British writer and comedian Stephen Fry helps celebrate the 25th birthday of GNU.
Articles by: Michael Geist
PickupPal Controversy Highlights Power of Networked Economy
My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) "picks up" on the debate over PickupPal, a ride sharing service that operates around the world. Trentway-Wagar, a Peterborough-based bus company, has raised questions about the legality of the service in Ontario. PickupPal has about 100,000 registered users worldwide (approximately 10,000 in Ontario alone) who use the Internet service to connect and identify possible ride sharing partners. The result is more carpools, less traffic congestion, and decreased emissions. Notwithstanding the benefits, Trentway-Wagar argues that the service violates the Ontario Public Vehicles Act because it allows drivers to collect money by offering strangers a ride. This is not the first time that the company has targeted ride sharing services. In 2000, it succeeded in stopping Allo-Stop, then Quebec's biggest ride sharing company, from operating in Ontario.
The PickupPal debate has thus far focused on an outdated provincial law (the government has promised to review the legislation) and the environmental impact of rules that appear to discourage ride sharing. Yet there is a bigger story here. The law has been rendered out of date because the Internet facilitates new modes of production and organization that enable thousands of people to connect, share, and work together in ways that were previously limited larger, well-organized, and well-funded companies. As scholars such as Yochai Benkler and Clay Shirky have persuasively argued, these modes of production provide great promise.
61 Reforms to C-61, Day 51: Education Internet Exception Is Unnecessary
One of the most controversial aspects of Bill C-61 is the inclusion of special educational exception. The provision has split the education community, generating support from some education groups and opposition from others. The product of years of lobbying by provincial education ministers and the AUCC, the exemption at Section 30.04 (1) provides that:
Subject to subsections (2) to (5), it is not an infringement of copyright for an educational institution, or a person acting under the authority of one, to do any of the following acts for educational or training purposes in respect of a work or other subject-matter that is available through the Internet:
(a) reproduce it;
(b) communicate it to the public by telecommunication, if that public primarily consists of students of the educational institution or other persons acting under its authority;
(c) perform it in public, if that public primarily consists of students of the educational institution or other persons acting under its authority; or
(d) do any other act that is necessary for the purpose of the acts referred to in paragraphs (a) to (c).
I will discuss why the conditions render this exception virtually useless in a later post. For the moment, I want to reiterate that I do not believe that the exception is either necessary or equitable.
Garneau on Copyright
Hugh McGuire reports on a conversation with Marc Garneau, the astronaut and Liberal candidate in Westmount Ville-Marie. Garneau confirms the likely Liberal position on C-61 – kill the bill (which will likely die this week when an election is called) and consult. More interestingly, he notes that he received more […]
Saunders on Copyright at the Ballot Box
Alec Saunders discusses why he won't be voting for the Conservatives in the upcoming election.