[Ecommerce] Canada's Copyright Reform: Coming Clean on Copyright - the WIPO Myths

[Manon Ress]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
QUOTE
The myths that may invoked in the months ahead fall into three
categories: (i) Canada's place in the international copyright world,
(ii) the impact of WIPO Internet treaty ratification on Canadian
creators and consumers, and (iii) whether Bill C-60 meets the
treaties' requirements.
END OF QUOTE

See below, interesting explanations by Michael Geist on Canada's
copyright reform and the WIPO myths

From: Michael Geist <mgeist@pobox.com>
Date: October 3, 2005 7:45:52 AM EDT
To: Manon Ress <manon.ress@cptech.org>
Subject: Coming Clean on Copyright - the WIPO Myths

SNIP

my regular Law Bytes column notes that with Canada's House of Commons
now back to business, a parliamentary committee will be formed in the
coming weeks to conduct hearings on copyright reform.  While much of
the public's attention in recent days has focused on concerns that
the bill will harm education, the reality is that the most
controversial aspect of the forthcoming hearings will not involve
those issues, but rather the WIPO Internet Treaties.  A steady stream
of lobby groups representing the movie, music, and software
industries will point to the fact that Canada has yet to ratify these
treaties as evidence that our copyright law is outdated.

I argue that it is important to separate fact from fiction.  The
myths that may invoked in the months ahead fall into three
categories: (i) Canada's place in the international copyright world,
(ii) the impact of WIPO Internet treaty ratification on Canadian
creators and consumers, and (iii) whether Bill C-60 meets the
treaties' requirements.

The arguments surrounding Canada's place in the international
copyright world frequently imply that Canada has failed to meet its
international copyright obligations, that signing the treaty in 1997
now compels Canada to ratify it, and that Canada has fallen behind
the rest of the world by moving slowly on ratification.

None of these claims are true.  Canada has not failed to meet its
international obligations since it has no obligations under the WIPO
Internet Treaties -- under international law, obligations only arise
once a country has ratified a treaty. Moreover, Canada's decision to
sign the WIPO Internet Treaties was merely as a sign of support, not
a legal obligation to ratify.  In fact, according to government
documents obtained under an Access to Information request, at the
time Canada considered signing the treaties, then-Canadian Heritage
Minister Sheila Copps was advised that "international convention is
such that signing in no way binds Canada to ratify the treaties. It
is a symbolic gesture."

Finally, to hear supporters of the treaties describe it, it would
appear that Canada is the last country in the world to move toward
treaty ratification.  The reality is far different -- of the
countries that comprise the G-20 (the large group actively supported
by Prime Minister Paul Martin of economically-important nations),
only six have formally ratified the WCT.  Far from playing catch-up,
Canada finds itself in the majority of G-20 countries by having
adopted a wait-and-see approach.

The WIPO Internet Treaties' impact has been similarly exaggerated.
Supporters argue that failure to ratify will result in diminished
protection for Canadian artists outside the country and that
ratification will not have an adverse impact on Canadian consumers.
Once again, neither of these claims prove accurate under close scrutiny.

Ratification of the WIPO Internet treaties won't provide Canadian
artists with any additional protections in countries such as the
United States and Japan since they already extend equal protection -
known as national treatment - to local and foreign artists under
existing trade agreements. While WIPO Internet treaty ratification
will not benefit Canadian artists in foreign jurisdictions, foreign
artists will enjoy great benefits from ratification to the detriment
of Canadian consumers, since formal ratification of the WPPT would
require additional changes to Canadian copyright law, most notably
providing national treatment for the controversial private copying levy.

The column also focuses on the intense pressure to ratify coming from
the U.S.  For example, according to information obtained under an
Access to Information request, last year the Recording Industry
Association of America met with Canadian officials and called on
Ottawa to ratify the treaties within seven weeks, presumably jumping
ahead of issues such as health care and removing the need for any
public consultation or debate.

I conclude by acknowledging that the new Bill C-60 parliamentary
committee will face a tough challenge since copyright reform is
always a contentious issue.  As dozens of interested parties lineup
to make their case, committee members must be sure to base their
decisions on fact, not fiction.

Toronto Star version at
<http://geistwipomyths.notlong.com>

Freely available hyperlinked version at
<http://www.michaelgeist.ca/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=972>

Best,

MG
--
**********************************************************************
Professor Michael A. Geist
Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law
University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law
57 Louis Pasteur St., Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 6N5
Tel: 613-562-5800, x3319     Fax: 613-562-5124
mgeist@pobox.com              http://www.michaelgeist.ca





************************************************
Manon Anne Ress
manon.ress@cptech.org,
www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20009 USA
Tel.:  +1.202.332.2670, Ext 16 Fax: +1.202.332.2673

Consumer Project on Technology
1 Route des  Morillons, CP 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 791 6727

Consumer Project on Technology
24 Highbury Crescent, London, N5 1RX, UK
Tel: +44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252 Fax: +44(0)207 354 0607