Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
How do Canada's copyright laws affect you? How should existing laws be modernized?
I am affected by Canada's copyright laws because I listen to music, watch videos/movies, and look at art. However I also create things that are released that are covered by copyright law. While I don't want my works being used for the benefit of another without getting credit, I want to ensure that everyone who interacts with my works can do what ever they want with it as long as they say that it is based off or loosely based off of my work.
To modernize copyright laws we should ensure that the people who deserve the money (creators of media) get the money, while the people who distribute it get much less. An example would (in the USA) be the suing of grandmothers and 13 year old children, when the Media Giants have sued, they get huge amounts of money for the alleged infringement. The question in this case is: How much of that money is going to artists? Or the people who wrote the songs that were 'infringed' on? Chances are the answer is 0, at the end of the day score: Artists 0$, Consumers 0$, Media Giant 675k$.
Based on Canadian values and interests, how should copyright changes be made in order to withstand the test of time
Copyright is a hard thing to define, and would be hard to have stand the test of time unless it very explicitly laid out the rights of the 3 groups involved. The Artist, the Consumer, and the Distributor. In my opinion the rights of the Distributor would be severely limited, because they are paid to distribute the media, and maybe advertise it. So, unless given express permission by the Artist, the Distributor can not sue anyone for infringement. And if given the permission to do so, all of money that is made from suing goes directly to the artist.
The Artist should always have full rights to their work, and the term of copyright should be 10–15 years from the creation of the work. However, if they transfer the rights to someone else, this other party would only get the remaining time of the copyright, not an additional 10–15 years. Ex: Artist1 creates a work, 5 years later the rights are transferred to Artist2. Well, Artist2 gets only 5–10 with the rights before the work becomes public domain.
The Consumer should have rights to manipulate the media in any way as long as it is for personal use. For example, a Consumer should legally be able to break all and every DRM on a piece of media that they purchase. They should also be able to create backups of any and all media in case the original is destroyed. They should be able to show the media to friends and family as long as they are not making a profit from it.
As far as DRM or TPM go, they should be totally legal to break, for personal use. Or they should be legislated against, because they facilitate monopolies, and are anti-competitive. As a last note, things like BitTorrent, and other P2P software will not go away. I suggest that they are not legislated against, because if they are, it will only get harder to stop.
What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster innovation and creativity in Canada?
Contrary to the Webster definition of innovation (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innovation), innovation is not the 'introduction of something new'. It is more 'the introduction of something new, based off of something else' meaning that all new work is/was based off of something else. In the end all things stack up, if I hear a song I like, I could go and write one that resembles it. And this should not be considered infringing on copyright, just because my work 'resembles' anothers. However, for me to publish the song without giving credit to the artist of the original would be unfair, I should at least say that my work is 'based off of' or is 'loosely based off of' theirs.
What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster competition and investment in Canada?
The Webster dictionary defines competition as 'the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favourable terms'. So to encourage competition within Canada we should ensure that there is no monopoly for the distribution of media, ensure that companies like the MPAA do not hold a monopoly on movies, movie ratings and movie distribution. Does the Canadian government not encourage companies to break monopolies to the point they give these 'monopoly breakers' funding to start up? The MPAA and other organization should not be able to control our media so tightly, in my opinion these things should be handled by non-profit organization to minimize the corruption and abuse that has been seen in previous lawsuits made by such companies.
What kinds of changes would best position Canada as a leader in the global, digital economy?
For Canada to be a leader in the global digital economy we must protect the rights of Artists, and the rights of Consumers. Distributors are the ones who are trying to make it criminal to listen to recordings from the radio, or watch Tivo'ed TV shows and movies. And therefore, they should have very limited rights with regards to the media. Canadians should push to remove as many people as possible from the copyright debate that don't belong. Distributors in the USA have shown how much/little they truly care for the Artists and Consumers. We should push to remove Distributors from the food chain, ensuring that Artists get paid, and Consumers get what they wanted, no strings attached.
In summary there are a few things that must happen, they are as follows:
— Gianni Gambetti