The CCA puts out two documents (1, 2), which acknowledge that a key driver behind the bill is "unrelenting pressure from the United States and the mass media interests who regard Canadian copyright law as harmful to their economic interests. (This despite the fact that the World Economic Forum rates Canadian copyright law as being superior to American legislation.)"
Canadian Conference of the Arts on C-61
July 28, 2008
Tags: c-61 / canadian conference of the arts / cca / copyright / Copyright Canada
Share this post
Episode 169: Alissa Centivany and Anthony Rosborough on Repairing Canada’s Right to Repair
June 5, 2023
May 29, 2023
May 15, 2023
May 1, 2023
Search Results placeholder
- The Draft Bill C-11 Policy Direction: Canadian Heritage Implicitly Admits What It Spent Months Denying
- Tough Talk, Empty Answers: How Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez is Propelling Canada’s News Sector Toward the Bill C-18 Cliff
- The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 169: Alissa Centivany and Anthony Rosborough on Repairing Canada’s Right to Repair
- Meta to Test Blocking News Sharing on Facebook and Instagram in Canada in Response to Bill C-18’s Mandated Payments for Links
- Globe Publisher Calls Bill C-18 a “Threat to the Independence of Media” As Government Senate Representative Smears Bill Critics
Law, Privacy and Surveillance in Canada in the Post-Snowden Era (University of Ottawa Press, 2015)
The Copyright Pentalogy: How the Supreme Court of Canada Shook the Foundations of Canadian Copyright Law (University of Ottawa Press, 2013)
From “Radical Extremism” to “Balanced Copyright”: Canadian Copyright and the Digital Agenda (Irwin Law, 2010)
In the Public Interest: The Future of Canadian Copyright Law (Irwin Law, 2005) .
Apparently they forgot…
In the second document, “While the CCA welcomes the recognition that copyright is an essential tool to reward and encourage creativity and innovation, the expanded exceptions within C-61 broaden access to copyrighted materials with little recompense to the creator/copyright owner.”
Apparently they forgot the exceptions to the exceptions, namely DRM. Granted, the primary beneficiary of DRM is not the authors, but rather the publishers. However, so long as the authors/artists get a slice of the sales, they also benefit.
no they got it right, there is no benifit to the authors. You must be smoking something good if you think the publisher is going to change it’s stripes.
Since the advent of copyright of media, when has any Government on this planet of ours ever cared about what the authors rights are?
Is it just me or is the International Political response to this so called protection of intellectual copyright, disproportionate to the actual issue?
Why and how is an issue of what is basically pocket change in World Markets Terms being given so much time in our Political Arena’s?
I don’t care more about corporation right than citizen right.
Those corporate clearly want citizen right twiddle to oblivion.
Copyright should be:
1- Any money made upon copyright product is a copyright infringement.
That is… the bottom line of copyright protections. Now, that was the first copyright symbol when they created the first law of it… and in that time the Citizen Rights were more important than the corporate one. (the copyright is a monopoly for 20 years, after that the product is considered owned by the humanity)
That is the bottom line of my “religion”. In that regard, my religion permit me to share, care for my neighbors. People that try to stop my virtue of sharing are working for the Devil… and my religion don’t permit me to knee before them.