Canadian ACTA Consultation Report Revealed

In an earlier post, I noted that the Department of Foreign Affairs will be holding a consultation meeting on ACTA next week.  DFAIT first consulted on ACTA in the spring of 2008.  While I discussed some of the findings based on documents obtained under the Access to Information Act, I did not previously have access to the entire draft report.  I do now (through ATIP) – it is posted below for research and news reporting purposes. 

Update: In response to several comments, a non-Scribd PDF version is available here.


  1. Denver Gingerich says:

    Publishing report in a standard format
    As currently published, the report is not viewable for some users, including anyone that doesn’t use a Flash player (such as all iPhone users). Although Scribd does allow you to download the document in PDF or text format, it requires you to have a Scribd account, which many people would not want to create.

    Additionally, because of the use of Flash or requiring an account, the report is not indexable by search engines. This limits people’s ability to find it, which limits the reports usefulness.

    As a result of these issues, I suggest posting the report on your web site in a standard format such as PDF or text. If there are any problems with doing this, I’d be happy to help.

  2. Maupassant says:

    This is impossible to read
    This is unreadable as is (in firefox with flash), the fullscreen toggle does nothing, same as the save document menu item.

    Document successfully protected, then.

  3. provide a proper link pal
    ya and htis is jsut another way they including you are slowing the news

    comeone mike, you know thats not what you should have done.

  4. Chris Brand says:

    Follow the link
    It’s more readable if your follow the “posted below” link.

  5. Oddly intelligent.
    Aside from the squabbling over the use of scribd(which isn’t that bad, folks, even if not ideal), the documentation appears promisingly as if written by someone who truly does see how utterly ludicrous the handling of this has been. It’s nice to see some actual, you know, -principles- in gov’t.

  6. Denver Gingerich says:

    Re: Follow the link
    No, it’s not. It’s still in Flash. I can’t view it and neither can search engines.

  7. Scribd SUCKS!
    For someone who is as concerned about DRM as Mr. Geist is, it absolutely astounds me that he would post such an important document using this outdated and useless piece of DRM kludge Scribd.

    Just give me a simple PDF or even a text file.

    Scribd is just another form of DRM. IMHO.

  8. interesting read
    of 31 responses, according to article the majoruty of responses were “critical” of our involvement .

    IP crime love that
    think about the word. Intellectual Property OR thought control in effect.

    Freemarkets drive pricing , if you price to high OR make it too difficult …p2p sharing occurs and so does counterfeiting, buy outlawing filesharing YOU create a market for counterfeiting aka p2p for profit,
    when a cdr is 1$ and a movie fits on it …..versus a drmed 20-30 $ DVDR or 40-60$ blue-ray
    well gee am i going to buy off THEM or the guy at 5$ a dvdr /cdr.
    DON’T give me morals and crap either im already poor all this bailout madness , increases to bell tariffs and such will just make my “collection valueable as in every time i go without food il begin to “think more criminally”. THAT IS REALITY THEY ARE ACTUALLY CREATING.

    when you consider the pseudo legality that we can download cause we pay cdr levy , perhaps a the mediums SHOULD in law be made able to be expanded such as hard drives for individual and dvdrs and blu ray discs
    idea there that businesses get a special card or license exemption so they don’t have to pay for it as i don’t think that appropriate for some business to download and burn things as that’s using profits to profit more and as such under existing canuck laws would in fact for a business be illegal.

    but say they want hd’s for a computer they should not have to pay levy.

    On that note why do we need acta , why do we need wipo we catch you selling stuff we arrest and fine or imprison already?
    AND its nice to see the main focus seems to be on gang and “organized piracy” versus me getting a few tv eps or a music tune.

    remember either way i don’t have the money for you AIG style greedy mothers. So don’t waste time and effort.

    what benefit does 50 year copyright do any citizen of Canada? Then think USA style 95 years AFTER life of author, which could be as much as another 50+ years.
    So it is noice to see that they actually say they wont extend the time frames or would like acta not to require that.
    AWFUL drain on our economy these crazy time frames.

    ONE single stakeholder requested that sharing personal data doesn’t “impede(BLOCK) enforcement”
    Gee wonder who made that request CRIA anyone?

  9. More stuff
    BTW i dont eat a tv episode or music tune, i listen to it as a customer or freely share my enjoyment.
    THOSE should not be termed “consumables”
    for when you consume somehting after that its gone, and needs be gotten again from another source to be CONSUMED again, like you know food.
    Which is why a digital copy is not and should not be theft for personal uses. the original is not a candy bar that once CONSUMED is gone.

    One day in a gene roddenberry world , art music and entertainment are all freed and humanity will grow at an astonishing rate culturally, think about that in the 60’s how much culture was really shared …..

    UM how do they know your going to sell or not sell, that’s one prob also i see here, as htey state that if you possess goods that can be sold for the purpose of sale you are doing a crime.

    SO i have a music tune see …GUILTY

    immunity to private sectors for search and seizure? um shouldn’t that be other way around , as most likely that store selling counterfeit dvdrs should be searched and the crap seized.

    UM custom officers wiht power to destroy stuff , note they didnt say AFTER DUE course of law or a court hearng, nope they take your iphone or ipod and smash it. ALL at request of some IP owner who just may say go ahead all the time. NO court nothing.
    YEA that is gonna go over well.
    some of hte “stakeholders were opposed to the above good for them.

    statutory damages are a sham

    250000$ for a music tune screw yo
    i lose job and go on welfare and for 20 years you get 26$ a month off my welfare check UP YOURS.
    OR when i cant pay a fine i goto jail and cost taxpayers 40000 a year. GOOD ONE.
    rapists murderers , terrorists and we put kids in prisons and disabled.

  10. more again
    all the above then
    no differance between non commercial and commercial infringement.

    you get same crap as some idiot ripping and making money , well hten might as well sell dvdrs and cdrs then
    GEEE wise up turkeys.

    Circumvetion is mentioned again as mr geist states
    the wording means all software and things used to do this.
    AND its all criminal.
    and of course the vagueness of “circumvention” again comes back to bill c61 madness about who owns my door locks let alone digital locks.
    ADDITIONALLY any service you give in regard to said production or use is now going to also be an offense
    make a image for some website
    make the website
    provide a link ( p2p net won a case regarding links but this would be a challenging aspect right off the hop by canuck law)

    ISPS forced to cooperate aka censor your net provisions …..UGH

    and we now have added parts about you losing rights to have internet access for read up OPTICAL DISC infringement.
    soon as you burn YOUR screwed BUT you paid the CDR levy
    hrm is that legal?

    i see some stakeholders have sanity and are opposed to that and other censorship and anti-net neutral policies.

  11. and lastly
    i like this is funny
    “internet distribution and information technology”
    those last two words are so vague as to be anything any 0 or 1 transmitted on the net.
    IT is the net.
    p2p is about distribution shifting to the user whom pays for it rather then requiring or needing the movie house OR the big music companies and they know it.
    THIS mainly is an attempt to CONTROL not make more money and it will fail utterly.

    and in fact piracy has never impeded or blocked knowledge
    in fact proof is that if you or i never shared knowledge wed all be fraking 4 year olds for ever and cave men still.

    Piracy if its on a rise is showing that the current system of capitalism is and has failed to recognize that knowledge needs to be free and no matter how many laws you try 1984 will never happen we will fight for our right for freedom.

    If piracy is growing in organized crime fashion then mandate them lower the prices , that will whack the gang to make a buck at it. Ya see Hollywood wants gangs to use it so they can make laws to screw more people , cause a gangster don’t care about going to jail does he?

  12. ONE idea disturbs me
    you put some software into public domain or an image
    it hten gets used in a circumvention or a website fo rsuch

    your liable too so guess what this also places restrictions forever on public domain artwork music and software.

    Open source guys going to love this crap.

  13. How legal is a treaty like this
    As proposed i’ve seen this document about a month or so ago
    can’t remember where.
    Fact is there are sections that are contrary to basic human rights and instead of taking our rights away all the time and restricting us

    remember the movie serenity
    where the teacher is sitting there asking why the independents rose up in a grand civil war across the galaxy?
    River tamm said “it’s cause we meddle”
    We get in there heads , we tell them what to do , where to go what to eat , we meddle”

    This is the premise that is going to cause a real bunch a violence if this form of control continues , democracy destroyed communism and it will destroy hollywoodism, OR plutocracy OR oligarchy is and shall never be allowed to control us.

    I do not believe that the UN charter allows for a lot of this , but hey when did the USA ever go by democracy, ya know those guys that yap USA isn’t a democracy its a republic. HA, go read what the definition of that is and then tell me they aren’t a plutocracy (govt by wealthy)

  14. Canadian Stakeholders-Who are they?
    Its on Wikileaks in case anyone has problems seeing it:,_2008

    It seems geared around what “stakeholders” have to say.

    Who are theses Canadian “stakeholders”? Is there any info on who these stakeholders are?

  15. Who are theses Canadian “stakeholders”? Is there any info on who these stakeholders are?

    I’ll tell you exactly who they are.


  16. Canadian Stakeholders-Who are they?
    No. It appears to be Canadian “stakeholders”.