Bell’s promotion of a site blocking system in Canada – rejected by the CRTC on jurisdictional grounds – was grounded in the view that it could establish a mandated blocking approach without court orders. That placed the Canadian proposal off-side the vast majority of site blocking systems around the world, but it also pointed to mounting efforts to exclude the courts from the realm of copyright enforcement. For example, the Canadian Anti-Counterfeiting Network recently appeared before the Industry committee to argue for legislative reforms that would eliminate court oversight for seizures at the border. In its place, the group argued that customs authorities should be empowered to seize and destroy goods without court review.
Post Tagged with: "cacn"
“You’re Misleading Us”: Canadian Anti-Counterfeiting Network Calls for Elimination of Court Oversight For Border Seizures
Canadian Anti-Counterfeiting Group Calls For Graduated Response, More Restrictive Digital Lock Rules
On the Bill C-11 front, the CACN wants to gut many of the balancing provisions, including limiting the scope of the already overly restrictive digital lock exceptions, dropping the ISP notice-and-notice approach in favour of a graduated response that could lead to terminating Internet service for individual users, and removing the distinction between commercial and non-commercial infringement for statutory damages despite the fact that Canada is one of the few countries to have such damage provisions (which would pave the way for more Hurt Locker style lawsuits against individuals).
“Would You Risk Her Life?”
The Toronto Star has been the home of several columns I've written over the past year that focus on counterfeiting and the need for a bit of perspective (overblown claims column, misleading RCMP data column). I'm grateful for that venue and the paper's support for varying perspectives on the issue. […]
Public Safety and National Security Committee Releases Counterfeiting Report
The Public Safety and National Security Committee has released its report on counterfeiting (I appeared before the committee in the spring). The report makes 14 recommendations, most of which unsurprisingly track the recommendations from the Canadian Anti-Counterfeiting Network. These include criminal remedies in the Trademarks Act, inclusion of copyright within […]
The CACN’s Roadmap for Change
Over the next two days, two House of Commons committees will move toward finalizing their recommendations to address Canadian counterfeiting concerns – the Industry Committee will review its recommendations on the counterfeiting issue today, while tomorrow the National Security and Public Safety Committee will review its draft report on counterfeiting. While I am sure that all the witness comments and submissions will be considered, the Canadian Anti-Counterfeiting Network's Roadmap for Change [pdf] will unquestionably play a key role. During its appearances before the committees, the CACN representatives touted the document as the prescription to address the counterfeiting issue.
The Roadmap for Change was not translated at the time of the committee appearance, however, that has presumably now happened and the document has been posted online. It is generally consistent with the committee appearances – many of the anecdotes and recommendations that were raised before the committees are mentioned here too. The CACN is seeking a far larger IP enforcement framework with more resources, an IP crime task force, and an IP Coordination Council. It is also seeking stronger border measures, changes to the proceeds of crime legislation, and the creation of a criminal provisions for trademark counterfeiting as well as for camcording in a movie theatre.
While there is much to take issue with (just about every media release from the past couple of years is crammed into the report), it is the recommendations and omissions that really matter. I am skeptical about the likely effectiveness of some recommendations (for example, the reliance on stronger border measures is undermined by the GAO study on U.S. border effectiveness), yet several have little downside and will likely make their way into the Committees' reports. There are, however, several recommendations that should be rejected.