Last Thursday the Government of Canada introduced into the House of Commons Bill C-11, an Act to Amend the Copyright Act. In a press release describing the Bill, Heritage Minister James Moore and Industry Minister Christian Paradis, stated that the Bill will ensure that Canada’s copyright laws “are modern, flexible, and in line with current international standards” and will “protect and help create jobs, promote innovation, and attract new investment to Canada.”
Posts Tagged ‘WIPO Treaties’
Some observations on Bill C-11: The Copyright Modernization Act
October 3rd, 2011Key issues on the legal protection for TPMs under Bill C-32
December 8th, 2010There has been considerable debate about the appropriate scope for legal protection of TPMs under Bill C-32. I dealt with this issue in a speech I gave today at the Insight Conference: RIGHTS and COPYRIGHT, Bringing Canada into the 21st Century.
The questions I discussed were the following:
- Does Bill C-32 properly implement the WIPO Treaties consistent with approaches used by Canada’s trading partners?
- Does Bill C-32 permit circumvention of TPMs to permit copying for fair dealing, educational and other purposes?
- Does Bill C-32 have a flexible framework to permit new exceptions to be made by regulation?
Separating copyright fiction from facts about C-32’s TPM provisions
November 24th, 2010Earlier this week Prof. Geist wrote an opinion piece in the Toronto Star in which he purported to separate “copyright facts from fiction”. His opinion piece, Separating copyright facts from fiction, followed by another blog post this week, The False Link Between Locks and Levies, are two in a series of blog posts and opinion pieces written by him recently that purport to expose as inaccurate statements made about Bill C-32 by various individuals and organizations. See: Responding to ACTRA: Group Calls C-32 a “Disaster” and Proposes Six Part Fix; Copyright Fear Mongering Hits a New High: Writers Groups Post Their C-32 Brief; In Search of A Compromise on Copyright; EU: ACTA Digital Lock Rules Don’t Cover Access Controls.
ACTA and TPMs
July 20th, 2010The latest draft of the ACTA is publically available. It has undergone significant development since the last publically available version including to one of its most important chapters, the chapter on Special Measures Related to Technological Enforcement of Intellectual Property in the Digital Environment. This is the chapter that includes the obligation of the contracting parties to provide legal protection for TPMs. Despite the changes made to these provisions, it is clear that the countries negotiating the treaty still intend that the contracting parties provide adequate legal protection and effective legal remedies against circumvention related activities that could undermine new and exciting business models that rely on TPMs.
Minister Moore’s Speech on C-32
June 23rd, 2010Heritage Minister Moore gave a speech yesterday at a meeting of the The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). His focus was on Bill c-32, the Copyright Modernization Act. He made a number of important remarks about the goals behind the Bill. He also used the occasion to comment on some of the Bill’s main critics Here are some highlights of his speech.
Minister Moore stressed the contribution that the copyright industries make to Canada’s economy noting that they “cannot be underestimated, both in terms of stimulating investment and creating jobs”.
Legends and reality about the 1996 WIPO Treaties in the light of certain comments on Bill C-32
June 17th, 2010I. INTRODUCTION
It was at a copyright seminar abroad that I learned about the publication of Bill C-32 by which the Canadian government intends to adapt the copyright legislation to the digital on-line environment. By the time I arrived home, some of my European colleagues, with whom we usually exchange information, had sent me the links to various blog posts that were trying to offer a first assessment of the new Bill. Some of them contained objective analysis pointing out both the commendable elements of the draft provisions and those where further improvements were found desirable, while others seemed to reflect continued opposition to the government’s intention to modernize the copyright norms the way required by the international treaties and the emerging international standards.
Fung and Isohunt found liable for inducing worldwide copyright infringement
December 25th, 2009Earlier this week, a US district court granted summary judgement to MPAA members holding that Gary Fung and four websites operated by him, including Isohunt one of Canada’s largest bittorrent sites, contribute to massive worldwide copyright infringement.
Operators of bittorrent sites like isoHunt often claim they are nothing but content neutral search engines like Google. The Isohunt court disagreed holding, based on uncontested expert evidence, that approximately 95 percent of all files made accessible through Isohunt were infringing or highly likely to be infringing.
Only once more – and then Marry Christmas and Happy New Year to everybody, including Professor Geist and his devoted followers: the 1996 WIPO Diplomatic Conference, the WIPO Treaties and the balance of interests
December 23rd, 2009Christmas is two days away; I have to concentrate on my eight grandchildren. I am really not in the mood to deal with copyright, and I do not want to read books, articles and blogs about it this year anymore. However, a colleague of mine in Germany (he may not have been in full Christmas mood yet like me) sent me an e-mail asking me to correct somebody’s allegations which he has found obviously untrue (in fact he has used certain adjectives to describe his opinion about those allegations, which, however, I – sticking on the spirit of what is called, at least in my country, the holiday of love – definitely do not want to quote). So, I have visited the source indicated by him, and yes, I have found Professor Geist’s friendly comments about my post politely remarking that I might be wrong about the interpretation of the 1996 WIPO Treaties concerning the coverage of the anti-circumvention provisions. To prove this, he quotes Professor Pamela Samuelson who, on the basis of what happened – at least according to her – at the Diplomatic Conference, states that the Treaties do not obligate Contracting Parties to extend protection against circumvention devices.
Dr. Ficsor is right; Prof. Geist is wrong about the WIPO Internet Treaties
December 23rd, 2009Earlier this week, Dr. Ficsor posted a blog inviting Canada to join the international community by ratifying the WIPO Internet Treaties. Dr. Ficsor is an internationally revered copyright scholar and professor and the former Assistant Director General of WIPO. As his posting pointed out, he was also responsible for organizing the preparatory work of the two Treaties, for the 1996 Diplomatic Conference adopting them, and for the first efforts to achieve their adequate implementation, There is no one on the planet who knows more about the treaties or what was intended by them than him.
This site is published by Barry Sookman personally. It is not affiliated with McCarthy Tétrault or any of its clients. Full bio 