Columns

C-32’s Fair Dealing Fears Greatly Exaggerated – Hill Times Edition

This week’s Hill Times includes my op-ed on the recent Access Copyright win at the Federal Court of Appeal and how the decision demonstrates that fears about fair dealing reform in Bill C-32 are greatly exaggerated. Text of the op-ed below.

The introduction of long-awaited copyright reform legislation has generated considerable discussion among Canadians about whether the latest bill strikes the right balance. While concern over Bill C-32’s digital lock rules has garnered the lion share of attention with expressions of concern from all opposition parties and a wide range of stakeholders, the other major issue in the bill is the extension of fair dealing – Canada’s version of fair use – to cover education, parody, and satire.

August 6, 2010 — 3 comments — Columns

U.S. Move to Pick Digital Locks Leaves Canadians Locked Out

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) picks up on last week’s DMCA exemption decision with a contrast to Bill C-32. I note that since its introduction two months ago, the government’s copyright reform package has generated widespread debate over whether it strikes the right balance. The digital lock provisions have been the most contentious aspect of the bill, with critics fearing that anytime a digital lock is used, it would trump virtually all other rights.

Supporters of the C-32 digital lock approach have sought to counter the criticism by arguing that the Canadian provisions simply mirror those found in other countries such as the United States. Yet last week, the U.S. introduced changes to its digital lock rules that leave Canada with one of the most restrictive approaches in the world.

August 3, 2010 — 58 comments — Columns

Digital TV Transition Could Lead to New Digital Divide

In just over one year, Canada is scheduled to complete the digital television transition, as stations switch from analog to digital broadcasts. While cable and satellite subscribers will not notice the change, over one million Canadians that rely on over-the-air signals will be affected. Despite the experience in other countries that left many consumers without digital converter boxes staring at blank screens, my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) argues the Canadian government seems content to leave the switch to the private sector, implausibly claiming “industry-led solutions will ensure a smooth transition for consumers.”

July 29, 2010 — 17 comments — Columns

Why Parma Ham May Stand in the Way of ACTA and CETA

Canada is currently negotiating two major international trade agreements and my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that while it may seem hard to believe, their successful completion may ultimately depend on the level of protection provided to Parma ham. The Canada – European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) are both facing increasing opposition based on European demands to expand protection for “geographical indications.”

Geographical indications (GI) are signs used on goods – frequently food, wine, or spirits – that have a specific geographical origin and are said to possess qualities, reputation or characteristics that are essentially attributable to that place of origin. Given the quality associated with the product, proponents of GI protection argue that it is needed to avoid consumer confusion as well as to protect legitimate producers.

July 20, 2010 — 8 comments — Columns

Federal Court Rules Internet Providers Not Broadcasters

Last year, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission released its new media decision, which addressed the prospect of increased CRTC regulation of Internet activities. After days of hearings and thousands of pages of submissions, the Commission side-stepped the pressure to "do something," maintaining a hands-off approach and punting the most contentious issue – the prospect of a new levy on Internet providers to fund Canadian content – to the courts.

The Internet levy proposal received strong support from several Canadian creator groups, who argued that given the video content streamed online, ISPs should be viewed as broadcasters within the Broadcasting Act. By treating ISPs as the equivalent of conventional broadcasters, they would be required to contribute to the Act’s policy objectives, which include promotion and support for Canadian content. The ISPs unsurprisingly opposed the proposal, maintaining that they are mere conduits in the transmission of video content. They argued the levy proposal was illegal since they are regulated under the Telecommunications Act as telecom companies, not broadcasters.

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes the two sides faced off at the Federal Court of Appeal earlier this year and last week a unanimous court sided with the ISPs, ruling that providing access to broadcasting is not the same as broadcasting. It concluded that so long as ISPs maintain a content-neutral approach, they fall outside of the Broadcasting Act and should not be expected to play a role in promoting the policies found in the legislation.

July 12, 2010 — 11 comments — Columns