ARCHIVED — Stuart L Hodgins
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 Stuart L Hodgins received on September 11, 2001 via e-mail
Subject: Comments on the Consultation Paper on Digital Copyright Issues
To: Industry Canada, the Department of Canadian Heritage, and all other concerned agencies:
I write today in response to your departments' invitation to comment on the Consultation Paper on Digital Copyright Issues. I would like to add my voice to those who have expressed concern regarding the intellectual property provisions of the Consultation Paper on Digital Copyright Issues (CPDCI).
The suggested measures appear to be strongly influenced by the United States' Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The DMCA has been roundly criticised by a cross section of civil libertarians, legal scholars, librarians and advocates of freedom of speech.
The proposed legislation removes the burden of proof of copyright violation from the complainant. Instead of requiring the complaining party to go to court and prove their case, the complainant may force the removal of disputed material without due legal process.
Specifically, the extension of liability to ISPs means that any threat of action will cause the ISPs to remove material, in order to protect themselves from possible action. This provides complaining parties with a powerful weapon, which could be used to force the removal of *any* material - not only copyright infringement but so called "objectionable" material.
What is "objectionable" material? This is a key question, and one which is open to a broad and dangerous range of interpretation. A corporation may find criticism of its products or business practices "objectionable." Without a legal review process, said corporation can, and likely will, exercise the provisions of the CPDCI to force the removal of any criticism. This is a clear and fundamental violation of Canadian's rights of freedom of speech.
Further, proposed amendments to the Canadian Copyright Act would ban or restrict all software and like tools that allow the bypass of copy prevention technologies. (See CPDCI section 4.2 - Legal Protection of Technological Measures.)
Photocopiers, scanners and laser printers allow the potential copying of arbitrary volumes and quantities of printed works under copyright. Yet we do not restrict them from schools and workplaces. We trust that the guidelines of "fair use" will suffice to prevent abuse, and that those cases of violation which may occur can be dealt with through the legal system.
The restrictions proposed would prevent the necessary and lawful use of such tools and technologies, including fair dealing, reverse engineering, computer security research and many other uses. As stated in the CPDCI itself, "There is concern that the Copyright Act may not be the proper instrument for protection measures that, prima facie, are extraneous to copyright principles." I couldn't agree more.
I urge you to remove these controversial provisions from the CPDCI language. The DMCA is already under legal challenge in the United States. Canadians can do better than to copy its mistakes.
Sincerely,
Stuart L Hodgins
(Address removed)
- Date modified:
