On the Bill C-11 front, the CACN wants to gut many of the balancing provisions, including limiting the scope of the already overly restrictive digital lock exceptions, dropping the ISP notice-and-notice approach in favour of a graduated response that could lead to terminating Internet service for individual users, and removing the distinction between commercial and non-commercial infringement for statutory damages despite the fact that Canada is one of the few countries to have such damage provisions (which would pave the way for more Hurt Locker style lawsuits against individuals).
- Canadian courts have awarded significant multi-million dollar awards in counterfeiting cases. For example, this past summer the Federal Court of Canada awarded millions in damages arising from a counterfeiting case launched by Louis Vuitton. The case is one of a growing number of decisions with significant damage awards. As Canadian experts have noted, the courts have sent a strong signal of a tougher approach on trademark and copyright infringement with some of the biggest financial penalties in the world.
- Several studies indicate that Canadian counterfeiting and piracy rates are declining. The OECD found that Canada is among the lowest sources of counterfeit products, the Business Software Alliance has said that Canada’s piracy rate is at an all-time low, the Canadian Motion Pictures Distributors Association has said that unauthorized camcording has all but disappeared in Canada.
- The RCMP and other law enforcement agencies regularly report on seizures of counterfeit products. In recent weeks, there have been reports in Toronto, Sarnia, and Winnipeg to name a few. While the CACN would no doubt point to this as evidence of a counterfeiting problem, RCMP action points to law enforcement prioritization and the effectiveness of current Canadian law.
While everyone is opposed to counterfeiting that raises health and safety concerns, the CACN is pushing for a massive public investment into private enforcement matters at the very time when the evidence suggests Canada already has strong legal rules against counterfeiting and a clear commitment from law enforcement to take appropriate action.
Digital Locks do the opposite
The only thing that digital locks and DRM have ever proven to do is frustrate customers and push them towards alternative methods of acquiring their media content. At no point have they ever contributed to increased sales or improved an experience for customers. Simply put, they don’t work. End of discussion. So why bother even allowing them? They defraud consumers of their money when their service shuts down. See any number of sites and businesses that have done so and left customers with useless content that they paid for. This just leads customers towards alternative downloads. And as far as counterfeiting goes, digital locks and DRM are a joke to those who wish to counterfeit, it would never stop them. It’s about equal to how fancy electronic lock devices have stopped car theft. Oh wait, they haven’t, it’s actually even easier for car thieves these days.
…
I’m sick of idiots like this. Let them have all their wishes. The faster groups like this realize legislation and regulation won’t fix the problem, the faster we can get on to real solutions. Of course, extremist groups like this, the RIAA, MPAA, etc, won’t be happy until the Internet is completely shut off so they can go back to their hay-days.
Technology will always be ahead of the legislation. Work with it or die. Did type-writer makers have legal protection when the word-processor came out? Did the candle makers have legal protection when electricity and the light bulb came out? Of course not, they had to adapt or fade away. Why today, do we allow progress to be stifled in the name of obsolete technologies?
With all the regulation and legislation groups like this are asking for these days we’re going to become stagnant. Think about it, if all these laws they want were applied 40 years ago, we’d still be listening to vinyl, we would never have had the cassette player, the VCR, personal computer, the Internet, cell phones and a plethora of other devices and technologies.
Legislation that deliberately stagnates progress is wrong, no matter then intent. DMCA, SOPA, C-11, graduated response, lawful access, protection of digital locks and so much more, all in to this category.
What about the 301 list
“Several studies indicate that Canadian counterfeiting and piracy rates are declining. The OECD found that Canada is among the lowest sources of counterfeit products, the Business Software Alliance has said that Canada’s piracy rate is at an all-time low, the Canadian Motion Pictures Distributors Association has said that unauthorized camcording has all but disappeared in Canada.”
Why is Canada still making the 301 list ? I guess that is pro-copyright propaganda.
Putting some of this into the criminal law is like welfare for rights holders by shifting the burden and costs of prosecution onto governments. These costs can be considerably more than the actual damages. If industry wants to go after the offenders it should have the burdens of prosecution. Recovered costs should never exceed the amount of damages. Perhaps too small-claims courts should have jurisdiction. If the rights holders had to bear more responsibility for prosecutions they might restrain themselves in all but the most important cases.
Fries with that?
@”CACG” – limiting the scope of the already overly restrictive digital lock exceptions, dropping the ISP notice-and-notice approach in favour of a graduated response that could lead to terminating Internet service for individual users, and removing the distinction between commercial and non-commercial infringement for statutory damages” !!?
Ever see a kid the first time they go to one of those huge candy stores? I’ll have one of those, and two of those, and all of these …
Greed, followed by gluttony never ends well.
Punish and Withhold!
“Meanwhile citizens increasingly hear the word copyright and hate what is behind it. Sadly, many see the current system as a tool to punish and withhold, not a tool to recognise and reward. ” – Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the European Commission responsible for the Digital Agenda.
And there we go again. Shock and Awe, Punish and Withhold.
Here is the list of CACN members for those who would like to inquire why they shouldn’t be allowed to some “copy-controlled” CDs on their iPods or their DVD collection on their Home Theatre PC.
Aside from the Law Firms and the Usual Suspects, you’d be surprised by some of the names on the list:
Canadian Institute of Plumbing And Heating
Canadian Standards Association (CSA)
ating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Institute of Canada
Electro Federation Canada
Do they really want to associate themselves with these Punish and Withhold campaigns?
CACN Membership List
Sorry, for some reason the link was missing from the previous post: http://www.cacn.ca/members.html
@Byte
“Do they really want to associate themselves with these Punish and Withhold campaigns?”
Do they even understand or care is more the point.
@IamME
The link I gave also has contact information; just skip the Law Firms (to them it’s all just billable time) and the likes of Apple, Microsoft and Motion Picture Association of Canada, and point specifically to paragraphs 7.1 and 8.1 in that brochure, and just ask them if they can please confirm that they are aware of it and actually stand behind it.
You might also want to point the the Retail Council of Canada’s submission to the C-32 hearings: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6046/125/
BSA is backing out of SOPA, perhaps we can have a few consumer-aware CACN members openly distance themselves from that report.