The National Business Review in New Zealand reports that that country's government plans to freeze any further reforms of its copyright law with the view to rewriting it for the digital age from scratch. (hat tip: Creative Freedom NZ) Update: Mark Harris and Rick Shera cast doubt on this NBR […]
News
The Absurdity of the USTR’s Blame Canada Approach
The IIPA, the lead U.S. lobbyist on international IP matters, has issued a press release on the USTR Special 301 report, welcoming the inclusion of Canada on the Priority Watch List. Yet the release inadvertently demonstrates why the designation is so absurd. Included at the end are the estimated software piracy percentages for each country on the list. While the BSA claims are themselves subject to challenge, compare Canada to the remainder of the list. Canada comes in at 32%. The remaining countries (no rates are listed for Algeria, Israel, or Venezuela):
U.S. Targets Canada Over Copyright in Special 301 Report
The U.S. Trade Representative released its Special 301 report today, in which it casts judgement on the intellectual property laws of dozens of countries around the world. To the surprise of no one, Canada finds itself playing the role of Bill Murray in Groundhog Day as it once again is target. In fact, this year the U.S. aims to increase the pressure by elevating Canada to the Priority Watch List (a more sinister designation than the previous Watch List), implausibly claiming that Canada sits alongside countries like Russia and China with its intellectual property laws.
The move is not unexpected, given recent comments from Vice President Joe Biden and U.S. Congressional panels as well as the demands from U.S. lobby groups. Those same groups will now dust off their press releases that lament the "embarrassment" of being included on the list (never mind that countries that represent more than 70 percent of the world's population are on the list) and the failure to introduce U.S.-style reforms (never mind that Canada enacted anti-camcording laws in 2007, introduced C-61 last year, is an original negotiating partner in the ACTA negotiations, joined the U.S. as a third party in the WTO copyright complaint against China, etc.).
Hopefully, the Canadian officials will similarly dust off their advice to the Minister, which for the past few years has stated (as obtained under Access to Information):
The Government is disappointed with the United States' decision to include Canada in its [year here] Special 301 "Watch List." Canada does not recognize the Special 301 process due to its lacking of reliable and objective analysis, and we have raised this issue regularly with the U.S. in our bilateral discussions."
Those same sentiments were expressed by an official at the Department of Foreign Affairs to a House of Commons committee in 2007:
Swedish Poll Show Pirate Party With Five Percent National Support
A new Swedish political poll shows the Pirate Party with 5.1 percent support, enough to garner seats in the June European elections. The party won 0.6 percent support in the 2006 elections. The party ranks second nationally among those aged 18 – 29 and fourth in the 30 – 44 […]
The Electronic Commerce Protection Act – The Competition Act Provisions
Having reviewed the Electronic Commerce Protection Act provisions on anti-spam, enforcement, and do-not-call, the other major section in the bill are the provisions involving reforms to the Competition Act. The ECPA makes several important amendments to the statute to better ensure that false or misleading representations in electronic messages are captured by the law. This will mean that the Competition Bureau will have the power to investigate and take action against the use of false headers, false locator information, or the presence of false or misleading content in electronic messages.
The changes focus on parallel reforms to the false or misleading representation provisions and the deceptive marketing provisions. The Competition Act will now include a lengthy new provision on false or misleading representations in an electronic message. The three main offences, contained with Offences Related to Competition, are:
Recent Posts
Lawful Access on Steroids: Why Bill C-2’s Big Brother Tactics Combine Expansive Warrantless Disclosure with Unprecedented Secrecy 
Government Reverses on Privacy and the Charter: Department of Justice Analysis Concludes Political Party Privacy Bill Raises No Charter of Rights Effects 
“Big Brother Tactics”: Why Bill C-2’s New Warrantless Disclosure Demand Powers Extend Far Beyond Internet and Telecom Providers 
Government Seeks To Exempt Political Parties From Privacy Laws Even As CRTC Reports They Are Leading Source of Spam Complaints 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 236: Robert Diab on the Return of Lawful Access
