Michael Ridley, University of Guelph's Chief Information Officer, on why creators and users should oppose C-61.
Post Tagged with: "dmca"
61 Reforms to C-61, Day 59: Statutory Damages Reform – Removes Court Discretion For Reduced Damages
While the new statutory damages provision may create a ceiling of $500 in damages for certain infringements, it also creates a minimum that is higher than the current statute. The drafting is complex, but the change is as follows:
61 Reforms to C-61, Day 58: Statutory Damages Reform – What It Doesn’t Cover
The problems associated with the statutory damages reform extend beyond the questions it raises. The provision is presumably a response to the over 30,000 file sharing lawsuits in the United States which each bring the prospect of millions in liability. Politically, the image of that kind of liability for Canadians would not sell well on the campaign trail. Yet notwithstanding the intent, the current provision does very little to address the prospect of enormous liability for all sorts of activities.
The new provision would likely reduce liability for downloading (though downloading of sound recordings is already arguably permitted due to the private copying levy), however, it certainly does not address uploading or the making available of content on file sharing networks without authorization. This means that BitTorrent users – who simultaneously upload and download – will still face the possible liability of $20,000 per infringement. Similarly, uploading a copyrighted work to YouTube raises the same potential liability.
61 Reforms to C-61, Day 55: E-Reserve Provisions Require DRM
The problems with the e-reserve provisions in C-61 extend beyond just the fair dealing concerns. In order to qualify for the exception, librarians are required to implement DRM-based solutions on the distribution of electronic materials. Yesterday I pointed to the provision that expressly permits digital reproduction. Section 30.02(3) adds two […]
61 Reforms to C-61, Day 54: E-Reserve Provisions Less Effective Than Fair Dealing
The Canadian library community has been one of the most outspoken critics of Bill C-61, expressing concern about (among other things) its impact on electronic delivery of materials. The Canadian Library Association press release on C-61 notes that:
Bill C-61 ignores the fact that the 2004 CCH Supreme Court Judgment already allows Canadian libraries to do desktop delivery of interlibrary loan. Bill C-61 requires libraries to lock up interlibrary loans with DRM tools, something that most libraries would not have the resources to accomplish. Bill C-61 alone would force many libraries back to delivering interlibrary loan via paper copies.
The CLA raises two important issues – the use of fair dealing for e-reserve policies as well as the effective requirement on librarians to use DRM for electronic delivery of materials. Today I will focus on fair dealing and e-reserve policies and save the DRM concerns for tomorrow.
Recent Posts
Bill S-210 Study Without Witnesses?: Why a Conservative Filibuster May Lead to New Internet Age Verification Requirements and Website Blocking Legislation 
A Post I Never Thought I Would Need to Write: Jewish Students Have the Right to Feel Safe on Campus 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 203: Andrew Clement on Calls to Separate Privacy Reform and Artificial Intelligence Regulation in Bill C-27 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 202: David Soberman on the Reality Behind Claims Canadian Wireless Prices Have Been Cut in Half 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 201: Robert Diab on the Billion Dollar Lawsuits Launched By Ontario School Boards Against Social Media Giants
