This week Policy Options launched a new series on copyright reform with plans to provide perspectives from across the spectrum. I was delighted to write the first published piece, which starts by making the case that the Conservative government got far more right than wrong in 2012. Canadian copyright law is widely regarded as one of the most innovative in the world with unique, forward-looking provisions (non-commercial user generated content, notice-and-notice) and flexible fair dealing. The last five years have largely achieved what the government had in mind as the days of labelling Canada a “piracy haven” are over, the cultural industries such as movies and music are enjoying record earnings, and new digital services have found great success in Canada.
So, as Parliament prepares for a review of the law later this year, what’s next for Canadian copyright?
I note the following:
The mandatory five-year review was lauded in 2012 as a mechanism that would ensure the law remains current, in what is a fast-paced digital world. On reflection, the uncertainty associated with the prospect of never-ending reforms may ultimately do more harm than good, as would-be investors may question whether Canada is committed to its current path of striking a balance between creators’ and users’ rights.
The 2017 review should be used as a benchmarking exercise, enabling the many stakeholders to give their perspectives on what is working well and what needs to be reviewed. There is certainly an opening for modest reforms that build on the changes in 2015 (extending the term of copyright for sound recordings) and 2016 (ratification of the Marrakesh copyright treaty for the blind and visually impaired). But a radical overhaul would be harmful, as the full implications of the 2012 reforms and recent court rulings are still being sorted out.
The low-hanging fruit offers potential action for the three government departments vying for copyright policy influence: Innovation, Science and Economic Development (notice-and-notice, fair use) Canadian Heritage (Copyright Board of Canada), and International Trade (NAFTA, TPP).
The full piece can be found here.
The great Michael Geist refuses to learn what
BLOCKQUOTEis and does. He’s not the kind of person who takes corrections gallantly, and it goes without saying he is the kind of Internet expert who doesn’t need to learn anything, least of all the basics. It further
Couldn’t agree more Joe. Michael Geist has his nose positioned squarely in the asses of those who pay to keep him in position of protectionism.
Canada 🇨🇦 wants Copyright Reform… ? This isn’t the only issues needing to be surfaced. #SOCAN #CRB #CMRRA #CIPO… are a joke. Neither SOCAN nor CIPO require an audio sample upon registry of what ..? “A Title only”… so in the event of Copyright Infringement, these agencies have sold a fallacy of protection, a license without insurance. Fraser at SOCAN on recording thought that $.0011 per play that was negotiated in 2003 at Superior court, is a “Good place to start”..
while SOCAN and it’s music wizards, according to Yiu on recording and Patrick, utilize “people above their pay grade who are much smarter than them, and perform magical equations with our Royalties in deciding who gets paid what, and when.
Canada 🇨🇦 isn’t interested in fixing the definition of Streaming that the Superior court created in 2003, with our Agencies as so called “experts” cohersing the Judge, to remove “Broadcast and Transmission” , thereby allowing the use of intellectual properties as a “Sale”… instead of a performance. Our total contributions received from all the distributors of Metadata was$13 million this year, for digital fair use and sales. While Q2 of Bell alone profits posted $1841 million is a grotesque display of the systemic theft and devaluing process of our creations to benefit the conflict of interest bring the Government taking its associated taxation from the very corporations it allowed to broadcast our creations on. No wonder Michael Geist has his face planted in ass so well.. he’s working with them to echo pure bulkshit given directly from the source.
Come out with your best bullshit argument Michael … let’s have a ream discussion live on air, at a hotel you shred to before Sept 29 2017. Bring your cohort friends that manipulate and perform both extreme measures of conflict of interests and the abide of Power to a point of the Criminal Code of Canada. Bring Gowlings .. anyone of them, I wouldn’t want to miss an opportunity to share the numbers in SOCAN and the CMRRA… you perform a disservice Michael, and only look to gain more funding for more bullshit you teach unknowing unwilling students.
Contact me firstname.lastname@example.org
I’m referred to as the William Wallace of the Canadian Music Industry, and have changed policy at SOCAN. Better sharpen your tongue Michael, we’ll be certain to bring our bullshit meters with additional batteries…
Reference: “The mandatory five-year review was lauded in 2012 as a mechanism that would ensure the law remains current, in what is a fast-paced digital world. On reflection, the uncertainty associated with the prospect of never-ending reforms may ultimately do more harm than good, as would-be investors may question whether Canada is committed to its current path of striking a balance between creators’ and users’ rights.”
More likely strategic lobbying, spending so the rich get what they want – protection and the $. See the US. The egg-in-the face is that people can do without it all – at some level, who needs new junk? WASTED ART; WASTED GENIUS; WASTED LIVES.
Pingback: Monday Pick-Me-Up « Legal Sourcery
I guess you were asleep at the wheel Michael Geist while the CRB notified SOCAN on Aug. 25 2017 of their 3 year deliberations decisions. Eric Baptiste released the statement on #SOCAN site on Aug 28th 2017…then after I pointed out on line social media that the Minister of Science and Tech, and the Minister of Canadian Heritage were giving us until Sept. 29th 2017 make our points and grievances known….SOCAN quickly pulled the statement down on Labour day. How can Canada facilitate the 150,000 pro musicians as members of SOCAN, if they’ve already broken our Civil Rights? over to you expert.