ARCHIVED — W. Blaine Dowler

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 W. Blaine Dowler received on September 13, 2001 via e-mail

Subject: Comments - Government of Canada Copyright Reform

I have written my opinions on the proposed Canadian Copyright Reform, and attached them in HTML format. Please, take a very close look at this legislation. I don't believe it will have the effects it is intended to have, although it will strip law-abiding citzens of some of their legal rights.

- Blaine

http://www.ualberta.ca/~wdowler

This e-mail transmitted using 100% recycled electrons.

This document is written in response to the proposals regarding Canadian Copyright Reform.

I have recently learned that the Canadian government is considering the introduction of legislation that is similar in nature to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) implemented in the United States of America. I implore all government members to closely examine the implementation of that act. While it is intended to protect the copyright holder, it does so in a manner that I find very disturbing.

I find that most legislations designed to protect copyright holders go too far, by making it illegal to be capable of piracy. To put it in context, the DMCA makes it illegal to own two video cassette recorders, because you can use the second to copy a tape being played on the first.

I also find that the legislation involving encryption is too strong. The DMCA makes it illegal to decrypt data, for fear of allowing people to distribute said data with impunity. Well, encryption does not prevent piracy. This is an important point. A person can copy encrypted data as easily as unencrypted data. The only difference encryption makes is in the ways a person is allowed to play that information back. To choose another example, there has been a recent drive to encrypt the data on Compact Disks using SDMI or other techniques. This means that a person needs a player that can decrypt the data before he or she can listen to the music that person legally owns. There are already encrypted CDs on the market that are not marked as such. As a result, hundreds of people have legally purchased music on CD, put that CD into a legally purchased player, and been unable to listen to that music because that player doesn't include this year's encryption schemes. On the other hand, if two people own new players, one can make an exact copy of an encrypted disk for his/her friend, who can then play that illegally acquired music in a legally acquired player. This is piracy, plain and simple, but the encryption laws can't touch it.

Legislations of this type are brought to the government and presented as effective anti-piracy means. However, they will not be effective in this regard. For example, I mention the case of Dimytri Skylarov. He is a Russian academic that was arrested under the DMCA for presenting the results of a study that was legal in his country of origin. It seems the popular ``e-book'' format created by Adobe is encrypted by comparing each character (letter, space, or punctuation mark) in a document to the letter f, and then writing the comparison to the file in place of the original character. (The software that generates the e-book actually uses several comparisons, the sum total of which is equivalent to the single comparison I mention here. This fact, in itself, may be indicative of a poor understanding of the processes involved in encryption to begin with.) The software used to read the e-book then reverses the comparison, arriving at the original character. In the digital world, this is akin to protecting your house by locking the door and leaving the key under the welcome mat. It is the weakest possible protection. However, Mr. Skylarov broke this encryption, and described how to a collection of other academics. He was arrested after his presentation under the DMCA. In fact, a small amount of research will reveal that a surprising proportion of people arrested under the DMCA, a document intended to encourage free speech, are academics and journalists.

As a final example, I will tell you that I enjoy listening to music at work. However, rather than carry several dozen CDs to work and home every day, I have made copies of my CD collection in the mp3 format and burned them onto CD. Thus, I can leave my 80+ legally purchased compact disks at home, and leave 7 CDs with the same data on them in my office, allowing me to listen to any music I want any time I want. This ``spatial translation'' is perfectly legal under current copyright laws. However, the proposed legislation, combined with the recording industry's intent to encrypt CDs sold in stores, will prevent me from continuing to enjoy my music at work without carrying several pounds of CDs each day. It will become illegal to make any copy, which is in direct opposition to fair use rights.

I understand the entertainment industry's desire to put a stop to piracy. Piracy is theft, and should be treated as such. However, I believe that the proposed legal ``solutions'' will deny law abiding citizens legal rights without significantly impacting the activity of data pirates. Please, review the legislation in detail. I do not believe it will be an effective solution to the problem at hand, although it will strip some rights from law-abiding citizens.