ARCHIVED — A CAUT

COPYRIGHT REFORM PROCESS

REPY COMMENTS

---

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.

---

Reply comment from Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) received on October 22, 2001 via e-mail

Subject: Reply Comments

REPLY COMMENTS of the CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY TEACHERS (CAUT) on “A Framework for Copyright Reform” and the “Consultation Paper on Digital Copyright Issues”

The Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) has had the opportunity to review the submissions posted on the Government of Canada’s Copyright Reform website respecting “A Framework for Copyright Reform” and the “Consultation Paper on Digital Copyright Issues”. We have the following comments to make:

First, CAUT commends the departments for soliciting and posting the responses to its consultation papers. The time and energy spent on this exercise in “digital democracy” is much appreciated and the end result of the effort is a extraordinary resource of opinion and information on the copyright reform process.

Second, CAUT commends all the organizations and individuals who took the time and effort to present their responses to the departments. The submissions provide an articulate expression of the starkly contrasting views that exist on the issue of copyright in Canada. They present the departments with very clear policy choices.

Third, in regard to specific submissions, CAUT expresses its support and agreement with the range of organizations, including members of the Copyright Forum, who have presented pleas to the departments to respect the public good and find a balance in the Copyright Act between the interests of all parties.

Further, CAUT respectfully disagrees with the responses submitted by groups such as America On-Line/Time Warner, the Canadian Motion Pictures Distributors Association and the Canadian Recording Industry Association. These organizations appear to believe that the Copyright Act is simply an enforcement arm for their business interests. We are particularly disappointed by the failure of these groups to acknowledge the complexity of the technological protection measures (TPM) issue. TPM’s, in addition to representing a partial solution to the problem of illegal copying, also pose an extraordinary threat to privacy, the exchange of information, the public domain and statutory rights of access. Any legislative initiative in this area must be carefully crafted with the interests of all stakeholders in mind. The thoughtful submissions of other creator groups on this issue, such as the Writers Guild of Canada, offer hope in this regard.

Finally, CAUT acknowledges, with a sense of astonishment and hope, the hundreds and hundreds of responses submitted to the departments by individual Canadians. That so many people have made the effort to make their views known signals a new era in copyright reform, an era in which public involvement moves to the front and centre. This can only be a positive development.

While the singling out of any one of these individuals represents a possible disservice to all those who participated in the consultation, CAUT does point to Chris Friesen (July 24), Graydon Hoare (July 29) and Paul Pival (August 22) as just three examples of the outstanding contribution individual Canadians are making to the copyright reform process.

October 22, 2001

Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT)

(Address, Internet address, telephone and fax numbers removed)