Canadian DMCA cancelled (again) (for now)

As the Canadian DMCA turns: the government has cancelled its plans to revive the flagging Canadian version of the US's disastrous 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act:
The roller coaster that is the Canadian DMCA has taken another turn. Sometime between yesterday afternoon and this morning, the government decided to hold off. At 10:00 am this morning, the introduction of new government bills came and went without a new copyright bill. The Industry Minister's press secretary has advised journalists that the bill will not be introduced today or tomorrow. Since the House of Commons will break at the end of the week, the Canadian DMCA will not be introduced until at least late January.
Link See also:
Canadian DMCA to be reintroduced -- your action needed NOW!
Canadian DMCA stalled, won't be introduced (today, at least)!
Canadian DMCA rally in Calgary -- photos, videos, reports
O Canada! The Canadian DMCA version of the national anthem
Canadian DMCA introduced
CANADIANS! Tomorrow is your best chance to fight the Canadian DMCA! Event in Calgary, national phone-in
Canada's DMCA won't get any consumer rights added to it for a decade
Facebook group for fighting Canada's DMCA growing fast
Ranting hand-puppet tackles Canada's DMCA
HOWTO Fight Canada's coming DMCA copyright law
Canada's coming DMCA will be the worst copyright yet
Canadian DMCA: how it might have happened
CBC radio show needs your input for question with Minister responsible for Canadian DMCA
Canadian Industry Minister refuses to defend Canadian DMCA in public


  1. Is it possible to catch anyone off-guard in 2007? Too many people watching, and it only takes one to notice and get it to the BoingBoings of the world for the furor to start all over again.

  2. What does the Canadian DMCA SNAFU and Hillary Clinton have in common?

    Both flip flop more than Charlie Parker after his last hit of Morphine.

    Too soon?

  3. I sent another round of succinct emails first thing this morning; I’ll continue to update and send more emails throughout the entire process if they don’t change things up. I hope that now it has been delayed they will actually take the public’s view into account in wording the bill.

  4. This may be a crazy thought, but what if this is a feint? Would there be any way in which they could publicly claim that the bill is off the table until late January, and then, when everybody has stopped looking, rush it through, or staple it to another bill, or what have you?

  5. Legislation really shouldn’t be passed in a way that resembles trolling on Wikipedia.

    Like a kindergarten, democracy requires constant vigilance, but it only works if you put adults in charge.

  6. By and large, because of the three readings a bill must go through, it is both not usual AND fairly difficult to force legislation through in a short time. It’s not unheard of to glom a bunch of issues together into one must-pass bill, but it’s usually a high-level political tactic, not a way to sneak something through. And because all legislation must be passed as-is (or sent back) by the Senate, it’s really, really hard to be sneaky *inside* Parliament.

    The exception can be made for special occurences – but this happens with all-party approval. This is NOT just everyone voting for it, but special all-party agreement to use a different set of rules that allow all the steps to happen in rapid succession. The bill is then whipped off to the Senate (bing!) and run across for Royal Assent from the Governor-General.

    In the Canadian system, the sneakiness tends to happen out of sight — in committee, or with regards to lobbying. Some sample Canadian sneakiness:

    – Anne of Green Gables and bill C-36; this bill contained a copyright provision that would have extended the terms of dead authors rights past 50 years for unpublished works. It was generally considered to be in reference to Lucy Maud Montgomery’s unpublished works. But it would have made copyright on unpublished works almost impossible to track and manage. There was some public disension on that, too. The relevant clauses were swapped out on third reading by actual voice reading in the House – *very* unusual – and the other parts of the Bill passed as normal.

    – Sam Bulte and the Committee; Howard Knopf was presenting before the Heritage Committee, but his materials were disallowed because he only had them in English. It’s one thing to expect your bilingual government to serve you in your choice of language, but I think it was rather extreme to expect a citizen in front of a committe to provide their materials in both languages. It had all the earmarks of the chairperson using procedural tactics to keep this material out of the record; later on, a bill could be described as “based on the evidence given to the committee” while glossing over the fact that the Committee might not have had the whole picture.

  7. Prentice is our biatch! I say we dog-collar him and make him eat kibble out of the trunk we keep in the basement…

  8. @7

    Thanks for bringing it up. Anne of Green Gables is basically worse for Canadian copyright than Disney is for American. I say once we have this whole mess cleaned up we head after that red-headed copyright goblin!

Comments are closed.