My five-part series on the problems associated with the digital lock provisions in Bill C-32 identified many potential changes to strike a more balanced compromise (Parts One, Two, Three, Four, Five or single PDF).  Several people have asked for specific legislative language for what I have in mind.  Together with my research assistant Keith Rose, we've drafted language that builds on the recommendations contained in the series on 32 Questions and Answers on C-32's Digital Lock Provisions.  The legislative language is available as a PDF download.

The primary solution that many have discussed involves permitting circumvention for lawful purposes. As I've discussed, this approach is compliant with the WIPO Internet Treaties, provides legal protection for digital locks, and maintains the copyright balance. There are at least two possible approaches.  The first would involve amending the definition for circumvent to account for only infringing purposes:

Read more ›

The first four posts on the 32 Questions and Answers on Bill C-32's digital lock provisions focused first on general issues in the bill, second on C-32's circumvention exceptions, third on the missing exceptions, and fourth on consumer-focused provisions in the bill.  This fifth post focuses on business considerations.  For those that want it all in a single package, I've posted the full series as PDF download.

Business Considerations

This section features answers to the following questions:

• Isn't this just a matter of consumer choice?  If consumers don't want products with digital locks, no one is forcing them to purchase them?
• Won't the digital lock provisions help bring new businesses to Canada like Hulu.com?
• Are the concerns associated with digital lock provisions in the United States legitimate? What issues have arisen in the U.S. under the DMCA?
• If these digital lock provisions are too restrictive, what compromises are available?

Read more ›