Canadian Industry Minister refuses to defend Canadian DMCA in public

Canadian Minister of Industry Jim Prentice refuses to be interviewed about the forthcoming Canadian DMCA that his Ministry will be bringing down. Last week, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's radio show Search Engine solicited public suggestions for questions to put to the Minister about his copyright bill, but the show has been informed by the Minister's office the he will not schedule an interview with the show to defend the proposal.

The Canadian DMCA follows the USA off the copyright cliff, instituting even more draconian provisions than were present in the USA's 1998 law. Since then, the US has seen the bankrupting-by-lawsuit of technology companies, lawsuits against tens of thousands of fans, a general trammeling of fair use and consumer rights (pity the poor schmucks who bought Microsoft "PlaysForSure" devices!) and for all that, no reduction in Internet copying and not one penny put in a musician's pocket.

I believe the Minister is running scared because he knows that the last two Ministers who tried to bring down a Canadian DMCA lost their jobs.

Industry Canada has notified Search Engine that despite the overwhelming amount of concern expressed on this site by the Canadian public (see below), Minister Jim Prentice will not come on to our program to answer the people’s questions before his new copyright bill is introduced. His office has told us to expect a statement explaining why, which we’ll post here once we get it.

Link

I write books. My latest is a YA science fiction novel called Homeland (it's the sequel to Little Brother). More books: Rapture of the Nerds (a novel, with Charlie Stross); With a Little Help (short stories); and The Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow (novella and nonfic). I speak all over the place and I tweet and tumble, too.

MORE: Copyfight

More at Boing Boing

Eurovision 2013: An American in London

The technology that links taxonomy and Star Trek

Bloo

@Cory (sorta)

The copyright fight is beginning to remind me of A.E. Van Vogt’s SF short story “The Weapons Shop” where the only sane thing to do is to ignore the law.
Officeslacker

I don’t think he’s running scared as much as he has no autonomy to speak publicly. Prime Minister Stephen Harper only allows one or two of his ministers (e.g., the Kyoto Accord-hating Environment Minister, John Baird) to go on the record and ad-lib anything with the press. The rest are given scripts from the PMO (Prime Minister’s Office) and kept on a very, very short leash. If I had a nickle for every time the CBC runs a story on the Federal government that ends with “Repeated requests for an interview with the Minister were denied”, I’d be rich.
madjo

If he’s running scared on losing his job, why does he still persist on supporting this law?
As a representative of the public he has an obligation of defending his choices to the people that elected him, so him refusing to do so would be grounds of dismissal in my eyes.
Gnomon

@MADJO,

That would be because Canada has already agreed and signed on to implement similar legislation. It’s not a question of whether or not we’re going to pursue this, it’s a matter of when we’re going to implement it.

I imagine that the Minister Prentice is under a tremendous amount of pressure to, on the one hand, produce this legislation; and, on the other hand, to fight it tooth and nail. The former will make him a villain in the eyes of the press and a large segment of the Canadian population; the latter can and will seriously affect the strained relations between Canada and the US.

Minister Prentice is in a very awkward and nerve-wracking position, and I do not envy him; but I do expect him to do his job. If he attempts to push through the law in its current form, I will fight it as hard as I can; if he flips and brings something entirely new to the table, I will examine it with great interest (and pay close attention to our international relations); if he compromises and creates reasonable legislation which fulfills our obligations and allows us room to improve our laws while setting a positive example, I will praise him for representing the part of Canada that makes me most proud; if he continues to stay silent and ignore the anxiousness that this issue generates, I will damn him as strongly as I am able.

It’s not as simple as him just choosing not to support the law, though.
Cory Doctorow

Gnomon@2, it’s not entirely true that Canada has an obligation to implement the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT). The way that treaty ratification takes place is, a country agrees to ratify the treaty, then adopts local laws that embody adherence the treaty, then deposits a copy of those laws with the UN.

Until you adopt the treaty’s provisions in law, then, there is no obligation to do so — IOW, you haven’t agreed to the treaty until Parliament agrees that you’ve agreed to it and adopts laws to make that agreement real.

The exception is when a country enters into ANOTHER treaty that carries with it the obligation to adhere to the first treaty. For example, the Central American nations that signed onto CAFTA with the USA are now obligated, under CAFTA, to adopt the WCT as well. They signed agreement 1, and in so doing, promised to sign agreement 2.

Canada has *not* signed any such agreement. NAFTA does not include any WCT obligations. The WTO requires adoption of TRIPS and Berne, but not the WCT.

Anyone who tells you that Canada is obliged to adopt the WCT is pushing an agenda. We have no such obligation.

Now, that said, there are much kinder, gentler ways of adopting WCT than is being contemplated in the proposed bill, or in bill C-60 (the last version of Canada’s DMCA). Notice-and-notice instead of notice-and-takedown for starters.

The best anti-circumvention law would only protect:

* Effective means of access control

* That are only applied to copyrighted works

* In accordance with copyright law, respecting exceptions and limitations (fair dealing, first sale, etc)

* Could be implemented in free/open source software

And would include exceptions for transcoding to assistive formats — and for making, selling, improving and discussing tools necessary to make such transformations.

That’s pretty close to the anti-circumvention limits embodied in the Access to Knowledge treaty (I helped write ‘em!) and it would ensure that DRM was only protected when it was being used without compromising privacy, free speech, fair use, competition, and the rights of disabled people.
sadmarvin

I find it disgusting how ballsy the Tories are acting despite the fact that they’re a minority government. The last time we had a political party that so flagrantly violated the will of Canadians was back in the days of Mulroney’s leadership, and he had many, many more seats than Mr Harper. C’mon, Canada, lets put this uppity party in its place.
PopeRatzo

This is why I refuse to put one cent into the coffers of any major record label or movie studio. I can well afford to purchase records and DVDs, but I have finally decided that I’d rather see the entertainment “industry” completely collapse than see our society turn into a police state, not because of a political dictator, but because some executives believe they have a god-given right to profit from the work of creative people.

Today, I will only purchase music directly from the artist, from a used record store or download it “illegally” via bittorrent. No more Virgin Megasuperstore, Borders, etc.

And any public official who supports these laws goes to the top of my list for voting against.