Wikileaks Cable Confirms Public Pressure Forced Delay of Canadian Copyright Bill in 2008

From December 2007 to mid-February, senior GOC officials and well-informed private sector contacts assured the Embassy that legislative calendar concerns were delaying the copyright bill's introduction into Parliament. Our contacts downplayed the small - but increasingly vocal - public opposition to copyright reform led by University of Ottawa law professor Dr. Michael Geist. On February 25, however, Industry Minister Prentice (please protect) admitted to the Ambassador that some Cabinet members and Conservative Members of Parliament - including MPs who won their ridings by slim margins - opposed tabling the copyright bill now because it might be used against them in the next federal election. Prentice said the copyright bill had become a "political" issue. He also indicated that elevating Canada to the Special 301 Priority Watch List would make the issue more difficult and would not be received well.

(Comment: James Rajotte - chair of the Industry Committee, which would likely receive a copyright bill - told the Ambassador on February 28 that the legislation would not have such smooth sailing. End Comment)

"Why don't you do something about it?" I did and I had an effect.

Newest letter

I have now lost count how much I have written about copyright law. Well, here is my latest rough draft for a letter. Go my one reader! Rip apart my grammar and typos.

It has been 3, almost 4 years since I started being active on copyright legislation in Canada. During all those years I asked everyone where the consultation with Canadians is. It was the topic of almost every discussion on copyright law I had. There was a public consultation from July 20, 2009, to September 13, 2009 with over 8,000 submissions not to mention the round tables and town halls. The lingering questions in my head is did anyone learn anything?

I honestly believe that people did learn some of the pitfalls of bad copyright legislation. Unfortunately I do not believe that knowledge has reached the Prime Minister's Office if current news has anything to say.

I only ask for legislation that is based on evidence and Canada's needs. By looking copyright laws around the world while using Canadian's opinion we could create a gold standard in copyright legislation. My fear is that we will table a bill that caves in to foreign and big business pressure for reasons not based on evidence.

Copyright is not a natural right, but a man made one which is why we should not loose sight of what the purpose of copyright law should be which is “to promote the progress of science and useful arts.” What Canada needs is a properly tabled bill based on evidence that will help the aforementioned purpose not a bill based on fear, or corporation's agendas, or other failed bills, or even maximizing consumer spending. I will only accept a bill based on evidence and Canada's needs

In case you were wondering what caused my motivation feel free to check out Michael Geist's latest post. I was actually starting to believe in Tony Clement. I suppose in a way I still can. I will prepare to aim my dislike over the next copyright bill at James Moore. The ministers of industry are probably tired of me anyways.

ACTA Concerns

The Government of Canada is seeking the views of Canadians on the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)

Michael Geist does not seem optimistic about the whole thing but I am going to be cup half full. I must admit it is going to be challenging to craft a coherent letter with the information that has been released so far.

The following is the first draft of my letter. Keep in mind I am not a English major. If you see any typos please leave a comment and I shall correct it.

Counterfeiting is a touchy issue and my concerns are with the ordinary Canadian consumer. My fear is that the "effective legal framework" is going to be over reaching and hurt business, artists, and consumers.

Strong intellectual property laws can hurt innovation though frivolous lawsuits and questionable patents. I find this is especially rampant in the tech industry. One quick look at Techdirt shows how intellectual property has been abused so far. My personal favorite is trying to patent the process of patent trolling. What needs to be kept in mind is intellectual property is a form of temporary monopoly enforced by the state with the goal of growing the economy and creating innovation. Having abusive intellectual property laws does not help that goal. I recommend intellectual property laws in moderation.

Any enforcement practice needs to respect peoples privacy. I am strongly against searching laptops at the border because I believe laptops to be a extension of the mind, especially in the business world. People should not be subjected to unwarranted searches under the ACTA.

Criminal enforcement needs to differentiate commercial piracy from non-commercial priracy as well having rules to protect the system from abuse. Without this separation lives can be ruined though expensive and long lasting lawsuits.

The ACTA should not target internet distribution and information technology. Any changes to that area can have far reaching and unpredictable effects which is why exhaustive public consultation is needed before even signing noncommittal treaties.

These are some of my recommendations and hopefully that will be taken into consideration.

Thanks for reading.

Scholarly Communication

Despite odds I managed to make it to Michael Geist's presentation. I must admit I was a bit surprised by the turn out. It was nice watching many people diligently taking notes. The presentation was a updated and expanded version of Concordia presentation. If you have not seen it yet I recommend it.

Fair Copyright for Canada- Edmonton Chapter was there in numbers. It was nice seeing familiar as well as new faces. One day I will be awesome at matching names to faces just due to all the practice I have been getting recently...one day.

With a bit of added motivation and a revised game plan it looks like more MPs shall be met. Lets see how the 40th Parliament members do.

Edit: Additional link to a more detailed write up on the presentation.

So it begins part 2

Kempton Lam has said if he did not organize the December 8, 2007 rally someone else would have. I honestly don't think anyone else would have. If there is one thing I have learned is that it that it takes everyone to keep the ball rolling from Michael Geist to the letter writer. Without people being involved in what ever way they can there would be no forward movement. The cause would be lost.

So, I created the Edmonton Chapter because no one else did. I had no plans on what to do with it. I just polished the introduction and slapped a purdy photo on it.

Before I even began to think about what to do with the group Michael Edwards showed up and organized a rally for Laurie Hawn's Town Hall.

"Oh", I thought. "That is what I am supposed to be doing with this group."