The Globe and Mail's Ivor Tossell provides the answer.
How Did Copyright Become Cool?
Tags: cdmca / Copyright Canada / copyright for canadians / Copyright Microsite - Canadian Copyright / Globe and Mail / prentice / tossell
4 Comments
Recent Posts
Back-of-the-Napkin Cultural Policy: The Government’s $600 Million Streaming Plan Copies the CRTC Decision It Killed at More Than Double the Cost 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 282: Udbhav Tiwari on Why Signal May Exit Canada Over Bill C-22’s Encryption and Metadata Retention Rules 
From Making Web Giants Pay to Paying Media Giants: Budget 2026 Replaces the Government’s Internet Platform Strategy With $1.5 Billion in Taxpayer Dollars for Culture and News 
Has the Government Read Its Own Bill? What Three Days of House Debate Revealed About Bill C-34 Before the Committee Hearings Begin 
Surveillance By Design: Government Officials Say Lawful Access Could Reach Gaming Platforms, Daycares and AI Services
WIPO and Anti Circumvention?
Does WIPO have a provision for anti-circumvention of DRM? as the cited article states?
Oh yes
Article 11 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty.
“provide adequate legal protection and effective legal remedies against the circumvention of effective technological measures”
@Chris Brand:
“provide adequate legal protection and effective legal remedies against the circumvention of **effective** technological measures”
Emphasis added for your amusement.
It seems to me, knowing a good amount of the history of DRM, that we have not yet come up with an effective DRM Scheme…
Theres been…
Devious…
Intrusive…
Damaging…
Appalling…
Laughable…
Expensive…
and Outright Broken…
but nope… theres nothing effective about any DRM scheme I’ve seen thus far.
So it seems to me that we wouldn’t have to much to satisfy that part of the treaty… until of course somebody comes up with an “effective” DRM… then we’d be in trouble.
But I don’t see that happening.
I think it’d be great if the law only restricted people from circumventing effective DRM. At least, as long as “effective DRM” was interpreted how I interpret it. If it can be circumvented, it’s not effective. So it wouldn’t be illegal to circumvent it.