John Degen's Globe and Mail essay declares that there is no copyright crisis. Degen is the head of the Professional Writers Association of Canada.
Who Needs Copyright, Anyway?
May 18, 2008
Share this post
4 Comments

Law Bytes
Episode 247: My Senate Appearance on the Bill That Could Lead to Canada-Wide Blocking of X, Reddit and ChatGPT
byMichael Geist

October 27, 2025
Michael Geist
October 20, 2025
Michael Geist
October 6, 2025
Michael Geist
September 22, 2025
Michael Geist
September 15, 2025
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
We Need More Canada in the Training Data: My Appearance Before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage on AI and the Creative Sector
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 247: My Senate Appearance on the Bill That Could Lead to Canada-Wide Blocking of X, Reddit and ChatGPT
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 246: Mohamed Zohiri on the Rise and Emerging Regulation of Stablecoins
Senate Bill Would Grant Government Regulatory Power to Mandate Age Verification For Search, Social Media and AI Services Accompanied By Threat of Court Ordered Blocking of Lawful Content
Government Reverses on Bill C-2: Removes Lawful Access Warrantless Demand Powers in New Border Bill

It’s not about getting material for free. If that were true, iTunes should not exist in the face of free competition. It’s not about abolishing or fighting copyright.
It’s about content providers embracing new business models instead of embracing new technologies that reduce the value of content for the consumer. It’s about treating your customers right. It’s about adding more value to content.
Despite his flawed diatribe, Degen concedes and ends up doing what “copyright fighters” like yourself, Ingram and TechDirt have been saying for years: change your business model. Unfortunately, I don’t think that Degen sees it that way.
He may not believe that’s what he’s doing…
Remember what copyright is for
The problem is governments, companies and individuals forget about what copyright is all about. In its most basic form, its simply about maximizing innovation.
If the copyright term is too short, no innovation will take place. A company would not be able to achieve a good enough return on the money invested in performing the research.
On the other hand, if the copyright term is too long, innovation will take place, but it will be significantly under-utilized. Only a single company, the company that performed the research, will get any benefit.
So there needs to be a balance, and government is who has been tasked with finding this balance.
Finding the Balance
Chris I think your right on the money when you say that copyright is a balancing act. The company I’m interning for, iCopyright, believes the same thing. It isn’t acceptable to let someone else’s content be whisked away and profited off by someone else; however also isn’t right for one’s work to stop innovation. iCopyright just came out with its beta version of ©reators which seeks to strike a balance between the creator’s rights, user’s rights, and the greater good.
The ©reators beta site is [ link ]’ target=’_blank’>link ].
Kind Regards,
Tyson O’Donnell
Product Marketing Manager
206-484-8561
Tyson@icopyright.com
[ link ]’ target=’_blank’>link ]