Post Tagged with: "clement"

Clement’s Digital Economy Strategy Speech

Industry Minister Tony Clement delivered an update on the digital economy strategy in a speech that was disappointingly short on specifics. There were some comments on timelines for spectrum auctions and foreign investment (heading into 2012), but no reference to open access or open data and no real benchmarks or […]

November 23, 2010 — 1 comment — News

SaveOurNet Renews Focus on Net Neutrality

SaveOurNet Coalition has written to Industry Minister Tony Clement to ask him to state his position on net neutrality.

October 5, 2010 — 1 comment — 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

Clement on the Next Spectrum Auction

“I’ve concluded we must get the 700mHz auction going soon.”

September 13, 2010 — 3 comments — News

The U.S. DMCA vs. Bill C-32: Comparing the Digital Lock Exceptions

Yesterday’s U.S. DMCA Rulemaking decision, which established a series of new anti-circumvention exceptions, attracted considerable attention on both sides of the border. In the U.S., critics of the DMCA noted the progress in addressing some of the DMCA’s most troubling consequences by creating exceptions for unlocking and jailbreaking cellphones and circumventing DVD locks in several circumstances (though the decision is hardly a panacea given the restrictions on distributing circumvention tools, contractual restrictions, and the absence of a general right to circumvent for lawful purposes).

From a Canadian perspective, the U.S. decision – combined with the recent 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling linking circumvention to copyright and the USTR decision to cave on the digital lock rules in ACTA – provides a timely reminder of the mistake that is the digital lock rules in C-32.

Looking back, Industry Minister Tony Clement said he wanted forward-looking legislation designed to last ten years, yet the scope of Bill C-32’s anti-circumvention exceptions became outdated in less than ten weeks. Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore, when not calling critics “radical extremists,” emphasized that Bill C-32 was not identical to the DMCA. While he had the notice-and-notice system in mind, weeks later his comments became accurate since it turns out the DMCA is far less restrictive than C-32.

Just how badly does the Canadian bill stack up? On the two key issues in the bill – digital locks and fair dealing – Canada is far more restrictive than the U.S. Consider:

July 27, 2010 — 17 comments — News