News

Federal Court of Appeal Rules ISPs Not Broadcasters: May Be End of ISP Levy Proposal

The Federal Court of Appeal issued is decision today [not online yet] on whether Internet providers can be considered broadcasters within the context of the Broadcasting Act. The case is the result of last year’s CRTC New Media decision in which many cultural groups called on the Commission to establish an ISP levy to fund Canadian content. The ISPs argued that such a levy was illegal since they fell under the Telecommunications Act, not the Broadcasting Act. The cultural groups argued that ISPs should be considered broadcasters in the case of the transmission of video programs. The CRTC punted the issue to the Federal Court of Appeal.

The Federal Court of Appeal sided with the ISPs, ruling that providing access to broadcasting is not the same as broadcasting. 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. The case is a huge win for the ISPs and – subject to an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada or a legislative change – puts an end to the ISP levy proposal. The case is also noteworthy from a net neutrality perspective, since the court emphasized that ISPs fall outside the Broadcasting Act so long as they remain content-neutral. Should ISPs play a more active role, their ability to rely on the broadcast/transmission distinction would be lost.

July 7, 2010 — 15 comments — News

The ACTA Timeline: An Update

Last December, I posted a timeline of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, with links to developments tracing back to 2004. With the ninth round of talks now concluded, I’ve updated the timeline with new links, documents, and videos from the past six months. The ACTA Timeline on Dipity.

July 7, 2010 — 4 comments — News

Angus Calls Out Moore on WIPO: Says Fails to Understand Treaty, Makes Mockery of Copyright Balance

NDP MP Charlie Angus has issued a lengthy letter to Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore and Industry Minister Tony Clement that challenges them on the digital lock provisions in Bill C-32. In a release on the letter, Angus states "the digital lock provisions will subject Canadians to arbitrary limitations on their legal rights of access. The government is trying to create the impression that this unbalanced approach to digital locks is necessary in order to bring Canada into compliance with WIPO and the Berne Convention. Nothing could be further from the truth." He adds:

"The government is establishing a two-tiered set of rights. Bill C-32 offers rights that consumers will be restricted from exercising. These provisions make a mockery of the claim that the bill is balanced and pro-consumer. Either the government has a faulty understanding of international treaty obligations or is looking to use these existing treaties as a cover to pursue a specific political agenda. The New Democratic Party will challenge any provisions that would lead to unbalanced and arbitrary copyright legislation."

The letter delves into much greater detail on the digital lock issue, discussing how there is flexibility at international law with Angus emphatically stating "I believe the government will be unable to produce evidence that these onerous digital lock provisions are the result of existing treaty obligations." As result, Angus makes a formal request that the government seek an opinion from WIPO on the issue of exceptions to digital locks.

July 6, 2010 — 27 comments — News

Canada_Version 3.0 Documentary – A Correction

Earlier today I posted on a new copyright documentary in which I raised the question of whether it was being supported by CRIA, much like the BCBC site. I have just spoken to a producer at the film company, who suggested that was not the case. I have therefore removed […]

July 6, 2010 — 4 comments — News

McKennitt Op-Ed: “Pirates are Killing Musicians, Composers, Lyricists, Even Popcorn Vendors”

Loreena McKennitt published an op-ed supporting copyright reform in the Winnipeg Free Press over the weekend that focuses on the harm of infringement and the need for C-32. The piece raises at least a couple of issues. First, there is the claim that "even popcorn sellers are struggling to stay alive" in light the current state of Canadian copyright law. This claim arises from some declining interest in big music tours, which is taken as evidence that performances are not a viable alternative for many musicians. What copyright reform has to do with concert venues, performers or popcorn sellers is anyone's guess – promoters of struggling music tours say it has everything to do with a tough economy, competition for the entertainment dollar, and high ticket prices rather than music downloads or IP enforcement. Copyright reform won't change the financial dynamics of the touring industry, which will presumably still leave those same popcorn vendors struggling to stay alive.

If the McKennitt piece was limited to the popcorn claim, it would merely join previous attempts to link copyright with the success of the corn industry (see Rick Cotton of NBC Universal). However, McKennitt also challenges the very notion of user rights in copyright, calling them "so-called user rights" which she says is used by activists and academics as "crafted language."

July 6, 2010 — 99 comments — News