ARCHIVED — Kirsanov
Archived Content
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.
COPYRIGHT REFORM PROCESS
SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED REGARDING THE CONSULTATION PAPERS
Documents received have been posted in the official language in which they were submitted. All are posted as received by the departments, however all address information has been removed.
Submission from Dmitry Kirsanov received on July 25, 2001 3:38 PM via e-mail
Subject: Comment on the copyright plans
Dear Sir:
I can only hope that Canada will not follow the US in some of its worst pro-big-corporations
legislation. I'm very much afraid that the greed of American "content providers" will reach our shores
so soon. Please try to learn from the fallacies of the DMCA, instead of copying it obediently! I'm not a lawyer
but you'll find a lot of in-depth legal analysis of DMCA on the Net, for example at: http://www.anti-dmca.org.
Now let me share my simple and common-sense opinions on the issues listed on your web site:
whether the Act should be
amended to:
set out a new exclusive right in favour of copyright owners, including performers and record producers, to make their works available on-line to the public;
Don't they have this right already?!! I think regular copyright applies to the Internet by default, why do we need to "grant an exclusive right"? If a work is copyrighted, I cannot distribute it in any way, including over the net (unless it's Fair Use), and I don't think we need to over-legislate this simple issue.
prevent the circumvention of technologies used to protect copyright material; and,
That's a BIG error. Instead of "preventing the circumvention of technologies", you should seek and prosecute only those who use whatever technology (or no technology at all) to infringe on copyright. Fighting against "technologies" instead of criminals is like fighting ideas, which is called censorship. This is very damaging to public interest. Any "circumventing technology" may have legal uses (such as academic research, fair use, etc) so making it illegal is a very bad idea. It's like outlawing photocopying machines which, speaking your terms, is a prime example of a "circumvention technology" that facilitates copyright infringement.
prohibit tampering with rights management information.
Again, why do we need anything special here? Currently, if a work states its copyright status, then this notice is itself protected by copyright, so I can't change it for the same reasons for which I can't sell this work infringing the copyright.
Thanks,
Dmitry Kirsanov
(address removed)
- Date modified:
