Yahoo’s The Right Click reports on the mounting protests from Canadians against the prospect of adding SOPA-style amendments to Bill C-11.
Archive for February, 2012
Government Imposes Time Allocation on Bill C-11
Government House Leader Peter Van Loan announced yesterday that the government is imposing time allocation on the second reading debate on Bill C-11. That means debate on the bill should conclude on Friday and the bill will be sent to committee for further hearings and review. While the government’s overuse […]
“Bill C-11 Is No SOPA”: My Response
The short response is that Sookman’s column – along with his clients – downplay the dramatic impact of their proposed amendments. Their proposed amendments to C-11 would radically alter the bill by constraining consumer provisions, heaping greater liability risk on Internet companies, and introducing website blocking and Internet termination to Canada. Several of these provisions are very similar in approach to SOPA in the U.S. and the comparison is both apt and accurate. Moreover, the column leaves the false impression that Bill C-11’s digital lock rules are standard when they are widely opposed by numerous stakeholders that Sookman would not dare to call anti-copyright.
There is much more to take issue with in the column and I’ve done so in paragraph-by-paragraph format below. Sookman’s column is posted in italics and my response immediately follows:
Could SOPA Make Its Way Into Canadian Copyright Law?
Appeared in the Toronto Star on February 5, 2012 as Canada’s overhaul of copyright law could take on a SOPA flavour The battle over the Stop Online Piracy Act in the United States may have concluded with millions of Internet users successfully protesting against the bill, but many Canadians are […]
Will Canada – China Changes Include a Shift on Intellectual Property?
While China-based piracy is unquestionable a concern, Canada has too often used the issue to curry favour with the U.S. at the expense of developing the China relationship. In recent years, our support for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (which deliberately excluded China) and now the Trans Pacific Partnership (which also excludes China) does little to help relations. China could be a strategic ally on global IP issues as both countries face significant external pressure for reform. While compliance with international rules should be the starting point for any dialogue, focusing on the flexibility that exists at international law to address domestic concerns is in both our interests.
The biggest Canadian blunder was the decision to join a U.S. complaint against China at the World Trade Organization in 2007 alleging that China’s domestic laws, border measures, and criminal penalties for intellectual property violations did not comply with its international treaty obligations. The case was a big loss. China was required to amend parts of its copyright law but on the big issues – border measures and IP enforcement – almost all of the contested laws were upheld as valid.
More interesting are the background documents that demonstrate that the Canadian government was unable to muster credible evidence of harm among Canadian companies.
Recent Posts
Debating the Online Harms Act: Insights from Two Recent Panels on Bill C-63 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 199: Boris Bytensky on the Criminal Code Reforms in the Online Harms Act 
AI Spending is Not an AI Strategy: Why the Government’s Artificial Intelligence Plan Avoids the Hard Governance Questions 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 198: Richard Moon on the Return of the Section 13 Hate Speech Provision in the Online Harms Act 
Tweets Are Not Enough: Why Combatting Relentless Antisemitism in Canada Requires Real Leadership and Action
