Yesterday's posting referenced the damages limitation for libraries, archives, museums, and educational institutions that limits their liability for "innocent circumvention" to an injunction only. It is worth asking why this principle does not extend to all Canadians. If the circumvention occurs for innocent purposes (ie. where the individual did not know that the circumvention violates the law), there is no reason to layer on the prospect of financial liability. As many have stated, the law fails to distinguish between cases of commercial piracy and non-commercial, private activities. The damage provisions should be amended to reflect those differences, not privilege only libraries, archives, museums, and educational institutions.
61 Reforms to C-61, Day 34: TPMs – LAM and Educational Institution Limitations, Part Two
Tags: 61 reforms / anti-circumvention / archives / c-61 / copyright / dmca / libraries / museumsCopyright Canada / prentice
3 Comments
Recent Posts
Named to Canadian Lawyer’s Top 25 Most Influential Lawyers 
Be Careful What You Wish For: Why Asking Google Maps to Defy the U.S. on Lake Ontario Would Undermine Canadian Digital Sovereignty 
Big Money, Bigger Design Changes: What the Meta Settlement Means for Canada, Bill C-34, and the Age Verification and Privacy Risks That Remain 
Unleashing the Trolls: Ontario Court Opens the Door to Liability for Influencers Who Weaponize Their Audiences 
Why Ottawa Will Likely Join the U.S. in Opposing the Quebec Online Streaming Law at the Centre of the Trade Battle
Designed to Fail?
I paranoically wonder if perhaps that failure wasn’t planned from the beginning when this bill was first put together.
As was pointed out yesterday, no-one can now claim innocence
high-balling
I would argue that they’re aware it won’t pass it it’s present form, but they will pass a watered down version of it, this way they can say they’re responding to Canadian concerns and those of industry.
They’re playing both sides of the fence like the their predecessors.