Canada Says No To DMCA

P Starrson writes " The Canadian government has reportedly said no to the DMCA. It released its plans for copyright reform today with a limited anti-circumvention provision that would not cover the likes of DeCSS. It even avoided the U.S. "notice and takedown system" that has caused a big headache for U.S. ISPs. A good summary is available from Canadian law professor Michael Geist. "

Some of the text

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's the bulk of the article text, before the poor guy gets taken down by the hordes. (Typical Internet copyright violation, eh?)

Government of Canada Unveils Plans for Copyright Reform

Industry Canada and Canadian Heritage, the two departments responsible for copyright policy in Canada, this morning released a joint statement on plans for copyright reform. There is an additional FAQ that fleshes out the issues. A bill is expected this spring and the statement spells out where Canada is headed. The key points include:

1. The government will implement the WIPO Internet treaties. Note that the government now speaks of implementing, rather than formally ratifying, the treaties. They indicate that they will consider ratification after this bill is passed.

2. The package will include an anti-circumvention provision applied to copyright material. There is no mention of extending the provision to devices (as is the case in the U.S.) and the specific reference to applying the provision to copyright material suggests that the provision will limit its applicability to circumvention to commit copyright infringement. The rights management information is similarly limited to instances to "further or conceal copyright infringement." While no anti-circumvention provision would be better, this suggests that the Canadian provision will feature some real balance.

Moreover, the FAQ makes clear that "the circumvention of a TPM applied to copyright material will only be illegal if it is carried out with the objective of infringing copyright. Legitimate access, as authorized by the Copyright Act, will not be altered." This is very different from anti-circumvention provisions found in the U.S. However, the FAQ also notes that circumvention for the purposes of private copying will not be permitted, meaning people may find themselves paying for a CD and paying a levy on blank CD yet unable to make the copy of the underlying CD.

3. The recording industry gets some of their package - a making available right and a full reproduction right for performers.

4. A "notice and notice" system for ISPs rather than notice and takedown. Canadian ISPs will only be required to notify their subscriber of an infringement claim, not take the content down as is found in the U.S. The ISP will be required to retain subscriber information, however to ensure that it is available should litigation later arise.

This is a major development as it implements a much fairer system than that found in the U.S. (or even the more draconian notice and termination system that CRIA raised last spring). The FAQ argues that this system is better suited to a P2P world, since notice and takedown simply doesn't work for P2P.

5. The photographers' copyright issue will also be addressed. It is not entirely clear how the reform will address the commissioning of photographs issue - an exception for private or domestic commissions is contemplated, but this one that really requires the legislative language. No word either on what will happen with the stalled Senate bill on this issue.

6. As previously reported, the extended license for Internet materials has been shelved for now with a consultation on the issue planned for this year.

7. The Act will include new provisions to facilitate electronic delivery of materials within schools and libraries. This is viewed as addressing the user side of the equation. It's a start but obviously user rights don't command the same attention as the rights holder groups.

8. Other major issues for immediate consultation include private copying and broadcasters rights.

The devil will be in the details but this represents a major shift away from the embarrassingly one-sided Canadian Heritage Standing Committee recommendations issued last May. While that report clearly pushed the agenda forward, the government's response has certainly recognized the need for some balance. Lots more on these issues to come...

Immigration...

[alexandreracine]

Here is the website... :)

http://www.cic.gc.ca/ [cic.gc.ca]

Mod chips

[PxM]

"the circumvention of a TPM applied to copyright material will only be illegal if it is carried out with the objective of infringing copyright. Legitimate access, as authorized by the Copyright Act, will not be altered."

That sounds like it will allow the creation and sale of mod chips as long as they are used legally. Though, it doesn't allow private copying which means that cracking iTunes for personal use is still not legal.

--
Want a free iPod? [freeipods.com]
Or try a free Nintendo DS, GC, PS2, Xbox. [freegamingsystems.com] (you only need 4 referrals)
Wired article as proof [wired.com]

Re:Mod chips

[Ahnteis]

Howso? From what you posted, cracking iTunes would only be illegal if you distributed the files after cracking them.

If you cracked them for your own use, how are you infringing COPYRIGHT?

Re:Walk this way...

[wankledot]

Tom Green (the comedian) was nominated for a Juno (.ca Grammy) for best hiphop album.

That should answer your question.

Re:So When Piracy Causes The End Of Freedom....

[DeathFlame]

Plus they were there because of a stolen vehicle, not because of the grow op.

Re:Stop sending us mad cattle.

[Wandering Wombat]

Well, sadly, yes, you got two cows from us. We've gotten six from you. Of course, when we raise hell, what happens? The Elephant to the south doesn't notice, or care.

As for the by-products control, the thing was, seven years ago Canada banned using animal by-products as animal feed. The cows that the States got were seven years old, and had been raised for the first few months of their life on the LAST few months of animal by-product feed process. These were the LAST possible cows who could have gotten Mad Cow from the feed, and they did, and we gave them to you guys. One in a million shot, doctor... one in a million.

No to DMCA? WTF?

[mikers]

Can record companies (Canadian equiv. of [MPRI]{2}AA) sue p2p users sharing music and movies?

Currently no. Once this act is passed, yes they can. The ISP is obligated to maintain sufficent records to identify the subscriber for a period of time.

Relevent documentation from Proposed changes [pch.gc.ca]:
Upon receipt of a notice, ISPs would also be required to keep a record of relevant information for a specified time. Rights holders would have the legal means to compel ISPs to comply with the regime.

AND
(FAQ [pch.gc.ca])
This will clarify that the unauthorized posting or the peer-to-peer file-sharing of material on the Internet will constitute an infringement of copyright.

Can users copy records/movies for private use?

Currently yes. After this act is passed, yes BUT users are not allowed to legally bypass any restrictions (DRM) in order to do so. That becomes illegal.

Relevent documentation from Proposed changes [pch.gc.ca]:
The Act's private copying regime provides for an exception to copyright that permits the making of a copy of a sound recording for private use

BUT... not everything is good: (from FAQ [pch.gc.ca])
The bill will also contain legal protections for technological protection measures (encryptions, password requirements) and rights management systems containing information for the purpose of tracking uses of works. The removal of or tampering with such measures for the purpose of infringing copyright will itself constitute an infringement of copyright.

What this looks like is basically opening the door to lawsuits for record companies, making file sharing illegal and closing the door on consumers being able to turn off DRM to make a copy of a CD or movie for themselves.

How is this not DMCA?

Je n'ai comprend pas.

Re:Walk this way...

[cavebear42]

Population - 32,805,041
Self Identify Black Canadian - 662,215 ..........

2.02%

compair to 12.9% in the US

just for the record

Re:Good step?

[Anonymous Coward]

Simply put, people will try to do things to put themselves at the top, but it's the governments fault for allowing itself to be manipulated.

I disagree. The government is being manipulated. It's being bought off.

It's the people who are being manipulated. The power of the US government comes from the people. What's baffling is that it's okay with the people (as evidence by who they vote into office) to allow their government to overstep it's authority and allow their rights to be eroded.

I think Thomas Jefferson would be crying right now ;)

I think, if Jefferson were alive, he would be too busy trying to deal with all speculation about what he'd do in different circumstances.

Re:Don't forget.. no selective service either!

[Phrogman]

Note that in British Columbia, the cost of treatment is covered by Medical Services, its only in ALberta (which has a more Conservative government that favors allowing private companies to do health care - and thus has a shittier Health Care system to justify it) that they aren't covered.

Now, this is also talking First Nations Health Care, and therefore may be subject to a different set of regulations.

In General, if you need health care assistance in Canada, you get it. Not always *fast*, and not without its problems and failures for sure, but at least you don't have your life ruined like people in the US regularly seem to do.

My wife had some friends down there in the US that she met years ago. They lived in Phoenix. Only he had medical coverage because he was working, they couldn't afford to cover her as well because it was another $500 a month or something stupid like that. At any rate, they figured if she fell ill they would be financially ruined. Up here, she might end up on a waiting list or have other problems, but she wouldn't end up with a $100k hospital bill.

You couldn't pay me enough to live in the US to be honest. I like visiting there and I like Americans generally, but there is no way I would ever become a US citizen. I prefer the slightly socialized system up here far more than the "your on yer own, sink or swim" feel I get from the US. The US has many good things going for it, don't mistake me, but I prefer my own country particularly in instances like this.

Re:wow

[Jherek Carnelian]

If I buy a CD, I have every right to make a backup copy of that. Its called fair use.

In the USA,"Fair Use" is not a right.
It is defense against prosecution.
It is also very nebulously defined, on purpose to make it applicable to future situations without requiring amendment, but that also means the application is not clear cut, generally relying on case law to determine specifics.

Here is the section of US copyright law that defines fair use:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sec_17_00 000107----000-.html [cornell.edu]

Re:No to DMCA? WTF?

[Drakonian]

Just to clarify my source, from the FAQ:

Circumvention for the purposes of making private copies of sound recordings will not be permitted, however.

Re:No to DMCA? WTF?

[Drakonian]

And the purpose of a notice and notice system is to directly target P2P. From the FAQ:

Why is the government not instituting a "notice and takedown" regime for ISPs (as other countries have done)?

A "notice and takedown" regime typically requires an ISP to block access to material upon receipt of a notice from a rights holder that alleges such material to be infringing. The obligation to block access lies with the ISP whose facilities are being used to host the allegedly infringing material. Under Canadian law, the courts already have the ability to order the takedown of infringing material in appropriate cases. The bill will maintain this standard in accordance with Charter of Rights considerations. A drawback of "notice and takedown"is that it typically applies only to materials posted on an ISP's facilities; it cannot cover peer-to-peer file sharing, arguably the most prevalent source of infringing material, since the files are actually located in the computers of the persons engaged in sharing. The proposed "notice and notice" regime will address peer-to-peer file sharing.

Re:So I pay a levy to make a copy, but I can't...

[Yaztromo]

So does this mean that all the protected CD's we get from the US we can now be sued for ripping? How does this make sense?

It makes perfect sense, vis:

Moreover, the FAQ makes clear that "the circumvention of a TPM applied to copyright material will only be illegal if it is carried out with the objective of infringing copyright.

The concept of "Private Copying" (which is the term used in Canadian Copyright Act C-42 [justice.gc.ca]) is not a copyright infringement. What you want to look at is Part VIII, ss 80, namely:

80. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the act of reproducing all or any substantial part of

(a) a musical work embodied in a sound recording,

(b) a performer's performance of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, or

(c) a sound recording in which a musical work, or a performer's performance of a musical work, is embodied

onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer's performance or the sound recording.

Limitation

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the act described in that subsection is done for the purpose of doing any of the following in relation to any of the things referred to in paragraphs (1)(a) to (c):

(a) selling or renting out, or by way of trade exposing or offering for sale or rental;

(b) distributing, whether or not for the purpose of trade;

(c) communicating to the public by telecommunication; or

(d) performing, or causing to be performed, in public.

As such, if you defeat a copyright protection mechanism for the purpose of making a private copy, you'll be okay, as that copy won't be an infringing copy.

(For the record, IANAL -- I'm just a guy who has read over the Copyright Act on numerous occasions :) ).

Yaz.

Re:Redeem us from bad press

[ikkonoishi]

Don't tempt [rense.com] US.

Re:Good step?

[mrbcs]

You obviously don't live here. We're so disgusted with the crooked politicians and Quebec always voting in francophone Prime ministers, that we've given up all hope of anything changing.

We used to just hope to be assimilated into America but lately the Americans are scaring the shit out of us. Patriot Act, DMCA, etc..

This current minority Government probably won't make the summer so this issue may die with an election call.

Re:Nice

[Brandybuck]

TANSTAAFL. There Ain't No Such Thing as a Free Lunch. Canadians have traded the costs of private insurance for the costs of increased taxation, waiting lists, and overall poorer medical care. In the US I may be one cancer diagnosis away from bankruptcy, but at least I won't have to wait weeks or months to start my chemotherapy. If Canada's health care system is so superior, then why are so many Canadians coming to the US for health care?

Don't listen to me, though. Read a recent Canadian article on the subject: Canadian Health Care In Crisis [cbsnews.com].

Re:Huh...

[sparks]

...what else can we boast about?

Progressive, tolerant society?

High standard of living?

Excellent international reputation - a beacon of peace?

Beautiful Canadian women?

Amazing landscape?

Good job opportunites?

Re:Nice

[ErikZ]

If you're in Canada, you're one major health issue away from death.

I find a great way to not have to pay for expensive treatment, is to make the patient wait for tests. And wait. And wait. Then the patient dies! Problem solved.

Re:Nice

[Bobzibub]

You forgot that Canada can increase spending from it's regular buget SURPLUSES (What 10 years now?) to increase spending on health care. The US spends more government money on HC than Canada does per capita. Too bad Medicare is *still* going bankrupt eh?

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1753
"per capita health spending in the U.S. is more than twice as high: $4,000 last year, compared with $1,800 in Canada."

So Canada increases spending on medicare by say C$1Billion....this year.
http://subscript.bna.com/SAMPLES/hcp.nsf/0/ c4a2808 945556ed085256e63007d87be?OpenDocument

"The federal government will commit more than C$1 billion ($760 million) toward increased health care spending in fiscal 2004-2005,.."

Past years too.

"The government's 2003 budget increased health care spending by C$34.8 billion ($26.4 billion) over five years, and Prime Minister Paul Martin confirmed only a few weeks ago an additional C$2 billion ($1.5 billion) payment to provincial governments to cover rising health care costs, Goodale said in the House of Commons in delivering the government's budget for fiscal 2004-2005. That brings federal cash transfers to provinces and territories for health care and social programs to C$28.1 billion ($21.1 billion) in 2007-2008, he said."

Sure, we Canucks held back on spending like you folks should have, but at least we have some room to manuver. That Social Security deal is a trial baloon for Medicare's privatization.. That is scary.

Canadians go to the US for quick and good healthcare, true. That is changing: HC is a priority and we budget to pay for it. Americans might be going to Canada as economic migrants if things continue as they are.

Cheers,
-b

Re:I love to be Canadian!

[dan of the north]

"Circumventing DRM to make private copies of sound recordings would become illegal."

Is that what this means? - "It would not be legal to circumvent, without authorization, a TPM applied to a sound recording, notwithstanding the exception for private copying."
Source [pch.gc.ca] (Government Statement on Proposals for Copyright Reform)

Re:English Parliament is great...

[arkhan_jg]

Just for future reference, Tony Blair has to defend himself on the floor of the House of Commons, the elected house of MP's. He has a half hour every week where he answers pre-submitted questions from all parties. (The commons is equivalent to the US house of representatives, the Lords is an appointed 2nd house that can delay legislation but not stop it)

Generally, a questioner can ask a supplementary question. The leader of the opposition (largest party not in power) gets 3 or 4 supplementary questions after his first, which are not scripted.

The whole thing is televised, or available online as video and transcript here [number-10.gov.uk]

I have to admit, it's one of the best bits of British democracy, and the US would benefit from introducing it. Some of the questions are just evil, and the PM has to work hard at it. PM questions can make or break a politicians career.

Re:ZED?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's so you can tell Zed from Cee.

The whole planet pronounces it Zed. You don't in the US simply because Noah Webster, in a fit of nationalistic pique, decided thar for consistency zed should be pronounced like the other consonants, practicality be damned.

You'll find that professional radio users in the US (dispatchers, hams etc) all say "zed" to avoid the "cee" ambiguity.

In short, "zee" is the result of a silly nationalistic brain fart and really is bes4 forgotten about.