ARCHIVED — Rain
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 Mike Rain received on September 8, 2001 10:55 AM via e-mail
Subject: Beware the CPDCI
Intellectual Property Policy Directorate
Industry Canada
235 Queen Street
5th Floor West
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H5
Canada
Greetings from the U.S.A. I am not a Canadian voter, but I have relatives in Canada, and I write as a concerned friend of Canada.
I want to warn you against the Consultation Paper on Digital Copyright Issues (CPDCI).
It is similar to a very bad U.S. law, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The DMCA disrupts the traditional balance between the rights of publishers and the rights of the public. It tips the balance way too far in favor of publishers at the expense of individual rights. The DMCA is being challenged in the U.S. and I believe it will be overturned because it is unconstitutional.
But in the meantime, this pernicious law is causing great harm. It violates free speech rights, and suppresses the advance of technology. For example, many researchers in the area of encryption and computer security are worried that their efforts may lead to criminal prosecution. A Russian programmer was recently arrested in the U.S. for writing software that is perfectly legal in Russia.
The CPDCI is just as bad the DMCA. It would amend the Canadian Copyright Act to outlaw software and other tools that allow copy prevention technologies to be bypassed. This would violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees freedom of speech, since such tools are necessary to exercise lawful uses, including fair use, reverse engineering, and computer security research.
The U.S. has plenty of good ideas. Please don't import this bad one.
Sincerely,
Michael Rain
[Address removed]
- Date modified:
