ARCHIVED — A Michael Joseph Lewchuk
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
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 Michael Joseph Lewchuk received on October 15, 2001 via e-mail
Subject: Copyright act - outlawing "tampering devices"
With respect to the existence of "copyright tampering devices", the legislation needs to be very careful in what to outlaw. Unless a device can only be used for the purpose of defeating copyright, outlawing it may be pointless. Consider that the popular home computer, general electronics, even electric devices available at Radio Shack can be used to circumvent one form of copyright or access protection or another. This will result in selective enforcement (unless the Canadian government wishes to stop entire industries from functioning normally), which will further erode public opinion in the judicial system. What is needed is to regulate human intent and purpose, not a particular devices or devices.
With respect to Internet copying of copyright material, the same legislation to prosecute violators of copyright should be written. Copyright violation (which is illegal) of broadcast material should be considered as the willful transmission of a copyrighted broadcast work from a provider to a person who has not subscribed with a provider for the equivalent (with respect to that provider) right to obtain and use a copy of that particular work. For example, if I have a friend who has the same internet broadcast subscription that I do, I should be able to make copies of broadcast works while my friend is away on holidays and send them to him when he gets back, because he has paid for the right to use those broadcast works. This type of viewpoint - not the medium of transmission but whether the user/owner of the data has the right to use it - bypasses the difficulty of regulating the medium and instead regulates the individual user and corporate users. Thus the crime becomes using the information without a license instead of simply transmitting it. The crime can be extended to sending (that is, directing) a broadcast to persons or companies not possessing usage rights. This differentiates between those actively directing data flow (cable companies, content providers) and those acting as the transmission network (passively checking desired destinations and routing information packets).
Michael J. Lewchuk
Edmonton, Alberta
- Date modified:
