Post Tagged with: "actra"

ACTRA Rep Says Mashups “Morally Wrong”

ACTRA is in Ottawa this week for one of its regular lobbying efforts. Copyright will undoubtedly form part of the effort and will apparently include an unexpected issue. Leah Pinsent is fighting against the Bill C-11 mashup provision, which allows Canadians to create new works for non-commercial purposes with attribution. […]

November 3, 2011 — 12 comments — News

Responding to ACTRA: Group Calls C-32 a “Disaster” and Proposes Six Part Fix

ACTRA completed a two-day lobbying blitz in Ottawa yesterday, bringing some Canadian television stars to convince MPs that Bill C-32 is a disaster that is bad for consumers and creators. While ACTRA isn’t proposing anything to solve the consumer problems, it is promoting six changes to Bill C-32. I review each proposal below, but it is first worth watching an interview on CTV with ACTRA’s Ferne Downey and Corner Gas’ Eric Peterson. Downey makes the startling comment that she is not a proponent of free market theory that users will pay for the content they like. Meanwhile, Peterson, who starred on a show that aired on free, over-the-air television without any levy but supported through commercials, now claims that “free” will eliminate the creation of new Canadian content.

As for the ACTRA proposals, each is posted below along with some of my comments:

November 17, 2010 — 27 comments — News

No Creator Group Consensus on C-32

Last week I posted on an ACTRA document that identified consensus positions on C-32 among many creator groups. I have received a request to remove the link to the ACTRA document on the grounds that it was posted prematurely as it turns out there is not yet consensus among all […]

November 1, 2010 — 3 comments — News

Against Bill C-32: Creator Groups Stake Out Strong Anti-Copyright Bill Position

Update 11/1: I have received a request to remove the link to the ACTRA document on the grounds that it was posted prematurely. I have been advised that there is not yet consensus among all groups listed in the document on the various C-32 issues.

When Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore told an IP conference last June that only two groups of radical extremists were opposed to Bill C-32, most assumed that he had user groups in mind. Yet as various groups begin to publicly make their positions known, few have been as critical as a creator coalition that includes ACTRA, a writers’ coalition, visual arts coalition, and Quebec artists groups. In a backgrounder on the bill, those groups oppose nearly all the major reform elements of Bill C-32, with the notable exception of digital locks (on which they remain silent).

Just how broad is the opposition? The position paper stakes out the following positions:

October 28, 2010 — 78 comments — News

The Canadian Music Industry on C-32: A House Divided

Musician Carole Pope has an op-ed in the Globe and Mail today calling on the government to reform Bill C-32 by extending the private copying to MP3 players. That approach was derided by both Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore and Industry Minister Tony Clement as the iTax last spring and Clement tweeted a response today. Regardless of your view on the levy, the op-ed highlights just how divided the music industry in Canada is on Bill C-32. While sites like the CRIA-backed Balanced Copyright for Canada seek to project an image of strong support for the bill, the reality is that the Canadian music industry is deeply divided on many aspects of the proposed legislation. In fact, in recent weeks it has turned increasingly critical, touting the need to pass the bill, but simultaneously offering mounting criticism of its provisions.

For example, the uneditable letter now being used by the Balanced Copyright for Canada site tells MPs and Senators that “unfortunately Bill C-32 falls short of meeting the government’s stated intentions. The core message, ‘thou shalt not steal’ is diluted by such a bewildering array of exceptions that if anything the situation for creators will grow worse.” This represents a significant change from earlier letters that did not include such criticisms. In fact, the initial BCFC consumer letter stated:

I believe the Copyright Act amendments proposed in Bill C-32 do a good job of balancing the right of artists and creators to benefit financially from their work, and the ability of consumers like me to make copies for non-commercial use and personal enjoyment. If Bill C-32 passes, it will give me the peace of mind of knowing that when I take music I’ve purchased and downloaded online, and copy it to my player, it’s legal. There will be no doubt in my mind that the PVR copy of a movie or the episode of my favourite TV show that I’ve made for later viewing doesn’t infringe copyright. And, I will know that my favourite singers, musicians, and film makers have been financially and fairly compensated for their work and creativity.

The new criticisms from the BCFC are just the tip of the iceberg:

September 20, 2010 — 36 comments — News