Skip to Content

discussion forum

Tuesday September 15, 2009
Tracking the Copyright Consultation Discussion Forum: Final Results

Throughout the copyright consultation, I've been assisted by University of Ottawa student Frances Munn, who has been tracking the discussion in the online forum (earlier updates here, here, and here).  While submissions will still be accepted until midnight tonight, the discussion forum is now closed.   The forum attracted over 2,000 comments with a summary posted below.

2009 Copyright Consultation
Add Comment (2) Tags (5)
Tuesday August 18, 2009
Tracking the Copyright Consultation Discussion Forum - Through August 17, 2009

I last posted an update on the copyright consultation discussion forum on August 4, 2009.  Discussion has slowed since, but the total number of comments for the first question on how copyright affects you is closing in on 1,000 responses.  Frances Munn provides a summary.

Copyright and You

How do Canada’s copyright laws affect you? How should existing laws be modernized?

August 17, 2009 (841 responses)

Over the last couple of weeks, posters were concerned that the government would act in the interest of big corporations rather than consumers. Posters mainly urged the government to expand personal use protections, fair dealing, and create a technologically neutral law. Others opposed following the American example on copyright where individuals are being sued by powerful interests.

Highlights:

  • The most recent poster identified as a musician and urged the government to leave copyright laws alone, arguing that he was happy that the Internet allowed people to have easy access to his music.
  • A writer pointed out that he or she only makes five to ten cents off every book sold, but took a consumer centred position. He or she urged the government to limit DRM and statutory damages.
  • Other writers argued that they need to be paid for their work in order to continue creating and urged the government to create laws that would ensure writers are fairly compensated.
  • Another poster argued that a three-strikes “graduated response” law was completely unreasonable.
  • One poster argued that copyright should stop pitting creators and consumers against each other. The poster proposed that creators be paid by public-private partnerships that draw on taxes, corporate profits, license fees, government subventions, and educational budgets.
  • One person began a heated debate when he strongly opposed a “something for nothing” system, arguing that it is unfair for creators to produce work for free.
  • Another poster began a debate when he suggested limiting copyright terms to five years.

Test of Time

Based on Canadian values and interests, how should copyright changes be made in order to withstand the test of time?

Monday, August 17, 2009 (138 responses)

Posters pointed out that file sharing is almost impossible to stop and that the DMCA has had a “chilling” effect on innovation. One poster proposed banning DRM altogether, arguing that in the free market, industries should be left to adapt to new technologies. Others argued for expanded personal use and fair dealing rights.

Innovation and Creativity

What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster innovation and creativity in Canada?

Monday, August 17, 2009 (292 responses)

Highlights

  • Several posters argued that anti-circumvention legislation destroys innovation.
  • Another person argued that the law should protect the creator, not someone who wishes to use the creator’s work.
  • One poster argued that copyright laws should be written in clear and plain language.
  • A writer pointed out that they relied on book and article sales to make a livelihood.

Competition and Investment

What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster competition and investment in Canada?

Monday, August 17, 2009 (52 responses)

Highlights:

  • One poster proposed lowering prices in order to sell more for less – e.g. 1000 CDs for $1 rather than 100 CDs for $10.
  • Another person suggested differentiating between commercial, public, and personal use.
  • One person cautioned the government against protecting a digital media monopoly that will stifle innovation.
  • On the other side of the debate, one poster began a heated debate when he argued that Canada needs “iron-clad” copyright laws to foster innovation.

Digital Economy

What kinds of changes would best position Canada as a leader in the global, digital economy?

Monday, August 17, 2009 (330 responses)

Highlights

  • The most recent poster cautioned the government against trying to control the spread of information on the Internet, arguing that it would fail in the long run.
  • A poster argued for more freedom and privacy online and proposed implementing a levy on hardware.
  • Another poster proposed differentiating between commercial use, non-profit use, and private use where private use is exempt from copyright restrictions.
  • One person warned that crackdowns on P2P will only lead to increased usage and described a three-strike’s law as draconian.
  • Another poster argued that anti-circumvention should not apply to locked cell phones.
Add Comment (4) Tags (5)
Wednesday August 5, 2009
Tracking the Copyright Consultation Discussion Forum - Through August 4, 2009

I last posted an update on the copyright consultation discussion forum on July 24, 2009.  Discussion has slowed since then, but the total number of comments is now well over 1,000.  Frances Munn provides a summary.

Discussions

Copyright and You

How do Canada’s copyright laws affect you? How should existing laws be modernized?

Tuesday August 4, 2009 (639 responses)

Over the last week, posters continued to voice their support for great consumer protection. In particular, many advocated for greater personal use protections to make copies and backups, ending the use of DRM, and expanding fair use. Further, one thread debated whether digital copying was theft while others debated whether it was fair to only prosecute those that shared files for commercial gain.

Some highlights:

  • A poster argued that any new laws should comply with human rights legislation and the Constitution so as not to create a counterproductive law.
  • Several writers argued that authors should be paid fairly and that creators needed a copyright law with “sharper teeth.”
  • Several posters expressed frustration with the high cost of music/movies, pointing out that expensive media makes file sharing an attractive option.
  • Several people argued that the Internet has given creators the means to connect directly with consumers and that the distributors and ‘middle-men’ are the ones pushing for stronger copyright laws.
  • One poster proposed a fee on Internet use to compensate creators in the same way that levies were added to blank CDs.
  • One person pointed out that the disabled are particularly susceptible to DRM and should be allowed circumvention exemptions.
  • Another poster proposed re-writing the Copyright Act to eliminate references to specific technologies and ensure that it is up to the creator to track and investigate infringements.
  • One person advocated modernizing the Copyright Act by implementing WIPO, arguing that creators needed copyright protections to earn a living. In response, one poster replied that they did not support Bill C-61 because its DRM protections would “chill” innovation. Another poster pointed out that the DMCA did not kill innovation in the United States.
  • Another poster argued that consumers had no excuses for obtaining illegal copies of works. The poster said that depriving artists of their livelihood and their rights over how their creations are used “does not contribute to expanding the national culture.” In response, several people pointed out that it was too harsh to create laws that allowed corporations to bankrupt families and teenagers and that the old business model was outdated and should be changed.
  • One poster argued that the term “copy” should be removed and that the focus should shift to the right to distribute and the right to profit.
  • One person supported private copying rights, but argued that anyone who distributed or lent copies to another person should void their private copying exemption.
  • A poster suggested shortening copyright protection to 20 years and using a “digital footprint” to tie content to the purchaser in order to trace pirated material back to the person who distributed it while also allowing the consumer to make copies for personal use.


Test of Time

Based on Canadian values and interests, how should copyright changes be made in order to withstand the test of time?

Tuesday August 04, 2009 (110 responses)

Over the last week, posters argued for a technologically neutral law and opposed another Bill C-61 approach.

Highlights:

  • A recent poster worried about protecting him or herself from theft given the absence of laws dealing with the new economy.
  • One poster argued that the old copyright model was designed during the Industrial Age to protect creators from being exploited by big distributors. The poster argued that we have now entered the Information Age where distributors are no longer needed, and that the government should not enact laws to protect big industries from individuals. The poster said that freely sharing ideas should not be illegal, and that copyright should be directed at those who aim to make a profit off another person’s work.
  • Another poster argued that Bill C-61 was unfairly labelled as “too American,” pointing out that it was also similar to the European, Japanese and Australian approach to copyright. The poster promoted expanding private copying while also ensuring that creators were fairly remunerated.

Innovation and Creativity

What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster innovation and creativity in Canada?

Tuesday August 04, 2009 (239 responses)

Along with some criticisms of Bill C-61 and preserving an outdated business model, new posts included:

  • The most recent poster argued that “intellectual property” should be renamed “intellectual monopoly” since copyright does not deal with real items of property. The poster went on to question whether having a monopoly of intellectual products benefits society as a whole.
  • Another poster argued that having a monopoly on a cancer drug is more harmful to society than a monopoly on a hit song.
  • One person argued that publishers and distributers make far more money than creators and that there should be a fairer system of reimbursing creators for their work.
  • A writer argued that authors needed more copyright protections in order to make a livelihood.
  • Another poster proposed a system where users pay for file sharing, arguing that they would be willing to pay for the right to download.
  • One poster argued that copyright should operate more like patent laws with copyrighted works entering into the public domain after a period of time.
  • Another poster advocated for educational exemptions for teachers and students.

Competition and Investment

What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster competition and investment in Canada?

Tuesday August 04, 2009 (32 responses)

There was little change in this discussion over the last week. One poster argued for an end to Crown Copyright, pointing out that Canadians pay for government documents through tax dollars and should have the right to them without government permission.

Digital Economy

What kinds of changes would best position Canada as a leader in the global, digital economy?

Tuesday August 04, 2009 (230 responses)

  • One person proposed a ‘notice and notice’ strategy over ‘notice and takedown.’
  • One poster argued that enforcing laws will be a problem and instead proposed “monetizing the networks” in a payment scheme similar to cable TV.
  • One poster began a debate when they came out strongly against P2P networks like The Pirate Bay, arguing that downloading for ‘personal use’ is the same as stealing from the artist.
  • Another thread debated whether or not P2P music downloads translate to lost revenue or whether P2P serves as a way to sample music before buying it.
  • One poster argued that the new business model in the music industry has shifted towards giving away music for free over the Internet and making money off merchandise and concerts.
Add Comment (12) Tags (6)
Wednesday July 22, 2009
Tracking the Copyright Consultation Online Discussion Forum
While the government has yet to post submissions to the copyright consultation, the online discussion forum has been active.  University of Ottawa law student Frances Munn will be tracking the discussion and providing regular updates.  Her first report, current to the morning of July 22nd and grouped into the five questions, is posted below (note that the number of responses is cumulative).

Copyright and You

How do Canada’s copyright laws affect you? How should existing laws be modernized?

Tuesday, July 21 (84 responses)

Many posters were concerned about losing their fair use rights due to more restrictive copyright laws and criminal sanctions, particularly under Bill C-61.

Examples:

  • Educators worried about access to online materials such as Youtube. One discussion debated the balance between free access to materials versus compensating the creators for their work.
  • Several consumers worried about ‘licensing’ schemes whereby you can legally buy a CD from a store but still lack a licence to upload it onto your iPod.
  • Many Linux users pointed out that they have to use encryption software to play legally purchased CDs and DVDs on their computers which would make them criminals under Bill C-61.
  • Others felt that the DMCA laws limited rights such as privacy and free speech.

In addition, some posters were cynical about the power of big American industries, pointing to such things as the use of DRM and automatic patent renewals (i.e. Disney). Many were concerned that Canadian legislators were bowing to the pressures of American interests and designing copyright laws to maintain the profits of big business.

Despite the criticisms directed at C-61, most posters seemed to agree that creators deserved some kind of compensation for their work. One heated discussion began when a poster suggested that there was nothing wrong with copying music files for friends or lending out DVDs. The poster also said that those who could not afford the cost of a CD still had the right to experience arts and culture. The discussion evolved into at what point “stealing” begins and whether posting something online (e.g. photographs) constitutes putting something into the public domain. There was also a debate on whether or not big industries needed more copyright protections.

Wednesday, July 22 (150 responses)

The most recent response asked for a more transparent process at the bill crafting stage. Another poster advocated strongly for fair dealing protection, arguing that there had to be clear guidelines for what constituted fair dealing and what did not. There was also some debate on how long copyright protection should last, with most people agreeing that copyright protection was currently too long.

Test of Time

Based on Canadian values and interests, how should copyright changes be made in order to withstand the test of time?

Tuesday, July 21 (49 responses)

Many responders criticized the way the question was framed, pointing out that laws should be made to deal with current realties and changed in the future to deal with new technologies. Though posters generally advocated for balancing the rights of creators and consumers, many others pointed out that there was no present need to change the law. In addition, most posters were most concerned with protecting consumers’ rights in the future.

In particular:

  • Several posters pointed out that file sharing over the Internet is a reality and would be almost impossible to stop, making for wasted resources on an unenforceable law.
  • Others pointed out that today’s technologies are not all that different from old technologies. Music copying used to occur via cassettes over the radio and videos were used to record missed TV programs. Although it is now faster to download music from the Internet, the practice itself is not a huge change.
  • A member of the Pirate Party took issue with the copyright protection of a lifetime of the author plus 70 years.  In response, most posters said creators deserved some sort of remuneration, but that 70 years was far too long.
  • Other posters argued that “standing the test of time” has meant protecting big media interests at the expense of the public.
  • One reply focused on DRM, generating a large amount of discussion. The poster pointed out that companies that use DRM could go out of business “in the future” and leave the buyer with no way of accessing the material. Replies were overwhelmingly against the use of DRM as a means to protect copyright.

Wednesday, July 22 (65 responses)

New responses advocated for a flexible approach to copyright (i.e. not Bill C-61 or the American DMCA). One poster argued in favour of stronger protections for personal use of legally bought material while cracking down on unauthorized copying and distribution.


Innovation and Creativity

What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster innovation and creativity in Canada?

Tuesday, July 21 (49 responses)

One of the first posts took issue with the implication that changes were, in fact, necessary in Canada to support creativity and innovation. Many other posters pointed out that stronger copyright laws could hinder innovation rather than foster it. Several people also criticized the government for maintaining a Crown Copyright. There was also a general consensus that the length of copyright should be shortened.

Wednesday, July 22 (79 responses)

One poster began a debate when he advocated for much stronger copyright protection, arguing that the current system of receiving music for free on the Internet would eventually eliminate any incentives to create new products. In response, a poster argued that the business model for music was changing, and that more artists were giving away music for free over the Internet and making money off tours.


Competition and Investment

What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster competition and investment in Canada?

Tuesday, July 21 (6 responses)

Most responses pointed out that enacting a system with punitive damages only supports and maintains the existing big interests and does little to protect the average Canadian or foster an open market system.

Wednesday, July 22 (No Change)

Digital Economy

What kinds of changes would best position Canada as a leader in the global, digital economy?

Tuesday, July 21 (36 responses)

Discussion was divided on this topic. Some posters reacted strongly against Bill C-61, pointing out that it was designed to protect American movie and music interests rather than Canadians. Others pointed out that it is not the current system of copyright that is problematic, but the technologies available that make it easier to get copyrighted material. A few posters argued in favour of strengthening copyright laws to protect all works distributed without the permission of the creator.

Specifically:

  • At least one person pointed out that the use of DRM and the lack of easily available and affordable alternatives make pirating attractive.
  • One discussion suggested strengthening copyright protection but also instituting penalties for bringing forward frivolous complaints.
  • One poster came out strongly in favour of tougher copyright laws, arguing that the “culture of piracy” has to be targeted. In response, several people argued that the “culture of piracy” actually leads to increased sales since consumers go out and buy what they like when they have the means to do so.
  • A couple of professional photographers debated whether copyright should cover all work distributed without the creator’s permission or just cases where someone other than the creator profits off the creator’s work.

Wednesday, July 22 (54 responses)

There was little change overnight. One recent response cautioned against the American approach, pointing out that the DMCA has largely targeted individuals for huge sums of money in order to protect a few business interests.

While the government has yet to post submissions to the copyright consultation, the online discussion forum has been active.  University of Ottawa law student Frances Munn will be tracking the discussion and providing regular updates.  Her first report, current to the morning of July 22nd and grouped into the five questions, is posted below (note that the number of responses is cumulative).

Add Comment (3) Tags (6)
Syndicate content