technilogical measure that circumvents using 711 machines to produce a “Slurpee” like drink, if this law were able to applied in contexts that it should not be – as is happening in the USA with their DMCA.

    cn79dmg3gk

  96. I think a quote is appropriate here:

    To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all laws into contempt.
    ~ Elizabeth Cady Stanton ~

  97. illegal innocent activities
    I use to make AVIs of my daughter’s (4 years old) favorites cartoons (legally purchased) in order to have a compilation of 6 or 7 movies in a single DVD. Doing this I save time and I save my investment since she can play and damage only copies. With this simple innocent activity I’m now a criminal who if caught would have to pay $20,000 dollars. I’m thinking now I have to get rid of those copies a.s.a.p. I guess there are thousands of average respectful Canadians (not pirates) with the same problem (i.e. all DVDs backup copies now are illegal since any DVD is digitally locked) who face the same fate ($20,000 dollar fine or prison). Lets inundate parliament hill with all those copies.

  98. Michael Bishop says:

    Ashamed…
    Mr. Harper and Mr. Prentice,

    I would offer you both a shovel to finish digging your own grave, but it appears you\’re using an excavator.

    I was a Conservative once…yesterday, actually.

  99. Time Machine
    This also affects Mac owners who use Time Machine for backups. You can make one copy. When Time Machine backs up your hard drive, you are making a second copy, which is illegal. And if you say, moved the directory the file was in, Time Machine would back up the file again, making another copy.

    I suspect that under Bill C-61 there is a good chance that any back up software would be illegal.

  100. Alternatives
    If we start with obligations stemming from Berne, TRIPS, and such international commitments, what exactly have other countries done to comply that are less like the DMCA? Rather than simply repeat our problems with C-61, can we put forth clear alternatives?

    Let Mr. Harper and Mr. Pentice explain what is wrong with Israeli and New Zealand approaches? As it is being played out in the last few days, we have the political face of the government (fronting for the senior bureaucracy and civil service at the same time: the guys who actually drafted this bill) saying it is needed, it is just, etc. and the multitudes pointing out the pain, the silliness, and the insult. Forcing the government (politicians and bureaucrats together) to show what is inadequate about a sound alternative might change the nature of the game.

  101. Anonymous says:

    Papa
    This shows that in essence, Canada is just another US state.

  102. Foreign DVDs
    Written by Molly on 2008-06-13 10:49:29
    I don’t understand how purchasing a DVD from another region (legally purchased, paid for, everybody gets their cut) is not allowed. Who is that hurting? Who is losing money?

    If I understand the bill correctly, it’s still legal to purchase DVDs from other regions. You just can’t play them here if you have to crack the region coding to do so. (I really hope my cheap Chinese DVD player lasts.)

    Who it hurts is easy: the studios. By chopping the world up into small pieces they can sell movies multiple times, or force people in some parts of the world to pay more. One of my favourite movies cost me 20 RMB in China (legally), which is about $3, but Sony wants $30 for the North American version (which is made in China anyway!).

    It’s a win-win situation for Hollywood. They only release a dozen movies in China, so of course everyone has to buy pirate versions there, and so they get to claim billions in ‘lost sales’ (for products they never made). And in North America they get to charge markups of 1000% for Chinese films (which I bet don’t get back to the Chinese producers).

    Interestingly enough, a friend of mine in Australia says that there it is illegal to sell a DVD player with region coding, because it is illegal to prevent someone from viewing legally purchased material. Odd how we didn’t use that model, isn’t it?

  103. Cliff Dawe says:

    Bill C-61 Betrayal of Our Trust!
    This Bill C-61 that Minister Prentice is promoting and going to try to push through final reading legislation this fall is a betrayal of the trust Canadians put in this party ( Conservative Party ) to fend for quality rights and life style for Canadian citizens – shows by their actions that we have been betrayed!

    Greedy Big Label Record Corporations and American Media Groups have lobbied some big money in the coffers and we have been sold down the river!

    Our Conservative Govt. is simply more interested in being subservient to Corporations that have far too much power and now they are even cuddling up with the American corporations who want to dictate our money ( Canadian )into their pockets, while Canadians loose the rights they did have!

    The actions and and sponsorship of this American Lobbied
    Bill C – 61 by our Conservative government speak louder than anything they might say to allieviate the Canadian people\’s distress with this bill, that will take away many of our rights and even make some of the products and even music and carreers that Canadian musicians have invested in illegal and laid to waste as useless!

    I am sure that was not the type of performance Canadian people had in mind when they went to the poles and voted in a Conservative government!

    Therefore I urge you, that come next election if you do like I will do in my own little way of sticking up for some of my rights as a Canadian citizen, I will not be voting Conservative on the next election!

    Somehow politicans need to learn and understand that we (Canadian citizens whom our government is supposed to be representing ) will not tolerate these kinds of abuses on our rights and freedom!

    Cliff Dawe

  104. Alex Savulescu says:

    An even more insidious betrayal to NEW C
    This betrayal is even more odious for “new Canadians”, who are suddenly facing the unnerving prospect of not being able to import media from their countries of origin… If I buy a European DVD, and I bypass the region coding on my North American DVD player or computer, I’ve become a criminal under this new Bill, even though the disc was legitimately acquired. No more ties with the motherland or else!

    I am so disgusted… at a loss for words. This government is a total disaster, I hope they’re getting destroyed in the next elections.

  105. Anonymous says:

    This is Insane. What ever happened to common sense?

    It should be you buy a cd you own the rights to listen to it on any of your electronic devices including converting it to mp3. Whats the difference remember cassette tapes?

    how many people copied recordings from record players to cassette tapes?

    BS i tell you.

  106. Recording Industry
    This has nothing to do with the artist\’s
    This has nothing to do with piracy
    This has nothing to do with intellectual propperty rights

    This is about control.
    This is about money.
    This is a greedy US model to generate more income for the distributor\’s

    This bill benefits one group in particular. APPLE because who is going to buy a CD? or dvd?
    No one.

    I am not going to buy one CD for my car and a MP3 Version of the cd for while I listen to it while i am jogging.

  107. Well, all I can say is \”Thank the Lord I\’m not in Canada.\” Unfortunately, that only goes so far. If this same bill was introduced in the USA, I think everyone would be outraged, since everyone I know has an iPod, MP3 player, or at least two computers they would like to have the same music on.

  108. Marion31Morrow says:

    reply this post
    I would like to propose not to hold back until you get big sum of money to buy different goods! You can just get the loan or financial loan and feel comfortable