Fair Dealing by Giulia Forsythe (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/dRkXwP

Copyright

Gutenberg Galaxy by Marshall McLuhan by no_typographic_man (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/8hhvER

The Trouble with the TPP, Day 3: Copyright Term Extension

The Trouble with the TPP series continues with one of the most high profile copyright concerns associated with the TPP: mandatory copyright term extension (prior posts include Day 1: US Blocks Balancing Provisions, Day 2: Locking in Digital Locks). The term of copyright in Canada is presently life of the author plus an additional 50 years, a term consistent with the international standard set by the Berne Convention. This is also the standard in half of the TPP countries with Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Brunei, and Vietnam also providing protection for life plus 50 years.

From a Canadian perspective, the issue of extending the term of copyright was raised on several prior occasions and consistently rejected by governments and trade negotiators. For example, term extension was discussed during the 2009 national copyright consultation, but the Canadian government wisely decided against it. Further, the European Union initially demanded that Canada extend the term of copyright in the Canada-EU Trade Agreement, but that too was effectively rebuffed with the issue of term removed from the final text.

January 6, 2016 — 7 comments — News

Crew Close-Up by benj mako hill (CC BY-SA 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/4rfbH8

The Trouble with the TPP, Day 2: Locking in Digital Locks

The Trouble with the TPP series (Day 1: US Blocks Balancing Provisions) spends the next few days examining the TPP’s copyright provisions. One of the most controversial aspects of the 2012 Canadian copyright reform process involved the anti-circumvention provisions, often referred to as the digital lock rules. The U.S. pressured Canada to include anti-circumvention rules, which were required for ratification of the WIPO Internet Treaties, within the copyright reform package. They feature legal protections for technological protection measures (TPMs, a broader umbrella that captures digital rights management or DRM) and rights management information (RMI).

There was an enormous amount of scholarly analysis on these issues throughout the reform process. For example, I wrote about the flexibility in implementing the WIPO Internet Treaties, Carys Craig wrote about the negative implications for fair dealing, Ian Kerr wrote about the broader implications of digital locks, Jeremy deBeer focused on the constitutional concerns, and Mark Perry wrote about rights management information. Moreover, David Lametti, now a Liberal MP and the Parliamentary Secretary for International Trade, wrote about the incoherence of the digital lock rules. The academic analysis was decidedly negative about the legal reforms as was the broader public, which made the issue a top priority as part of the 2009 copyright consultation.

January 5, 2016 — 2 comments — News

Protest against Bill C-51 - April 18, 2015 - Vancouver BC, Canada by Sally T. Buck (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/sdxnaW

Tech Law in 2016: Previewing Some of the Tough Policy Choices

Technology law and policy continues to command the attention of the public and policy makers. My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that as Canada enters a new year with a new government, 2016 will be all about making tough choices on a wide range of technology law policies, including the following eight issues that are sure to generate headlines.

1. How will Bill C-51 be revamped?

Bill C-51, the Conservative government’s anti-terrorism bill, emerged as a major political issue last year as many expressed concern over the lack of oversight and the implications for privacy and civil liberties. The Liberal government has committed to reforms, but has been generally coy about what those changes will be. New accountability mechanisms will undoubtedly feature prominently in any reform package, but the substantive amendments to the bill remain a mystery.

January 5, 2016 — Comments are Disabled — Columns

Computer Keyboard by Marcie Casas (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/99xKiL

The Letters of the Law: 2015 in Technology Law and Policy

With new trade agreements, a new government, new court cases, and new rules governing the Internet, law and technology issues garnered headlines all year long. My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) takes a look back at 2015 from A to Z:

A is for the Ashley Madison data breach, which affected millions of people and placed the spotlight on online privacy.

B is for Bill C-51, the anti-terrorism bill, which became a flashpoint political issue on striking the right balance between surveillance and civil liberties.

C is for CBC v. SODRAC, a Supreme Court of Canada decision released in November that reinforced the significance of technological neutrality in copyright. The court sided with SODRAC, a copyright collective, on the need for payment for certain uses of music but ruled that an earlier rate-setting exercise had failed to account for the technological neutrality principle.

December 30, 2015 — 4 comments — Columns

Beatles Vinyl by Erwin Bernal (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/axnRZ4

Competition Tribunal Gives Go Ahead for Price Maintenance Claim Against Music Industry Giants

The Competition Tribunal has granted leave to Stargrove Entertainment, the Canadian music label that has published public domain recordings from the artists such as the Beatles, to pursue a Competition Tribunal complaint against some of the giants of the music industry. The complaint targets the Canadian Music Reproduction Rights Agency (CMRRA), Universal Music, Sony Music, and several music publishers. I wrote earlier about Stargrove’s complaint and noted the backroom lobbying campaign that succeeded in obtaining a copyright term extension in Canada for sound recordings.

Despite strong opposition from the music industry, the Tribunal granted leave to pursue a complaint of price maintenance in violation of the Competition Act. The Tribunal concluded:

December 15, 2015 — 8 comments — News