In one of the strangest responses to C-32 yet, Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore told the House of Commons yesterday that consumers are supportive of C-32 and cites as evidence the Canadian Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber describes itself as Canada's largest and most influential business association and makes no pretense of representing consumer interests. The exchange:
Fair Dealing by Giulia Forsythe (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/dRkXwP
Copyright
Moore Says Chamber of Commerce Support Evidence Consumers Like C-32
Clement Interview on TVO’s Search Engine
TVO's Search Engine features a detailed interview with Industry Minister Tony Clement on Bill C-32. Clement is clearly sensitive to the concerns associated with digital locks in the bill, though his suggestion that the new provision on ephemeral recordings would allow broadcasters to circumvent locks for news reporting does not […]
Magic Seals Are Made to be Broken
Ivor Tossell's column in the Globe and Mail focuses on Bill C-32 and the problems with the digital lock provisions found in the bill.
Fixing Bill C-32: Proposed Amendments to the Digital Lock Provisions
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:
Setting the Record Straight: 32 Questions and Answers on C-32’s Digital Lock Provisions, Part Five
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?
Recent Posts
Lawful Access on Steroids: Why Bill C-2’s Big Brother Tactics Combine Expansive Warrantless Disclosure with Unprecedented Secrecy 
Government Reverses on Privacy and the Charter: Department of Justice Analysis Concludes Political Party Privacy Bill Raises No Charter of Rights Effects 
“Big Brother Tactics”: Why Bill C-2’s New Warrantless Disclosure Demand Powers Extend Far Beyond Internet and Telecom Providers 
Government Seeks To Exempt Political Parties From Privacy Laws Even As CRTC Reports They Are Leading Source of Spam Complaints 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 236: Robert Diab on the Return of Lawful Access
