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.

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.

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.

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.