Why Canada's Proposed Copyright Bill is Complete and Utter Balls

I KNOW. I KNOW. It seems like every week and a half I'm asking you to write your MP about something or other. But cases like Bill C-10 might be important to me, and of a more tangential importance to you. The piece of legislation -- and I use that word loosely -- that Jim Prentice introduced quietly last week is NOT a Made In Canada approach. It is NOT "an attempt to finally go after illegal downloaders," as it was framed in articles in the major press -- which, not so coincidentally, are owned by some of the big corporations with interests in promoting the bill. This bill is nothing short of a giant step backward for Canada and Canadians in the digital realm.

It would make me, and most people --- I'm gonna hit a moving target here -- under say, 45, criminals.

It would strangle and eliminate the nascent, flourishing kinds of user-generated content and online discussions that are driving the YouTube revolution.

It would severely restrict your ability to use content that YOU HAVE BOUGHT AND PAID FOR in the way you want -- including some very reasonable uses that you'd never think of as being "wrong" or "illegal."

The bill, Bill C-61, is nothing short of a complete anti-consumer measure, written, bought, and paid for by big media corporations.

In terms of provenance, it resembles the disastrous DMCA, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in the United States, which just about everyone short of the dying record labels and the RIAA have admitted is a deeply flawed law.

Except, it's actually worse.

The concept of "fair comment" has never really existed in Canada. You can't make fun of a copyrighted image for satirical intent, as you can in the United States, because of the way the 1st Amendment has been interpreted. In Canada, your freedom to express yourself is already greatly restricted. Under this law, all "fair dealing" will be eliminated.

What is "fair dealing?" Well, that's a great question, and I'm going to point you to a bunch of sources that explain this better than I do.

But first, let's speak to context, and spin. More than twenty years ago, the same companies that essentially wrote this bill opposed at every step of the way behaviors that you now know as commonplace. Before the internet, before digital files were a possibility, back in the day when the only way you could get music other than buy it was to borrow it from the library, or from a friend, and tape it, or to tape it off the radio -- the same companies opposed that. They opposed the introduction of VCR's. (The new bill makes it illegal to copy something off a PVR to hard media.) The stuff over "perfect digital files" and how they're different etc, etc, is just the latest iteration of an tactic that has always opted to promote a vision where you had very few rights, and they essentially told you what you could do and what you couldn't do.

The difference is that once upon a time copyright law sought to strike a balance between consumers and copyright holders. The DMCA, and the Canadian Copyright Law, its bastard Frankenstein offspring, completely toss that out.

I am someone with a vested interest in having a cogent, logical, and defensible copyright law -- because I make money entirely from the production of intellectual property. That's my only product. The problem with this law (well, there are so many, but the one that trumps all others) is that it's so badly conceived that it's going to result in two simultaneous things:

It will result in harassment of normal consumers who are not doing anything wrong (not the "pirates" talked about in the press.)

Finally, it will criminalize so many behaviors that it will actually have the opposite effect of its intent: it will be a law without credibility that does not recognize the reality of our digital age -- and it will hasten a movement to ignore ALL forms of copyright. If the law is not respected, people will not follow it. You'll wind up turning people against the very concept of copyright, and down the road that has some very serious consequences for us all.

Cory Doctorow explains some of this in this video from Open Source Cinema:



Now, who should you read? First and foremost, Michael Geist. Here's why this bill betrays you, and all of us:

Because in a country whose Supreme Court of Canada has emphasized the importance of balance between creators rights and user rights, the Canadian DMCA eviscerates user rights in the digital environment by virtually eliminating fair dealing. Under this bill, the right to copy for the purposes of research, private study, criticism, and news reporting virtually disappears if the underlying content is digitally locked.

Because in a country that prioritizes privacy, the Canadian DMCA will render it virtually impossible to protect against the invasion of privacy by digital media companies. The bill includes an exemption for those that circumvent digital locks to protect their privacy, yet renders the tools needed to circumvent illegal. In other words, the bill gives Canadians the right to protect their privacy but prohibits the tools needed to do so.

Because in a country that values consumer rights, the Canadian DMCA means that consumers no longer control their own personal property. That CD or DVD or e-book or cellphone you just bought? The bill says you now have the right to engage in “private use copying” but not if it contains digital locks.

Because the Conservative Party of Canada promised to Stand Up for Canada, yet the Canadian DMCA is quite clearly U.S.-inspired legislation, the result of intense pressure from U.S. officials and lobby groups.

Because the government pledged to table treaties for House of Commons debate before introducing implementing legislation and failed to do so. Claims that this legislation does not ratify the treaties violates the spirit of that commitment.

Because the Canadian DMCA was introduced without consulting consumer groups, education groups, civil society groups, or the Canadian public.

In this post, Geist outlines the actions you should take today. The Tories have promised the Americans that they will ram this bill through by the end of the summer. Don't let that happen.

My sense is that the government still doesn't quite get it. The usual suspects generated the expected supportive press releases, yet simmering online are thousands of Canadians who are angry and who vote. There remains much work to be done - there will be opportunities for people in Calgary to meet Industry Minister Jim Prentice at his Calgary Stampede breakfast on July 5th, for residents of Guelph to make their voice heard in the fall by-election, and for Canadians across the country to participate in offline protests this fall. In the meantime (once again):

1. Write to your MP, the Industry Minister, the Canadian Heritage Minister, and the Prime Minister. If you send an email, be sure to print it out and drop a copy in the mail (no stamp is needed - c/o House of Commons, Ottawa, ON, K1A0A6). If you are looking for a sample letter, visit Copyright for Canadians.
2. Take 30 minutes from your summer, to meet directly with your MP. From late June through much of the summer, your MP will be back in your local community attending local events and making themselves available to meet with constituents. Give them a call and ask for a meeting. Every MP in the country should return to Ottawa in the fall having heard from their constituents on this issue.
3. If you are not a member of the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group, join. If you are, consider joining or starting a local chapter and be sure to educate your friends and colleagues about the issue and starting working through the list of 30 things you can do.

I hate to get all generational on your ass, but this is just one more case where you see the problems that come from the old and out of touch being in charge. It's long past time for a generational change in Government. We're seven years into the 21st century. The Tories have had plenty of time to get up to speed on the issues that are really at play in the new frontier. They can't make the bridge. Neither can most of the U.S. Senators who voted for the DMCA.

Well, to quote a grizzled guy who kind of got it then and surely gets it now: the old world is rapidly fading. So get out of the new one if you can't lend a hand.

CBC's Search Engine is all over this, as well. And do check out faircopyright.ca. That site makes a great point (among many) that on its own should get your outrage going. This bill actually is trying to take away rights that were affirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada. That's right. U.S. Media corporations' interests, for this government, trump the Supreme Court. It's a scandalous, naked betrayal. Laura Murray's full article on the Lies of Bill C-61 is a must read, but here's the fair dealing excerpt:

This Bill suffocates fair dealing and flies in the face of Supreme Court rulings of recent years. Remember “once an authorized copy of a work is sold to a member of the public, it is generally for the purchaser, not the author, to determine what happens to it?” Remember “the fair dealing exception is… a user’s right”? The Bill handcuffs user rights CCH and its sister cases urged us to cherish. Or rather, it lets us practice those rights via videocassette. I hope somebody out there still has a working VCR.

The thing about this, of course, is to not believe the line that's sold that somehow going in this direction is "the only way." This is complete balls. In Europe, there is a far more enlightened approach to protecting creator rights, and balancing the consumers' rights with the rights of copyright holders. The Writers Guild of Canada was pushing for this to be included in the bill, but, again, the Government chose to favor the backroom boys.

From a WGC Press Release:

The WGC has been working behind the scenes on this issue, meeting with representatives from the Ministry of Industry and representatives from Heritage to express our concerns about copyright and our interest in an approach that balances the desires of creators to see their work widely disseminated with the right to be fairly compensated for that dissemination.

We advocated that a system of levies – such as those in use in many European countries – be introduced that would address the points of access for potential infringement of copyrighted material. Such levies are collected by international organizations who in turn distribute monies to the established “authors.” The Canadian Screenwriters Collection Society (CSCS) was created in 1999 to collect those funds from international partners (other than the U.S., where no such provisions exist) and to distribute them to Canadian Screenwriters whose copyrighted material has been has been distributed internationally. We were disappointed that such levies did not form part of the government’s proposed legislation tabled yesterday.

So that's it. It's a bad law that will further erode respect for intellectual property in the age group that understands it the least: the under 25's who don't remember a time before the Internet made it easy to get stuff, to remix it, and repurpose and re-edit whatever you wanted.

We lose them, we lose everything.

This is a desperate mess of a bill. Stop it.