Canadian Advanced Technology Alliance Concerned With C-32’s Digital Lock Rules

The Canadian Advanced Technology Alliance, one of Canada’s leading technology associations with small, medium, and large technology companies as members, has posted an issues brief that includes criticism of Bill C-32’s approach to digital locks.  According to CATA:

Like many stakeholders, the members of the coalition are concerned that the new personal use rights (as well as other legal uses of works) are eliminated in the presence of a “digital lock.” To provide greater consistency between the personal use provisions (which prohibit circumvention of both access control and copy control TPMs) and the general anti-circumvention provisions (which only prohibit circumvention of copy control TPMs), we propose that the personal use exceptions permit circumvention of copy control measures, but not access control measures.


  1. William Wallis says:

    I agree with CATA from the perspective of the content remaining unaltered. The author / creator of the work must, at minimum, be credited and acknowledged for their effort. Preventing alteration makes proof of that authoring / creation easier and, hopefully, reduces the need for a “qualified opinion”. This is my take on the “copy control measures”.

    My concern is the “access control measures”. Would format or time shifting be deemed “access”?

  2. False dichotomy
    There is a false dichotomy between ‘access controls’ and ‘copy controls’. In the majority of cases, the same technology is serving both purposes.

  3. Say What?
    But William, digital signatures can already be used to authenticate content and documents…DRM. does no such thing! Your post did get me thinking, though, that DRM is as much a copyright violation tool as it is a “protection” tool. If I were an artist and someone co-opted my work without permission as part of theirs and then locked that with DRM I’d be right pissed!!!

  4. @Abattoir
    Access control measures, in this sense, would include things like TPMs which prevent the use of time-restricted demo software beyond the demo period. You can use it free for 90 days but at the end of the period must purchase or not have access to the tools. In some cases the free version of a piece of software, which has reduced functionality, and the full version, is a licence key. For instance, Apple’s Quicktime product, without a license, could be used for playback but with a license could be used to create files.

  5. A perplexing position …
    The government seems to be putting positions forward that conflict in regards to the fair use/industry needs debate.

    1) Gov: Fair dealing essential part of copyright law. Extension to education not open-ended. SCC tests still apply

    2) Garneau: Do digital locks trump all education rights under fair dealing? Gov: YES

    3) Angus: Surprised education rts trumped by locks. Doesn’t WIPO offer flexibility? Gov: Diff views on meeting standard

    So, at least the government acknowledges that there are different views on TPM implementation in regards to WIPO, but seems to be holding the line on their current interpretation. I suspect that must be their starting place but they will eventually have to give ground to reach a consensus.

    But I fail to see the point of education (or any fair use provision) falling under fair dealing then saying TPM trumps those provisions. Do they really think that media holders will not use digital locks to the fullest extent to maintain their control? Is this just naivety on the part of the government or rather theater for the masses?

  6. In a digital world, access control = copy control. They are inseparable.

  7. Wow, are they stupid or something? So they are saying you can copy it all you like, but you can’t access it? How does the work? I guess it works in imaginary land. Then again, in imaginary land, stakeholders like this would actually know what the hell they are talking about.

    Any other “alliances” or “associations” want to say stupid things? (Degen, that’s your cue!)

  8. Again, like so many other things involved around this, it’s no more than splitting hairs.

  9. “access control”
    I don’t see why our government has decided to give rightsholders control over access *at all*. They never had the right to decide when or how I read a book that I buy, why should they get the digital equivalent ?
    There’s no reason to allow an author to dictate that I can’t read the book I bought in the bath, or for a movie maker to decide that I can’t watch the DVD that I bought in a different country.
    Simple fairness says that once I’ve paid for it, “access” should be out of their control.

  10. @Chris: “I don’t see why our government has decided to give rightsholders control over access *at all*.”

    So that you cannot skip advertising and other crap on you DVDs. You know, these create “additional revenue streams” for the “starving CEOs” so that they could afford the new Lamborghini model.

    Of course, the “starving artists” won’t see a penny from this advertising.


  11. My DVD player allows me to skip ads, it even lets me skip the iritating “Theft is Theft” garbage they put on the start of DVDs. If I’m seeing it, I probably already BOUGHT or legally rented the DVD, this just serves to iritate me. “Pirates” certainly don’t include such things on the ones you download from bittorrent and ripping software, by its nature, lets to ignore unwanted parts. A classic example of the wrong advertizing in the wrong place…mostly missing the demographic they’re after. The entire campaign was laughable anyway when any numbskull from Timbuktou knows just how much the entertainment industry is worth.

  12. @Napalm said: …

    So that you cannot skip advertising and other crap on you DVDs. You know, these create “additional revenue streams” for the “starving CEOs” so that they could afford the new Lamborghini model.

    Heh like a few retail DVD is bought a few years ago that had ads in them. I’m sorry but WTF did I pay for? I thought I bought a movie as stated on the dvd case and not ad space for another company.

  13. @IanME: “My DVD player allows me to skip ads, […]”

    Illegal. Surrender it to the local police station, you radical extremist pirate!

    Nap. 🙂

  14. Michael’s tweets
    Did anyone else notice this one:

    “Del Mastro: Tell us what Chambers of Commerce, CRIA, etc think of bill. Clement: Here’s what Hollywood execs told me…”

    This tells it all.


  15. May I recommend Mr. Clement to listen to some other voices, like the one of Gianfranco Lanci, CEO and President of Acer (who’s product I use to type this, and that recently overtook Dell to become nr. 2 PC products world manufacturer, surpassed by only byHP):

    “Users want to control the flow of the media. They don’t want to be told what to do. And we see companies in this industry with a tendency to tell people what they need to do, rather than helping people to do what they want to do. People want the media they want, when they want it and where they want it.”

    The whole article here: