Post Tagged with: "c-11"

The Government’s “10,000 Consultations” on Copyright

Last week’s House of Commons copyright debate on Bill C-11 included a curious comment from Industry Minister Christian Paradis, who, in trying to demonstrate the amount of debate that went into the bill, stated that “more than 10,000 consultations have been held across Canada.” The “10,000 consultations” claim made it onto the Hill Times front page article on the bill titled “House Set to Pass Controversial Copyright Bill Next Week, After 10,000 Consultations.”

The problem with the “10,000 consultations” claim is that it isn’t entirely accurate. Paradis is likely combining the total responses to the 2009 copyright consultation (just over 8,300) with submissions or witnesses to the Bill C-32/C-11 legislative committees (roughly 300). Throw in the two town hall meetings and private meetings with stakeholders and you might come close to 10,000. However, if Paradis is relying on comments and submissions from the public to the government, the 10,000 figure massively understates the public response. During the same debate, Liberal MP Geoff Regan indicated that his office received over 80,000 emailed submissions over the past several months alone. Three weeks after the introduction of Bill C-61, Industry Canada received tens of thousands of actual letters. When you combine the additional MP meetings, thousands of letters and emails to MPs, the number of submissions on this copyright bill is at least 10 times the Paradis estimate.

May 25, 2012 — 23 comments — News

Why Universities Should Not Sign the Access Copyright – AUCC Model Licence

Copyright has emerged as a hot issue on Canadian university campuses in recent weeks as schools consider whether to sign the Access Copyright model licence negotiated with the AUCC. Several schools, including UBC, Athabasca, Windsor, and Winnipeg have already indicated that they will not sign the licence, while others (such as Queen’s, Victoria and Calgary) have reluctantly signed the letter of intent. Many groups have voiced their strong objection to the licence, including the CAUT, APLA, BCLA, MLA, CFS, and CASA. These groups represent faculty, students, and librarians – the three groups within education most affected by the model licence.

Last week, I was asked by the Association of Professors Ottawa, the University of Ottawa faculty union, for my views. I opened my remarks by emphasizing a key misconception often fueled by Access Copyright and its supporters. The question being faced by the universities is not whether to pay for copyright works. Universities, faculty and students currently spend millions of dollars every year on copyright materials and will continue to do so. The only question is whether – in addition to existing expenditures on books, licences, and in support of open access – they should also pay the $26 per student fee to Access Copyright.

I believe the answer is no for the following six key reasons:

May 24, 2012 — 10 comments — News

What the Govt Rejected in the C-11 Amendments: Access for the Blind, Cloud-Based Services & More

Bill C-11, the copyright reform bill, passed the report stage yesterday, leaving only a third reading debate and vote before the bill heads to the House of Commons. While many good elements in the bill remain intact, it is worth noting what the Conservatives voted against by opposing every amendment […]

May 16, 2012 — 27 comments — News

Del Mastro on Format Shifting

Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro offers up one of the oddest copyright analogies during the C-11 debate, likening format shifting to socks and shoes.

May 16, 2012 — 13 comments — News

Government To Impose Time Allocation on Copyright Debate

The government yesterday gave notice of time allocation on the Bill C-11 debate, which will cut short the debate over the copyright bill. The move does not come as a surprise, given the willingness to use time allocation for other bills and the Conservatives’ consistent position that it will not further amend the bill. As I’ve stated repeatedly, there is much to like in Bill C-11 including expanded fair dealing, new consumer exceptions, new rights for user generated content, the notice-and-notice approach for ISPs, and the a cap on non-commercial statutory damages (this came up during the House of Commons debate as Conservative MP Chris Alexander quoted my comment on some of the balanced provisions but omitted the criticism on digital locks). Moreover, the decision to reject demands for website blocking, notice-and-takedown, an iPod tax, and disclosure of subscriber information suggest that the bill could have been considerably worse.

However, the decision to leave the digital lock rules unchanged remains the bill’s biggest flaw and given the widespread opposition to the approach makes a mockery of Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore’s insistence that the bill reflects the public support. Yesterday, Moore defended the approach:

May 15, 2012 — 42 comments — News