The Chair of the Canadian Bar Association's IP Committee, Torys lawyer
Andrew Bernstein, has sent a public letter
to the thousands of IP Committee members responding to the media
reports of pressure to withdraw a CBA copyright submission. The CBA
letter not only debunks claims of secrecy and plagiarism, but calls
into question the motivation of the 34 lawyers who signed onto the
letter.
The CBA letter confirms my previous post
that there was no plagiarism given the use of materials from a
predecessor committee. It also includes two important revelations (both
new to me). First, Bernstein reveals that he personally provided the
original letter writers - Casey Chisick and Claude Brunet - with an
explanation for how the drafting of the submission occurred and why
claims of plagiarism were false. Despite being briefed on the issue,
Chisick and Brunet proceeded with the letter and 32 others signed it.
Second, the repeated claims that the working group membership was
secret are unfounded. Bernstein notes "the names of the Working Group
members are available to any Section member who undertakes not to
disclose the names outside the CBA for lobbying purposes." In other
words, thousands of CBA members have access to the membership list on
the single condition that it not be used for lobbying purposes. That
the 34 lawyers presumably decided not to accept those terms points to what may be a key motivation for many behind the letter. It is not about CBA process
concerns nor about plagiarism. It is lobbying, designed to distract
from the SOPA-style demands, iPod taxes, and reduced fair dealing
reforms many of the lawyers and their clients are seeking to be
included within Bill C-11. As I stated yesterday, the best response to
this shameful attack is for Canadians to speak out
with their views on copyright before it is too late.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareFriday March 09, 2012 |
|
|
Open Media has launched a campaign
to encourage Canadians to speak out before Monday's Bill C-11 meeting.
The group makes it easy to speak out against SOPA style reforms, harms
to fair dealing, and unduly restrictive digital lock rules.
Postmedia's Sarah Schmidt covers the upcoming amendments here.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareFriday March 09, 2012 |
|
Dwayne Winseck examines
many of the copyright maximalist claims and doesn't pull any punches:
The biggest problem with all of this
is not the underlying faulty economics and total absence of meaningful
evidence, but rather the complete bankruptcy of the lawyers and
lobbyists peddling the case. They appear to have no moral compass when
it comes to these matters and would just as easily turn ISPs, search
engines and social networking sites into online gatekeepers working in
their behalf as they’d toss their grandmothers overboard if she hacked
a digital lock.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareFriday March 09, 2012 |
|
|
The Financial Post runs my blog post responding to the false claims of
plagiarism and policy laundering at the Canadian Bar Association as an op-ed
in today's paper.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareFriday March 09, 2012 |
|
|
