Columns

ACTA: Why You Should Still Care

This post appears as a guest column on GigaOm today:

After years of secrecy, the eighth round of talks aimed at drafting an international treaty called the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) recently concluded in New Zealand – and in the face of public pressure, a version of the text was subsequently made available to the public. The ACTA is neither a trade agreement nor one focused primarily on counterfeiting, but a copyright deal featuring provisions on Internet service provider and Internet company liability, DMCA-style notice and takedown requirements, legal protection for digital locks, and requirements for statutory damages that could result in millions in liability for non-commercial infringement – even heightened searches at border crossings.

Ever since the ACTA partners – among them the U.S., E.U., Canada, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, Morocco and Singapore – announced negotiations plans in October 2007, ACTA has been dogged by controversy over a near-total lack of transparency. Early talks were held in secret locations with each participating country offering virtually identical, cryptic press releases that did little more than fuel public concern. Now that the ACTA text is public, some might wonder whether there’s still cause for concern. Indeed, given widespread support for measures that target genuine commercial counterfeiting, some might believe it’s time to actively support ACTA.

It’s not – at least not this version.

May 3, 2010 — 11 comments — Columns

Privacy Takes Step Towards Global Enforcement

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that last week the talk of the privacy world was news that 10 privacy and data protection commissioners – led by Canadian Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart – had released a public letter to Google CEO Eric Schmidt, expressing concern that the Internet giant was forgetting its privacy responsibilities.

The letter, also signed by the heads of privacy agencies from France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain and the United Kingdom, focused on the recent introduction of Google Buzz, a service that offered new social media capabilities. It attracted the wrath of users and privacy advocates after Google automatically assigned users a network of "followers" from among people with whom they corresponded most often on Gmail. Google quickly altered the offending features, but the damage was clearly done, as privacy commissioners from around the world used the incident as the basis for a shot across the company’s bow.

April 29, 2010 — 2 comments — Columns

Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore: The iPadLock Minister?

Since his appointment as Canadian Heritage minister in 2008, James Moore has carefully crafted an image as "Canada's iPod Minister." Young, bilingual, and tech-savvy, Moore has expressed regular support for the benefits of the Internet and is always ready with a quick "tweet" for his many followers. Yet as my op-ed in the Hill Times notes (HT version (sub required), homepage version), according to the scuttlebutt throughout the copyright community, Moore may be less iPod and more iPadlock. As the government readies its much-anticipated copyright package, Moore is said to be pressing for a virtual repeat of Bill C-61, the most anti-consumer copyright proposal in Canadian history.

Moore's about-face on copyright will come as a surprise to those who have heard his enthusiasm for new technology and the Internet. In June 2009, Moore told Industry Minister Tony Clement's Digital Economy conference that "the old way of doing things is over. These things are all now one. And it's great. And it's never been better. And we need to be enthusiastic and embrace this things."

Those comments were quickly followed by the national copyright consultation that generated thousands of responses, the majority of which called on the government to abandon the C-61 approach in favour of copyright rules that struck a better balance between the interests of creators and consumers.

April 26, 2010 — 64 comments — Columns

Open Government Moving in Parallel But Opposite Directions

Suzanne Legault, Canada’s Interim Information Commissioner, and Michael Mulley, a Montreal-based software programmer, may occupy different worlds, but my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that last week both placed an important spotlight on open and transparent government.

Legault is responsible for administering the Access to Information Act and last week her office warned that inadequate resources and lengthy delays were causing enormous damage to access to information rights in Canada. Legault released a 154-page report that gave below average or failing grades to the majority of the 24 government departments she reviewed.

The implication of a broken access to information system extends to virtually every policy area. For example, Canadian Heritage and Industry Canada typically lead on policies involving broadcasting and new media. While Industry Canada received a solid "B" grade, handling a 93% increase in requests relatively smoothly, the first review for Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore’s department yielded an "F" grade.

April 19, 2010 — 4 comments — Columns

The Truth About ACTA: My PublicACTA Keynote Address

As I posted over the weekend, I had the pleasure of participating in the PublicACTA conference in Wellington, New Zealand. The Wellington Declaration is a must-read, as is the extensive media coverage that ACTA has received over the past 48 hours in New Zealand (NZ PC World, National Business Review, […]

April 13, 2010 — 5 comments — Columns