Post Tagged with: "music shifting"

61 Reforms to C-61, Day 13: Music Shifting Provision and One Copy Per Device

Today's proposed reform comes directly from a reader of the blog who writes: While I was reading your latest entry in "61 Reforms to C-61," I realized that the "one copy per device" limitation on "format shifting" as described in Section 29.22(1)(d)(i) makes a common practice of mine illegal – […]

Read more ›

July 9, 2008 21 comments News

61 Reforms to C-61, Day 11: Music Shifting Provision Non-Compatible With Online Music Lockers

In recent months there has been growing emphasis on the potential of online music lockers that allow users to access their music from anywhere.  Services include MP3Tunes, Musana, and Anywhere.fm.  While most of these services rely on the fair use provision in the United States (though Musana is based in […]

Read more ›

July 7, 2008 8 comments News

61 Reforms to C-61, Day 10: Music Shifting Provision May Conflict With Computer Backup Systems

The music shifting provision is careful to limit the number of copies that may be shifted to one per device.  In particular, the provision (Section 29.22 (1)(c)) states that an individual may reproduce "the sound recording no more than once for each device that the individual owns, whether the reproduction […]

Read more ›

July 3, 2008 26 comments News

61 Reforms to C-61, Day 9: Music Shifting Subject To Anti-Circumvention Limitation

Having reviewed the format and time shifting provisions, I now turn to the music shifting provisions (Section 29.22).  Industry Minister Jim Prentice has heavily promoted these provisions as he assures Canadians that they can now shift music from CDs to their iPods. The provision has faced significant criticism from all sides, however.  The Canadian Private Copying Collective is livid at the change, arguing that it will "rob creators of their rights, denying them compensation for this use of their work."  In what sounds a lot like consumer group complaints, the CPCC adds that they were not consulted on the issue and that an open consultation is needed.

From the consumer perspective, the provision does not go far enough.  I think it is fair to say that most consumers believe that if they have paid for a song, they should have the right to listen to it on the device of their choice without further compensation (CRIA seemingly agrees).  Such uses should be considered fair uses and the value of listening to a song on multiple devices can be built into the initial purchase price.

Yet the music shifting provision is subject to some significant limitations that undermine their fairness. 

Read more ›

July 3, 2008 39 comments News