ARCHIVED — John Cavan
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 John Cavan received on September 9, 2001 via e-mail
Subject: Copyright Reform
Dear Sirs,I'm writing in order to express my concern over the proposed changes to copyright in Canada.
Any attempt to forbid or criminalize the use or production of copyright circumvention measures is dangerous to the rights of law-abiding citizens. While the concerns of the copyright holders are very legitimate, their rights are no more important than others. The advances of computer related technology have NOT simplified the circumvention of copyright any more than the tape recorder or the photocopier. Shall we ban those as well? These laws do not halt criminals, they merely chill the rights of the average citizen.
The logic of the mechanism makes the tool the crime and not the use. Under most considerations, the law requires intent or actual criminal activity to take place. A crowbar can be used to prise open a door, should the maker of the crowbar be punished? A butcher knife can be used to kill another, shall we punish the knife maker? The list goes on. Any technological device used to circumvent protection schemes provides the means for the consumer to engage in their rights to use, the device itself is not responsible for how it is employed.
Finally, any law needs to be considered in the context of alternative technologies. The market for open source software, such as Linux, is increasing dramatically. The growth of this technology is often reliant on the ability of the developers to reverse engineer to determine how to implement a solution to the problem. Laws that prohibit that model place the entire open source development cycle into jeopardy. Witness the case of DeCSS, a software program for Linux that permitted the viewing of DVD movies. The industry FORCED the choice of platform to be Windows or Mac, which is far beyond any reasonable scope of copyright protection. It is not the choice of the producer of content to determine the nature of the light bulb I use to read their book, so why should they have the right to choose the nature of the operating system as well?
The United States of America has produced a bad law. It infringes on the rights of their people for the financial benefit of corporations who were unable to even provide PROOF that they suffered loss. It is not the history of Canada to enact laws against technology when life is not at stake. The laws already protect the rights of the producers, they are sufficient.
Thank you,
John Cavan
(address removed)
- Date modified:
