One of the most frequently cited concerns with Bill C-11’s digital lock rules is that they create a two-tier legal framework that is technologically non-neutral. Where content does not have a lock or is in non-digital form, the usual copyright balance applies including fair dealing and consumer exceptions. However, with Bill C-11, once there is a digital lock included with the content, the balance disappears since the fair dealing and consumer exceptions can be overriden. A description of the situation:
The Bill also favours digital lock business models for the sale and delivery of content over unlocked means of dissemination. In the traditional model, copyright holders control the exclusive right to reproduce content onto CDs or DVDs. Once an unlocked copy is created, rights holders cannot control the application of copyright exceptions such as fair dealing. But the Bill creates a different situation simply because a copy of digital content is delivered with a digital lock. This is an economically inefficient interpretation of an Act that is meant to fairly balance the interests of rights holders and users to further the interests of society as a whole.
While consumer groups have been making this case against technological non-neutral copyright for months (and Charlie Angus raised precisely this point in the House of Commons yesterday expressing concern about a “two-tier set of rights”), the above quote is a slightly modified version of arguments by the Entertainment Software Association of Canada, one of the lead proponents of the digital lock rules.
Read more ›
The Canadian Association for Open Source promotes the use and development of free, open source software, by providing a public voice to the community of its Canadian users, developers and supporters. The Association submitted comments
to the 2009 national copyright consultation that included the following on digital locks:
The key policy for software authors is “technological measures”, given this policy is about what software the owners of computers are and are not allowed to install and use on their own hardware. The Liberal Bill C-60 recognized the nuances of the 1996 WIPO treaties and tied anti-circumvention legislation to activities that would otherwise infringe coyright. The WIPO treaties use language such as:
Contracting Parties shall provide adequate legal protection and effective legal remedies against the circumvention of effective technological measures that are used by authors in connection with the exercise of their rights under this Treaty or the Berne Convention and that restrict acts, in respect of their works, which are not authorized by the authors concerned or permitted by law.
Being “used by authors in connection with” and “or permitted by law” suggests that anti-circumvention legislation should be tied to infringing activities. Copyright and other laws (including privacy law) should trump technological measures when there is a conflict, not the other way around. By clarifying that the anti-circumvention legislation is tied to copyright, the legislation could also avoid providing any protection for technical measures applied to devices by other than their owners.
Read more ›
Big news on the open government front where Embassy is reporting that Statistics Canada will make all of its online data free starting early next year.
Read more ›